- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
With Charged Words, Democrats Get Tough with Petraeus and Crocker
Email
ShareApril 09, 2008 6:21 PM
ABC News' Matthew Jaffe Reports: If the first round of Senate and House questioning left something to be desired, this afternoon's House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing managed to make up for it, bringing to an end, with sharp words, the combined fifteen hours of Congressional testimony given by the U.S. commander in Iraq General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker.
Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman, Democrat of California, let his intentions be known by warning Petraeus and Crocker that "our respect and appreciation for you and the people you lead does not mean that we should yield in our oversight responsibilities."
And his Democratic colleague Rep. Gary Ackerman, of New York, went a bit further.
"With the surge, you've gotten a re-do," he said.
"You know, we haven't had one of those since we played in the playground, but you get a re-do. Four thousand Americans who died don't get a re-do; 20,000, 30,000 whose lives have been dismembered don't get a re-do. Tens of thousands, scores of thousands of families who have been destroyed don't get a re-do."
Ackerman continued, "The only thing we know for sure is there will be a lot more people who don't get re-dos. How do you know we've won? Because at the end of this thing, unless we decide it's the end, nobody's going to hand you a revolver; nobody's going to hand you the sword and say, 'We quit. We stopped.' How do we know the Iraqis can stand up for themselves? Nobody seems to be able to answer that question."
Crocker acknowledged that he and Petraeus deal with Ackerman's question all the time. "It’s a question that we both ask ourselves constantly", while warning that "it’s going to be not one grand sweeping moment in which we can say "it’s all fixed" but it’s going to be area-by-area, circumstance-by-circumstance. It’s complicated, but I think it’s do-able."
"When we're asked why the troops are there, well, we sent the troops over there and now we have to support them because they're there," Ackerman said. "Well, why are the troops there? Because we sent them. And what do we have to do? We have to support them because they're there. So, we're there because we're there, because we're there, because we're there, and it never ends. How do you get out of this mess, is the real question. How do you fix it?"
At one point, the conversation abruptly turned to '08er politics.
"What would happen if we, with a new president, said we're going to jerk everybody out of there in six months?", asked Rep. Dan Burton R-Indiana.
Crocker responded, "My judgment is that where conditions are at this time, that you would see a spiral down," he responded. "And that would lead to expanded sectarian conflict at levels we probably have not seen before. It would bring the neighbors, especially Iran, into the fight. And it would create space for Al Qaeda to root itself on Arab soil."
"The ambassador has captured my sentiment on that as well," Petraeus agreed, adding "it's about risk, and it's about the consequences that the ambassador talked about with respect to Al Qaeda, sectarian conflict, regional stability, the humanitarian situation and so forth."
Across the aisle from a satisfied Burton, who noted that "I hope that everybody in America gets the gist of your comments," Rep. Brad Sherman, D-CA, responded by asking Petraeus and Crocker if in November they will begin planning the implementation of the incoming president's policies, should they call for troop withdrawals.
"I can only serve one boss at a time, and I can only execute one policy at a time," Petraeus fired back. "I'm actually very uncomfortable, candidly, with where the conversation is going as a military man, again, who subscribes to civilian control."
April 9, 2008 in Veepstakes | Permalink | User Comments (11)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
America,
We need to ease out of this civil war. Petraeus is an American hero that has done his best in the most difficult circumstances. If asked to withdraw he will no doubt succeed, and will leave Iraq as stable as possible. This mess occurred on George Bush's watch and it needs to be concluded on George Bush's watch.
========================================
Hillary Clinton will begin the removal within 60 days of election if George Bush doesn't have the spine to do it!
========================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Apr 9, 2008 6:39:33 PM
"Democrats Get Tough with Petraeus and Crocker"
Probably should of Read..."Democrats Talk Tough with ....."
Posted by: The Commander Guy | Apr 9, 2008 6:52:32 PM
NONE of the candidates will do anything except variations on the original PNAC plan: 60 - 80,000 troops permanently stationed in large, permanent bases to ensure the oil exploration and extraction by western companies and dominate the region. There was never any other intention.
Posted by: neo | Apr 9, 2008 7:01:17 PM
Democrats get tough with the patriot General Petraeus.
Gee, I wish they could ever get tough on terrorists and our other enemies.
McCain '08. Get use to it.
Posted by: Jo | Apr 9, 2008 7:02:17 PM
TCG - I find myself agreeing with you however rare this may well be to me and to you. Democrats are wonderful when talk is the option but not so good on action to back of their useless words.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Apr 9, 2008 7:16:38 PM
As Generals go, Petraeus has done his best, given he has had to put up with crap admin' like "Bums-felt", (sharp-shooter) Cheyney and Bubba Bush. I'm so glad Hillary stuck to her guns; to begin tactical withdrawals within 60 days of her becoming President...and she will become the first
Woman US President after November and I for one can't wait!
Posted by: D | Apr 9, 2008 7:27:21 PM
The Democrats are all talk, and yet some of them are making money off this war, with stock in the defense industry. No wonder they aren't trying to stop this war or the next one in IRAN. What's good for the corporate Democrats, is just as good for the corporate Republicans. Meanwhile our sons and daughters are dying for a lost cause, guarding poppy fields (heroin) in Afghanistan, and oil in Iraq. Sorry, but I don't believe protecting cartels, be they the international drug trade OR the cartel of oil producing countries is worth one DAMN drop of American blood. But then what would I know, I am just an American citizen. Let "the professionals" who are running the war and ruining our economy keep up the good (for them only) work. After all they know what they're doing. (especially for each other)
Posted by: ha! | Apr 9, 2008 7:39:54 PM
Both democrats make me cringe.
Eother one might lead us into a more horrible crisis than the Iraqi war.
I might have to hold my nose and vote Maccain
Posted by: change | Apr 9, 2008 9:13:36 PM
Brad Sherman a Dem Rep from
California obviously Does Not Know
the Constitution!
No matter who wins the election in
November, President Bush is in charge
until January 09! DUH!
How do these educationally challenged
fools get elected to Congress?
Posted by: reaganfan | Apr 10, 2008 12:41:18 PM
D: You're going to wait a long long
time! Hillary will not win the nomination! The next president will
be Obama or McCain! wake up to reality!
Posted by: reaganfan | Apr 10, 2008 12:44:01 PM
I want to say to "ha" very well said. Now to the person whom is considering holding there nose and voting for McCain to please stop and think about the fact so many Americans made that same mistake when voting for Bush. Why would you even consider such a choice after this pathetic war in Iraq...McCain is another war President and could you really forgive yourself for being that ignorant...Obama is trying hard to make a difference..Please consider giving him a chance. When we want change why do we turn our backs.. I hope we don't made the same mistake as we did with Bush. In my wildest dreams I can not understand why anyone would even consider McCain. I'm still asking that question over our present mistake. If you will only listen and read his books you will discover we do have someone who's light is shinning bright for us all...I can't believe your not looking! Obama..May his light continue to shine!!
Posted by: Libby Singleton | Apr 11, 2008 4:30:41 AM
Post a comment
