Petraeus testimony, Democrats go too far questioning his integrity?

[GtrHtr]

I know that some of the information released by the DIA recently can be interpreted in several ways. I haven't been overly impressed with some of their products tbh but honestly don't know in this case. If your reference proves that their assessment is radically different from what was presented yesterday, then a case could be made that there may be alternative motives at play and I'd be interested to see that.

I'm not a big fan of General Petraeus having served with him about 12 years ago, that is to say we have different leadership styles. I never did find him dishonest or anything other than genuine and extremely competent. Its difficult to put it into words that the average civilian would understand, but don't take my comment to mean he's a d'bag. To try again, he is/was very good at his job yet got on my nerves.

As for fox news, I have no idea what their agenda is other than to make money so I don't have a comment on them. That link didn't work for me fyi.

[old dogg]

[ QUOTE ]
Your right everything he says should be accepted as gospel because after all he is a General of the United States Army.

BTW, He has his own agenda. If he says the Surge is failing etc he might as well say "I suck at my job please fire me."

[/ QUOTE ]

Liberal politicians and attack groups have sunk to an all time low, thanks to the recent campaign to discredit decorated General David Petraeus. Before he has even reported anything about Iraq, he is being drug through the mud with ads calling him General 'betray us'. If a military General comes out with the least bit of negative news, he is lauded as the greatest human being to ever live. Give an honest assessment? Then of course they are just a Bush chronie with no brain of their own.
It must be remembered that General Petraeus is a highly educated man with a Phd. who could be living a more comfortable and financially lucrative life. I don't believe that General Petraeus finds it necessary to have to lie in order to keep his job.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your right everything he says should be accepted as gospel because after all he is a General of the United States Army.

BTW, He has his own agenda. If he says the Surge is failing etc he might as well say "I suck at my job please fire me."

[/ QUOTE ]

Liberal politicians and attack groups have sunk to an all time low, thanks to the recent campaign to discredit decorated General David Petraeus. Before he has even reported anything about Iraq, he is being drug through the mud with ads calling him General 'betray us'. If a military General comes out with the least bit of negative news, he is lauded as the greatest human being to ever live. Give an honest assessment? Then of course they are just a Bush chronie with no brain of their own.
It must be remembered that General Petraeus is a highly educated man with a Phd. who could be living a more comfortable and financially lucrative life. I don't believe that General Petraeus finds it necessary to have to lie in order to keep his job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's disregard the extremists on all sides for the moment... Nobody here (at least not me) is accusing him of lying. I am sure the statistics he gave are accurate given how they were collected. However, it is clear based on data from the DIA and GAO that he didn't give a lot of other statistics which show the situation in much less rosy terms. Cherrypicking data to support the success of a strategy is fairly standard (I did it while on a HQ staff myself when building briefings to show results of new policies). I posted a story a few days ago about US officers handing money to Iraqis to open stores in Anbar province. These officers admitted that even if a store was "open" (i.e., got the money and had an attendant for a couple hours per day) but had nothing but dust to sell, the store still counted as a new store opening in Anbar for purposes of data collection -- and these storekeepers admitted that after the Americans leave, they'll probably just close shop. In other words, the "stores opening" statistic was accurate in a sense, but meaningless practically. I see no reason why the officers in this story would be lying. The point is that the administration and military leadership is trying to make a success story out of some very debatable data -- and then claiming that the data is conclusive. You don't have to be anti-Bush to at least admit the objective data shows the surge in a practical sense to possibly be treading water rather than really making progress. The real issue that right-wingers are ignoring is what happens after a surge. Without massive American presence, Anbar goes right back to being chaos. Even the locals admitted as much when they said they close their shops and run when the police (infiltrated by militia) come through.

Please stop hating on liberals and address this reality.