Comments on: Gen. Abizaid On Stabilizing Iraq

U.S. Commander Talks To Lara Logan About Iraq, Iran And Stability In The Middle East

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front, being a big one. But now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?... I'm waiting.

[Radar.1]

What is great is that now we will have the chance to observe whether there is a threat from the Muslim world or not. We will return to a pre 9/11 country waiting for the next attack and hoping it will not come. A different and possibly/probably better administration and Congress will have the opportunity to show how we should deal with terrorists. I wish them luck and skill for the sake of my children and grandchildren. (Incidentally I was opposed to going into Iraq.) I do think we should pull all our troops out immediately. Why should we have our troops continue to be killed an injure for up to 180 days?

[feelfree1]

prober6,

Re: "You imply the U.S. is the cause for the sectarian bloodshed. You imply the U.S. is causing the impossible circumstances for normal Iraqis to survive. You imply the U.S. is incompetent."

This is no mere implication. This is the undeniable reality of the situation. It seems that only a dwindling handful of Bush League believers are unaware of this unmistakable truism.

[seanmccarry]

The problem is not all Lara. The CBS 60-minutes has gone down in quality again and again. This program needs new direction under new blood. Lara was exceptionally poor in her role, one cannot even find the slightest amount of sympathy for how terrible she was and how aggressive. And her agenda was to blame Iran as forcefully as possible. If it was possible, she wanted to be more Neocon than Neocons themselves.
Time to fire this stupid woman and let her go to Fox news with Bill Oreilly who claims that Iran wants to kill all jews .... despite the fact that Iran has 40,000 jews living there and that Iran's history is filled with events (even documented in the Bible) where this was the only country fighting to protect the rights and lives of jews in middle east.

[cbgb31]

"Is that victory now? Is that what victory will look like in Iraq, just stability, that's what we're aiming for?" Logan asks.

This is the only question I don't understand. Stability sounds pretty good to me. Other than that I thought Lara Logan conducted a good interview and certainly has the qualifications to interview Abizaid. She's been reporting on location in Iraq for years.

[thechinaman1]

Sorry Lara,

The President never said "mission accomplished," nor did anyone else. What he did do was stand under a banner that said "mission accomplished," and utter the words "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

If you're going to chat with a general in the joint chiefs of staff, you better get your stuff together.

[icarus_ancalion]

Logan was very disrespectful of General Abizaid. She asked leading questions about Iran (repeatedly), putting words into the general's mouth. Then she talked right over the top of the general so that we couldn't hear some of his answers!

On top of that, she was antagonistic, interrupting him. She became defensive when he corrected her with calm, balanced answers that were far more nuanced than what she attempted to put in his mouth.

Kudos to General Abizaid. I don't agree with everything he says, but handled an unprofessional and rude interviewer with aplomb.

Logan made 60 Minutes look bad, and by comparison made the general look very good (what we could hear above her interruptions).

When is Logan going to be fired?

I am not going to watch any interviews by her. She's dreadful. If this is the direction of 60 Minutes in the future, I will not be watching it any more.

[ceekuei]

Ask General Abizaid what he thinks, and he will tell you exactly what the Bush administration thinks, and that is more of the same. What do you expect? He is a product of the administration and under no circumstances will he say anything otherwise. He is the military face of Bush. The invasion of Iraq was for all the wrong reasons mismanaging it not withstanding. Bush broke it, he can't fix it because he does not know how to, period. Meanwhile nobody knows what to do and every Tom, ***, Harry, and Jane has their own theory and suggestions. None will work. Only the Iraqis can work out a solution among themselves. Certainly not Bush, the man who started it all.

[kesac4650]

It would have been a nice touch, if Ms. Logan would have interviewed Gen. Abizaid and given us his opinions, rather than insisting on giving us her own infomercial. I'll bet the General will be more hesitant to grant any interviews in the future.
I am also appalled at the level of blatant dishonesty shown in some of the comments, from inventions attributed to Kissinger, to comparing our Government with Nazis.
There are important facts that the public needs to know, but instead, we get a steady dose of opinion.

[seanmccarry]

I am sick of seeing American media DEMONIZE Iran. This stupid woman, Lara Logan - British accented biased stupidity - is putting words in the mouth of General Abizaid. Why does 60-Minutes recruit someone who is so poorly informed and who is so biased or even receiving money under table from Israel? Iran is not to be blamed for everything that goes wrong in the world. I am sick of the mainstream media looking to blame a convenient scapegoat but never address the stupidity of the Neocons that got US into this horrible situation. Lara logan, it's obvious why you left England since they won't tollerate a liar and incompetent interviewer but US happily takes someone as useless and ignorant as you.

Sean

[prober6]

'since the U.S. has been fighting in Iraq, it has become unbearable for the Iraqis' -

You imply the U.S. is the cause for the sectarian bloodshed. You imply the U.S. is causing the impossible circumstances for normal Iraqis to survive. You imply the U.S. is incompetent. How dare you ignore so much information and call it journalism? From Ms. Lara's first sentence, she took a great many liberties with the facts, just to make the very predictable, inflamatory, and leading statements I have grown so used to hearing from CBS. Ed wouldn't have. Morry wouldn't have. Mike and Dan?
Well... Shame on you all.

Why not have Andy Rooney go to Iraq to do interviews, if you want to joke about war?

[peter556]

It's almost impossible to listen to this interview because of the person conducting the interview. Why such a lightweight for such an important topic?

[cv0021]

So I am wondering if Lara is on the administration payroll, she seems to be pushing an agenda rather than asking probing questions about what is the real situation there today and how do we deal with what we have today. What's the deal with going after Iran as a journalist?She belongs on FOX news rather than a real news program like CBS 60 minutes..

[feelfree1]

"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.%u201D -- Henry Kissinger

[feelfree1]

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

[lauraann7]

Very unprofessional reporter to interview an excellent American Soldier . . . why does 60 minutes need a British?? reporter to interview an American General?? Then try to change his words?? Not the way for 60 minutes to retain their iconic status as a top news program!

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front, being a big one. But now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?... I'm waiting.

[feelfree1]

(1 of 2)

Gen. John Abizaid is little more than an apologist for the brutal and illegal war of aggression against Iraq. Abizaid is a central figure in the horrific debacle which has resulted there, and in the pointless continuance of the horrendous U.S. occupation.

Assuming that he is not completely incompetent, Abizaid knows full well that "foreign fighters" have never represented a significant portion of the Iraqi resistance movement.

The Iraqi resistance is composed of several groups of IRAQIs. Included among these groups are: include the entire Iraqi Army, disbanded by L. Paul "Dimwit" Bremmer, various religious leaders vying for power, and the friends and relatives of the more than 600,000 Iraqis that have faced violent deaths as a result of the illegal U.S. occupation of Iraq, and the millions of Iraqis that have been humiliated, wrongfully imprisoned, tortured, attacked, violated, and sexually abused by U.S. agents.

The Iraqis have every right to defend themselves against the illegal and morally impoverished invasion and occupation of their country.

[feelfree1]

(2 of 2)

Having already been obviously defeated militarily in Iraq, having completely failed to meet his obligation to provide adequate security for the Iraqi population, Abizaid has chosen to deepen his disgrace by attempting to blame the Iraqis and their puppet leaders for the U.S. inflicted catastrophe in Iraq. With this act, he demonstrates that he has surrendered any remaining ruminants of integrity or competency.

I look forward to the day that those responsible for this very low point in U.S. history, are brought to justice.

The Nuremberg Tribunals resulted in the sentencing many of the top Nazi leaders to death, by hanging. The U.S. is Constitutionally bound to adhere to all U.S. ratified international treaties, such as the Nuremberg Charter and the U.N. Charter. The strategy and tactics of the Bush regime are remarkably similar to those of the WWII Nazis, and they must be held to the same standard.

The world will rejoice when the Bush Butchers and their collaborators are held to account for their anti-human behavior.

[dtroness]

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Abizaid - they have not been right on anything. The general's comments and opinions are of no consequence - they are not relevant. Historians will have a field day writing about all the ways in which our leadership, at this time in history, brought about a more dangerous world, which will last for generations.
Even at this time, we can learn a valuable sociological lession as we consider the decision making processes that have taken place.
I this info from a google search:

Group Think

Janis, I. L. & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.

Eight Main Symptoms of Group Think:

Illusion of Invulnerability
Collective Rationalization
Illusion of Morality
Excessive Stereotyping
Pressure for Conformity
Self-Censorship
Illusion of Unanimity
Mindguards
----------------------------------------
Does this sound familiar?