thinkprogress.org — During an appearance on Hardball, Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) slammed the White House for using Petraeus as a political prop. He said the decision to bring Petraeus back to the U.S. for a rare visit last week, days before Congress voted on its Iraq timeline legislation, was ?purely a political move,? pointing out that Petraeus made numerous media appea
May 3, 2007 View in Crawl 4
wheresmyreaganMay 3, 2007
"comments that General Petraeus made are absolutely inaccurate, according to the intelligence we have. "Ummm, what intelligence do you have that Patraeus doesn't. Maybe you should share. Who is we?
moderniMay 3, 2007
First off it's obvious to any person who even attempts to follow the current situation in Iraq that Al Qaeda has next to no influence when it comes to the actual political stability of Iraq. They're just too bloody small. Second, the reason why 150,000 US troops cannot secure the country is because this is exactly the same situation as Viet Nam. Regardless if you like to hear it or not this is a politically driven conflict with political agendas and political doctrine. Just like Viet Bloody Nam. 300,000 troops could not secure Iraq under the current Congressional hamstringing, let alone 150,000.
entropymanMay 4, 2007
I don't think it was "America's intelligence" that got us into it, even if you meant our Intelligence, as in CIA. But if you did mean our Intelligence, as in CIA, then I don't get what you mean about them criticizing the war. Has that been an issue?And no, it's not logical that Generals will become political accessories. Shinseki (sp?) said it would take 400,000 troops and he was cast aside like a bloody rag.