I’m going to get into some heavy quoting here, but it’s to make a point.
Fox News Sunday, today:
Chris Wallace: General, we have less than a minute left. Let’s get to the bottom line here. Do you feel that we can still win in Iraq, that we can leave behind a stable, democratic government?
Gen. Petraeus: Chris, if I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t be here. I wouldn’t be leading the finest of young American men and women who are putting their lives on the line every day. In the last two weeks, I’ve gone to memorial ceremonies, one of which was for four soldiers lost in one unit, another for six soldiers lost in one unit. And I can tell you that as you sit there at that, you obviously reflect on that particular question. And again, I think that there is good prospect for progress in the months ahead, that hopefully can be matched by progress in the political and economic arenas here in Iraq, and again, can give us hope for the way ahead.
And I thought back just a bit, and recalled…(indistinct mumble) Oh…yes, here it is, at PoliPundit: [1]
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “Listen To The Generals.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Remarks At The National Press Club, Washington, D.C., 01/19/07)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “If The President Won’t Listen To Generals, he won’t listen to the American people, who have spoken for a new direction, then perhaps he will listen to us, Congress, when we send him a supplemental bill that acknowledges reality in Iraq .” (CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” 03/26/07)
PoliPundit also points out that Dirty Harry has called both Marine general Peter Pace and Army general David Petreus “incompetent” a report which Reid himself confirms, despite the fact that Reid originally voted to confirm him:
Senate Democrats Voted Unanimously To Confirm General Petraeus. (Petraeus Nomination, Roll Call Vote #33: Approved 81-0, 01/26/07)
Petraeus isn’t “in touch” with what is going on in Baghdad, or he isn’t validating Harry Reid’s assertion that “the war is lost” and “the surge has failed” (before the last of its soldiers have even been deployed). Whatever happened to Reid’s “listen to the generals?”
The left, who suddenly is so concerned with context, should really try to help us understand the context in which Reid makes these judgments as opposed to the man on the ground in Iraq dealing with it every day.
And on the Pace matter, speaking of out of touch, where does Harry Reid, who as the Majority Leader in the Senate has passed nothing of significance and done nothing of note, get off calling anyone else “incompetent”.
Obviously, what we have here is someone whose job is way too big for him… someone who obviously isn’t taking his own advice about listening to the generals, including the one that he had a hand in installing.
Reid is clearly misrepresenting the situation apparently to advantage his own argument. For those of you Kos kids: Reid is lying.
Kate reports: [3]
There is a long list of people including Senators (Carl) Levin and (Jack) Reed and others who have talked about General Pace long before I did. …The fact is, he’s not going to be the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, for which I’m happy,” Reid said.
Reid ripped Petraeus for an interview published in Thursday’s USA Today [4] describing progress in Iraq.
“I have high regard for General Petraeus. When I was in Iraq, he was responsible for training the Iraqi troops. He told us it was going great. As we’ve looked back, it didn’t go so well,” Reid said. “I was a little disappointed, to say the least, today reading USA Today newspaper, where he’s saying things are going fine, kids are playing soccer. The truth is, you look at another newspaper and look at a different page of USA Today, the bloodiest three months of the war has been since the surge took place,” Reid said.
The thing is, when you bother to check on that USA Today article Petraeus didn’t exactly say things were going “fine”. Reid – as usual – is misrepresenting his comments. There were few actual comments from Petraeus in the article Reid references. This is one:
Iraq’s 135,000-strong police force continues to be plagued with problems, U.S. commanders say. Up to 70% of Iraqi police leaders have been replaced because they had ties to sectarian violence, Petraeus says.
Does that sound like “everything is fine” to you? It doesn’t to me, but obviously Senator Reid has an interest in portraying General Petraeus as untrustworthy and partisan regardless of what he actually said. Fine. If we are to believe such a weighty accusation, Reid’s own credibility ought to be fair game. He’s already been caught out once. Let’s examine a bit more of what Senator Reid had to say, for example his claim that the last three months have been “the bloodiest of the war”.
Actually Senator Reid, even if you insist on reducing our servicemen and women to Another Grim Milestone TM for your obscene jihad against George Bush, that one turns out not to be true either.
The bloodiest three months of the war so far were November 2004-January 2005. Get your facts straight. And simply looking at US casualties without normalizing the monthly rates for the number of people in theater produces a dimensionless figure that is inherently (one might even say purposely) misleading.
Captain Ed, passes on this tidbit: [5]
MYTH:
General Petraeus Says The War Is A “Lost Cause”SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): Gen. Petraeus “Told” Our Troops That “They’re Fighting For A Lost Cause.” CNN BASH: “Is there something to that, an 18- and 19-year-old person in the service in Iraq who is serving, risking their lives, in some cases losing their life, hearing somebody like you back in Washington saying that they’re fighting for a lost cause?” REID: “General Petraeus has told them that.” BASH: “How has he said that?” REID: “He said the war can’t be won militarily. He said that. I mean he said it. He’s the commander on the ground there.” (CNN’s “The Situation Room,” 04/23/07)
FACT:
General Petraeus Sees “Positive” Signs in IraqGEN. DAVID PETRAEUS: “While It Is Too Early To Judge The Success Of The Surge And The Emphasis On Population Security In Iraq, We Have Seen Some Positive Results – Though The Enemy Has Certainly Sought To Overshadow Our Achievements By Carrying Out Sensational Attacks.” “… Your visible presence alongside Iraqi soldiers and police has begun to restore a sense of normalcy to many areas that have seen little other than violence over the past year. Your hard work ahs also led to the uncovering of sizable weapons caches, the detentions of a number of death squad and car bomb network members, the bringing to justice of a number of militia extremists, a decrease in the number of sectarian killings, and a renewal of commerce in many markets and neighborhoods.” (Gen. David Petraeus, Letter To Soldiers Serving In Multi-National Force-Iraq, 04/14/07)
I notice that the advice of “listening to the generals” is no longer such good advice. At least, by Dirty Harry Reid’s lights. Nor apparently, is telling the truth.
Now why would Reid lie, so as to make the situation appear worse than it s? Why would he go out of his way to send the message that America cannot win against the Islamo-Facists?
The hypocrisy were being exposed to here, is nothing short of the stuff of legend.
However, it gets better ; Kate goes on to examine the claims that we should be embracing the recommendations of the rock study group , and finds that reads implementations of those recommendations is also wanting , to say the very least:
Senator Reid was all in favor of “listening to the experts” so long as they were useful in bashing George Bush:
Dec. 2006: “The Iraq Study Group has done a tremendous and historic service to the American people and to the troops serving in harm’s way in Iraq. Their report underscores the message the American people sent one month ago: there must be change in Iraq, and there is no time to lose. …Like the Iraq Study Group, I urge the President to change course. He will find Congress ready and willing to work with him. The Senate will do its part next year and conduct strong oversight to ensure the President carries out an effective change in policy.
But as James Baker, co-chair of the Iraq Study Group Senator Reid lauded in December of 2006 noted, the measures Reid tried to ram through the Senate were completely contrary to the group’s recommendations:
The report does not set timetables or deadlines for the removal of troops, as contemplated by the supplemental spending bills the House and Senate passed. In fact, the report specifically opposes that approach. As many military and political leaders told us, an arbitrary deadline would allow the enemy to wait us out and would strengthen the positions of extremists over moderates. A premature American departure from Iraq, we unanimously concluded, would almost certainly produce greater sectarian violence and further deterioration of conditions in Iraq and possibly other countries.
Baker had more to say:
The president announced a “new way forward” on Jan. 10 that supports much of the approach called for by the Iraq Study Group. He has since said that he is moving to embrace our recommendations. The president’s plan increases the number of American advisers embedded in Iraqi army units, with the goal that the Iraqi government will assume control of security in all provinces by November. It outlines benchmarks and indicates that the Iraqi government must act to attain them. He has approved ministerial-level meetings of all of Iraq’s neighbors, including Syria and Iran; the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council; and other countries.
In other words, as they had done with their parade of Generals, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid paid cynical lip service to the Iraq Study Group and then proceeded to ignore every one of their recommendations. The Democrats soon abandoned their Useful Idiots, once they could no longer be used to embarrass the administration. In retrospect, the President is the one who has listened, and Reid and Pelosi have fought him every step of the way for doing what they publicly called for him to do not six months ago.
Is this the Democrat party version of “supporting the troops”? Why are the lies coming so fast and furiously from the Democratic Party side of the aisle?
The answer, I fear is a simple one, but breathtaking in it’s implications:
The Democratic party are invested in our losing, so heavily invested in fact that if we win, the Democrats are going to look like the traitors they are, and will be out of power for generations; Nobody will ever trust them again. Reid knows it, so he’s doing everything possible… Bald faced lies, etc… to win this PR battle.
The press, apparently, are helping in this effort; have you noticed any of the reports that I’ve cited here, being trounced upon by the mainstream media? No, you haven’t. The mainstream media has been sweeping these lies under the rug as quietly as possible.
The evidence that the Democrats have been lying to us, is overwhelming.
The bottom line for us, is that the Democratic party cannot be trusted with national security, or any other position of responsibility.