Our Opinions On Iraq Strategy Don't Matter

Bob Schieffer: What Happens In Baghdad That Matters More Than What's Said In Washington

(CBS)  Weekly commentary by CBS Evening News chief Washington correspondent and Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer.

---

As I listened to the debate over Iraq policy last week, what struck me was how people could look at the same situation and come to such opposite conclusions about what they saw - let alone what to do about it.

Think about it. General Petraeus told us the administration policy has led to some success in Iraq. Critics said it has led to total failure.

The general said violence is down in Iraq. Critics challenged his figures and said violence is up.

The general and the president said it is the success we have had that has made it possible to bring home some of our troops. Critics said success had nothing to do with it; we simply don't have an army large enough to keep the current number of troops in Iraq past April.

The president said being in Iraq has made us safer. Critics said it's made us weaker.

General Petraeus said he did not to know.

The administration says Iraq will require a long term American military commitment. The critics say the president is just making an excuse to justify the 100,000 American troops that will still be in Iraq when the next president takes office.

To my ear, the only thing the two sides agreed on was that the internal factions in the Iraqi government are still a long way from working out a way to share power and make the compromises necessary to form a stable, efficient government.

The discouraging thing is that until the Iraqis resolve that who's right or wrong about the rest of it doesn't really matter

Not at all.

---

E-mail Face the Nation.

[shingles1]

Shorter Bob Schieffer: On the one hand people say "this" and on the other hand people say "that".

What a pointless commentary.

[samthetvcat]

"To my ear, the only thing the two sides agreed on was that the internal factions in the Iraqi government are still a long way from working out a way to share power and make the compromises necessary to form a stable, efficient government.

The discouraging thing is that until the Iraqis resolve that who''s right or wrong about the rest of it doesn''t really matter"

Or worse, if/since Iraqis can''t/won''t share power and make compromises what''s next? It just seems like we''re stalled, and NONE of the presidential candidates seem to want to talk about how to move the ball forward. Republicans say stay the course but don''t want to talk about the opportunities cost to the treasury, homeland security/intelligence, hunt for Bin Laden, etc; Democratic politicians urge withdrawal without addressing the fall out to Iraqis.

I feel like coming up with a more detailed plan could really help get something passed in Congress or shake up the presidential race, but all the politicians seem intent on playing it safe . . . who knows . . .

[ioweign]

Let''s see...

Bush lied about Iraq and still does!

Cheney lied about Iraq and still does!

Powell lied about Iraq and figured things out and quit!

Rumsfeld lied about Iraq and couldn''t figure things out and resigned!.

Rice is out to lunch and counting her "Sky Miles"

And these two hand picked individuals (not sworn in) present their estimates on Iraq.

Even if I give them the benefit of the doubt, the reality in Iraq doesn''t match with their accounts.

[kesac4650]

Our author tells us that different people listened to Gen. Petraus and then came to different conclusions.
That is probably untrue in nearly all cases. Those people were present when Gen. Petraes spoke, may or may not have listened, and then trotted out the same opinion they have displayed on every other occasion.
Then of course each of those persons disparages the honesty of anyone who might have actually listened and learned and developed an informed opinion.

[middleman8]

''THE INTERNAL FACTIONS IN IRAQ A LONG WAY APART"

I WOULD SAY THE INTERNAL FACTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES ARE A LONG WAY APART.

[tomtomasters]

What would I do if I were a Terrorist?

Hi my name is Mohammad Abullaabullabulla. I live in Afghanistan and my brother Mohassammanmama lives in Iraq. We are terrorists. We have been trying to win the war on terror. And we want to get the bomb to protect ourselves. This is what my brother is doing.

It is said that America has pounded our countries with tons of DU known as Depleted Uranium. We have it everywhere, and people are saying we are dying from it. But I think I can use it for our own bombs.
I ordered a nice metal detector from the internet.

It is being shipped soon to us. Although I don%u2019t need it, because shrapnel and metal is everywhere to include blown up tanks and shells and casings, and what we really like are the DU tips found from your expended munitions. The cruise missiles are especially cool. Although a little beat up, my brother said I can use them to grind up into powder and make our own DU bombs.

[tomtomasters]

I found some bags lying in the streets, you know the ones they put over the heads of our brothers; and I use them to collect my metal parts. I put a scarf over my mouth and I found an old pair of glasses blown off some guys face in a car bombing. I had to wipe away the dried blood, but they are pretty useful to protect my eyes when I do the grinding. It%u2019s a little blurry but they work ok. I know that I am becoming contaminated with DU; but I don%u2019t mind. I can stay alive long enough to make more good missiles. In fact we are planning to sell DU dust to Osama. They can put the dust in the rocket held shoulder missiles called stingers. Or maybe we can do some smelting and make a real good DU tip and fasten it to our stingers. You know these stingers are pretty good. They stopped the Russians. Now we are going to see about stopping you.

[tomtomasters]

We%u2019re especially happy that you will continue to use DU Depleted Uranium munitions against us, to keep us well supplied. We use all the metal parts to grind into dust and using other scientific methods can keep our production costs much lower I suspect than yours. We are very happy about these developments. Again thank you, and see you on the battle field! Yippee hi ho!

Can you imagine that; look what Bush has done! He has given the stuff to terrorists? They don''t care if they become contaminated because they would die anyway from their conventional TNT bombs.

[tomtomasters]

They can scavenge tanks, and dig up shrapnel that is loaded with radioactive material to put in stingers. They will use it against the USA.
And the funny thing about is the USA will fire more at them, so they can go out to dig up the expended rounds. Here Shrub spends all this money on the war for munitions, and it costs the terrorists nothing to make them. Just go out their front door, and get it.

Pretty pathetic what Bush has done. In fact he is fired. He needs to pack his gear and get out of the White House. He is done OUT OF TOWN. He needs to face criminal charges. The War is over. American people are not going to allow this war to go on any longer. It is done. We need to help clean up Iraq and Afghanistan before they get more of the DU material. We need to ban DU munitions, and foremost end the idea of War. War is Terror.

This will expose that freak once and for all. I am trying to stop this war. It is clear the terrorist are winning with Bush.

[photogeezer]

Sorry to be in agreement with the first poster, but, Bob, it is a pointless commentary. We know we are living in a divided house on this issue.

What matters is that our sons and daughters serving the our military were lied to about the point of this war from the beginning. It is about oil, as Alan Greenspan points out.
What matters is the the news media, you included, failed to question the reasons for this exercise from the beginning. You answer to your corporate owners, not to the truth. Amy Goodman, of Democracy Now, has had it right from the beginning.

Of course, the two sides are in total disagreement...Republicans are trying to justify a war that should never have occurred, and Gen. Petraeus is trying to put a positive spin on this debacle. All the waste, the insanity of this misadventure, the outright lies constructed to get us into this mess are simply infuriating. It was easy to get in...it is not so easy to get out! Americans should all be outraged at the sorry leadership of the Bush Administration and certainly not vote in any more of the same.

[magenta13-2009]

Sen. Jon Kyl said that it was up to General Petraus to define the mission in Iraq. I believe it is up to the president and congress to define the mission. The job of the military is to execute the mission. Otherwise congress and the president should be paid what the soldiers are paid and the soldiers should be receiving the pay of congress and the president.

[sjc_1]

It is up to the Commander in Chief to define our mission in Iraq. That means that the President should explain to the American people and Congress WHY we are there and what we hope to accomplish. So far, that story seems to change time and time again.

[nmsuip]

Nothing striking about it at all. "...General Petraeus told us the administration policy has led to some success in Iraq. Critics said it has led to total failure..."

They are one and the same. If the present strategy is only capable of delivering "some success," the end result will be "total failure."

But as noted by this article, if Iraq remains as politically disunited as it is then no military strategy will end successfully. And as politically disunited as we are becoming, perhaps we''re heading down the same road...

[alanrobisch]

mr schieffer nice to see for a change a opinion piece that is not based on an already prejudged point of view. I''m about where you are. I''d like to know how the critics know that General Petraeus is lying and if he is not why do they find to win an argument to change our policy by doing the same thing that the opponents constantly accuse bush doing of lying to support their point of view.

[feelfree1]

Mr. Schieffer,

Please speak for yourself.

I would agree that YOUR opinion does not matter, because you have demonstrated that you are an eager boot/arse-licker of the illegitimate and criminal Bush cabal, and a shameless apologist for the illegal war of aggression against Iraq.

With this in mind, why not retire, rather than risk further exposing yourself as a dottering old fool?

[sjc_1]

FeelFree1,

Bob has more wisdom and experience than G.W. Bush will ever hope to have. Bush has no introspection nor humility, thus he is unable to see his own mistakes and correct them. He can not grow as a person without this and as such remains the lame excuse for a president that people know he is.

[doctor--o]

If you infect your mind with FOX propaganda you may not know that there is anything amiss in.... where?

[alanrobisch]

I would agree that YOUR opinion does not matter, because you have demonstrated that you are an eager boot/arse-licker of the illegitimate and criminal Bush cabal, and a shameless apologist for the illegal war of aggression against Iraq.

With this in mind, why not retire, rather than risk further exposing yourself as a dottering old fool?

Posted by FeelFree1 at 06:17 PM : Sep 16, 2007

Having a bad day need to attack other people to get your aggression out. Because he doesn''t agree with you you call him a dottering old fool Puhlleze.
I have always heard when people can''t win the fight of ideas they resort to insults. I guess that''s where you are

[clestes-2009]

It sure as hell will matter in the next election. Anyone who thinks Iraq won''t be the MAJOR concern next year is out of touch with American people.

It will matter and even more will it matter if Bush bombs Iran, as he is expected to do.

[alanrobisch]

It will matter and even more will it matter if Bush bombs Iran, as he is expected to do. sted by clestes at 09:53 AM : Sep 17, 2007

Cut me a break. Bush isn''t going to bomb Iran. If we were person to person I''d be glad to wager $1000.00 that he has no intention to do so and will not and Im not a betting man unless its a sure thing

[toldyouso21]

Cut me a break. Bush isn''''t going to bomb Iran. If we were person to person I''''d be glad to wager $1000.00 that he has no intention to do so and will not and Im not a betting man unless its a sure thing
Posted by alanrobisch2 at 08:07 PM : Sep 17, 2007

LOL and were you SURE, that the Republicans would not lose in 2006? Were you SURE that Iraq had WMD and helped in 9/11? How about were you sure, that each time Bush said we were turning corners it was true and that no one in Bush''s administration leaked the name of a CIA agent? Were you SURE Bush would be a really great President? Were you SURE that Bush would respect and honor the constitution? Because if you were wrong about any of these obvious things---then it is indeed GOOD that your bet remains an idle claim. The one thing we can be sure of about Bush, is that he will not give up his power easily--that being a given--we have no idea what such a person might do.

[aidamm-2009]

Why not quit critisizing Bush and Petraeus and let them do there job. You don''t knoww what is going on over there to make a good decision. I believe they are doing the best that can be done. If you can do better, go to Iraq and do it.

[alanrobisch]

I did not think he would be a great president or even a good one I was turned off by his lack of erudition. It was pretty clear that republicans would lose seats in the Senate and house because of the mess that the war was and the poor manner in which Katrina was handled.

I didn''t think nor ever assumed that saddam was involved in 9/11 and I believe there was legitimate reasons to believe that he had WMd''s but did not back invasion

As far as honoring the constitution I don''t think he has dishonored it as dems and liberals have obsessed with. this wouldn''t even be a issue if the war in Iraq was going well

[imnho]

Its hard to take the adminastration seriously. There ratanole for the war keeps changing and all of there predictions have been wrong. I would rather see the general be right then wrong; But having been mislead either accidently or intentionally I remain skeptical of the surge working.

[alanrobisch]

But having been mislead either accidently or intentionally I remain skeptical of the surge working.
Posted by IMNHO at 10:08 PM : Sep 17, 2007

I can''t be sure it will be sucessful but I found I trusted general petraeus and think that sufficient troops from the beginning may have prevented the present civil war