Gen. David Petraeus proved my point. He's a political
general. Worse than that, he said something in his Senate testimony that should
infuriate the loved ones of every man and woman fighting in Iraq.
"Is everything you are doing over there making America safer?" Sen.
John Warner asked. Petraeus tried to evade the question, but Warner wouldn't
let him off the hook. "Is it making America safer?" he persisted.
"I don't know," Petraeus replied. In other words, maybe these nearly
4,000 young people who died and the 27,000 who have suffered wounds simply died
and suffered for nothing. After all, their own commanding officer has now gone
on record that he doesn't know if the sacrifices they are making are doing anything
to make their country safer. That's a hell of a note.
Petraeus, like a true spin master, was trying his best to put a gown of optimism
on the pig he brought to the dance. Like the bureaucrat he is (despite a chest
full of ribbons, Petraeus has seen very little combat), he had his little charts
and graphs purporting to show sectarian attacks and civilian deaths are down.
Whether his numbers are correct or not – and they differ from the numbers
of several independent organizations – is beside the point. President George
Bush pre-defined success of the surge. The purpose of the surge, the president
said, is to buy time and space for the Iraqi government to reach agreement on
reconciliation.
Did it? No. Ergo, the surge was a failure.
One congresswoman nailed him good. She read a report Petraeus had written
after his earlier tour of training the Iraqi army three years ago. Oh, he spread
good cheer. Everything was going swimmingly. Unfortunately for the general,
he used almost the same words three years ago that he used in his current testimony.
None of the promises and predictions he made three years ago came to pass.
Turns out the politician-general had, just before the last presidential election,
written those words in an op-ed piece for the Washington Post that painted
the war in Iraq in glowing and optimistic colors. I may be wrong, but I know
of no other general on active duty who wrote an op-ed piece so carefully timed
to influence the outcome of a presidential campaign.
Petraeus' testimony was also out of sync with the Government Accountability
Office report, as well as a report done by a retired Marine Corps general. Petraeus
tried to cover his political tracks by saying upfront that he personally wrote
his report. Well, I personally write these columns, but that doesn't mean I
don't confer with people, interview people and do other research. I'll bet a
six-pack to a shot of bourbon that Petraeus conferred many times with the White
House spin doctors before he sat down to write his own report.
So the game goes on. The president says he will "accept" the general's
recommendations. What a surprise. That will leave 136,000 Americans stuck in
Iraq until the new president is sworn in January 2009.
Congress should act and cut the funding off for this war. It is a moral outrage
to sacrifice the lives and limbs of our men and women in uniform for nothing.
The dumb Bush administration succeeded in creating a Shi'ite theocracy closely
allied to Iran and set off a sectarian civil war. Well, let the Iraqis fight
it out without us and without them blowing billions of American tax dollars
at the same time.
May the most brutal and ruthless win.