Originally posted by smw6869A report due out in sept from Gen Petraeus hints of progress being made and a Democrat went to Iraq to see first hand the war and talk to the general and reported back that things are looking up. Now several Dem senators are afraid they will be on the wrong side of the issue, so they are releasing statements about the war that are positive.
Could you give details?
Some are Sen. Dubin, Casey, Levin and others... just google it.
1 edit
Originally posted by MacSwainActive generals are not permitted to criticize military policy publicy I believe. I was referring to retired generals.
Which Generals are waffling - expressly? Or are you referring to retired personnel making their living on Tele vs active Generals?
Then there's the intelligence community:
In a bleak assessment of Iraq, the National Intelligence Estimate said Iraq's growing polarisation, the persistent weakness of its security forces and the ready recourse to violence are driving an increase in communal strife and political extremism.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2004630,00.html
There's the Iraq Study Group:
The United States should begin to withdraw forces from combat and launch a diplomatic push, including Iran and Syria, to prevent "a slide toward chaos" in Iraq, an elite panel recommended yesterday.
The Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by James A. Baker III, former US secretary of state, also urged Washington to reduce its political, military or economic support if Iraq's government fails to advance security and reconciliation in the country, where sectarian violence kills scores every day.
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/12/07/10087743.html
There are many, many military, political and intelligence experts who have been pessimistic.
However, I suppose I shouldn't have said "the generals" since that implies a dishonorable breach of their military code. They can't say what they think.
Originally posted by lepomis*sigh*
I didn't think about that... but now I remember that all of the great leaders of the past were wishy washy.
All great leaders -- like all intelligent people -- form their opinions on the most recent facts available. If they change their minds about something, they're not being wishy washy, they're using their brains to process information. People who stick to one version of events no matter what have no business being in government, because it means they're too stupid to process information or look at facts as they become available.
Originally posted by pawnhandlerWhat you are talking about has nothing to do with what the dems are doing. The key word you are using is 'facts'. I agree with what you saying here.
*sigh*
All great leaders -- like all intelligent people -- form their opinions on the most recent facts available. If they change their minds about something, they're not being wishy washy, they're using their brains to process information. People who stick to one version of events no matter what have no business being in government, because it means they're too stupid to process information or look at facts as they become available.
Originally posted by AThousandYounghe's talking 'recently', not months ago.
Active generals are not permitted to criticize military policy publicy I believe. I was referring to retired generals.
Then there's the intelligence community:
[i]In a bleak assessment of Iraq, the National Intelligence Estimate said Iraq's growing polarisation, the persistent weakness of its security forces and the ready recourse to violence a ...[text shortened]... implies a dishonorable breach of their military code. They can't say what they think.
Originally posted by zeeblebotHillary says:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20070808/cm_rcp/hillary_hedging_her_bet_on_ira;_ylt=AlzFJIL0tshlFMRm1rKDZCKs0NUE
"But if it is a possibility that Al Qaeda would stay in Iraq I think we need to stay focused on trying to keep them on the run as we currently are doing in Anbar province."
Classic! 🙂