BAGHDAD, Sept. 14, 2008
Petraeus: We Need More Than Troops
"Industrial Strength Insurgency" In Afghanistan Must Be Overcome With Political And Economic Progress
-
Photo
In this March 1, 2008 file photo, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, center left, talks to players during a youth soccer tournament in central Baghdad, Iraq. Amid a debate about U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus says experience in Iraq shows that political and economic efforts are needed as well as military action. (AP PHOTO)
-
Photo Essay
Another Hill Grilling
Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus, Ambassador Ryan Crocker answer questions from Congress.
-
Fast Facts
Afghanistan
Learn about the people, economy and history.
"You don't kill or capture your way out of an industrial-strength insurgency," he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.
His comments come as a debate over the need to redeploy troops from Iraq to Afghanistan has become a central issue in the U.S. presidential campaign.
Petraeus, who is widely credited with pulling Iraq back from the brink of civil war, is taking over as chief of U.S. Central Command, the headquarters overseeing U.S. military involvement throughout the Middle East, as well as Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia.
He'll hand over the reins in Iraq to Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno Tuesday during a ceremony at the U.S. military headquarters at Camp Victory on the western outskirts of Baghdad.
Petraeus' counterinsurgency strategy has paid off in Iraq, where the number of attacks has dropped to its lowest point in more than four years. But he will face a new challenge with violence rising in Afghanistan.
It will be a delicate balancing act to tackle a resurgent Taliban enjoying refuge in the lawless border areas of Pakistan without losing ground in Iraq.
"We've got a situation in Afghanistan where clearly there have been trends headed in the wrong direction," Petraeus said. "Military action is absolutely necessary but it is not sufficient."
"Political, economic and diplomatic activity is critical to capitalize on gains in the security arena," he said.
The 55-year-old general assumed control of U.S. forces in Iraq some 19 months ago after U.S. President George W. Bush ordered some 30,000 additional American forces to Iraq as part of a so-called surge aimed at stopping spiraling Sunni-Shiite sectarian violence.
The reason for the decline in violence is hotly debated, but the U.S. military cites the troop buildup, along with a Sunni revolt that saw former insurgents turn against al Qaeda in Iraq and a Shiite militia cease-fire ordered by strident American foe Muqtada al-Sadr.
Petraeus also acknowledged the military's dual role, calling U.S. troops "builders and diplomats as well as guardians and warriors" in his farewell letter posted on the military's Web site.
"The progress achieved has been hard-earned," he wrote. "There have been many tough days along the way, and we have suffered tragic losses. Indeed, nothing in Iraq has been anything but hard."
Petraeus stressed it was premature to discuss strategy but suggested he will carry over lessons from his playbook in Iraq - including possible outreach to try to bring hostile players into the political process.
Petraeus, however, stressed the ultimate decision to reach out to militants would be up to the Afghan government.
"We did reaffirm in Iraq the recognition that you don't kill or capture your way out of an industrial-strength insurgency," he said.
"Clearly there are so-called irreconcilables who must be killed or captured or run out of the country," he added. "But reconciliation with some of those who are currently part of the problem and making them part of the solution is something that I know is being examined as an option."
Bush announced last week that one Marine battalion and one Army brigade would be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan this fall and winter - far fewer than the 10,000 troops U.S. commanders there had requested. Meanwhile, about 8,000 U.S. troops will be withdrawn from Iraq by February.
George Friedman, the head of Stratfor, an independent intelligence risk assessment agency based in Austin, Texas, said Petraeus faces a more organized enemy in Afghanistan with the Taliban and must consider reaching out to them along with tribal chiefs.
"He's struggling with the question of limited forces and a political climate that's much different than Iraq," he said. "But it's impossible to imagine how the United States can create an Iraqi-style solution without the Taliban because they're getting stronger every day."
Petraeus and other military leaders have consistently warned that the security gains in Iraq are reversible and need continued U.S. attention - a point underscored by persistent bombings that bear the hallmarks of Sunni insurgents.
And while security gains have been remarkable, the Iraqi government has largely failed to take advantage of the calm to make political progress.
Petraeus said the new challenges in Iraq include stalled provincial elections that are expected to redistribute power among Iraq's deeply divided groups, growing tensions between Arabs and Kurds over disputed territory in the north and the need to provide new employment for Sunnis fighters currently on the U.S. payroll.
He also warned al Qaeda and "residual militia elements" remain a threat.
"There are still very significant challenges and there will be for the foreseeable future," he said, warning against an overly rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.
"What we're wary of doing in a country that has had a surprise around every corner is unduly jeopardizing the gains for which our soldiers and our Iraqi partners have fought so hard," he said.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 54 Comments$12 billion a month in Iraq is not enough.
We need to send more dollars to create American-style political and economic in these islamist wastelands.
Who said that the repubs are not for welfare?
We''ve been paying the islamist hoodlums and warlords billions a month to keep the peace in Bush''s war!
And who''s laughing all the way to the bank?
Our esteened ******** Cheney and his buddies at Halliburton!
Go McCain go!
100 More Years in Iraq!
His greatest success - quelling the insurrection with not guns but American taxpayers dollars, billions of them.
His great war strategy:
"If you can''t beat them, pay them!"
Seems to be working!
US casualties are down.
But who''s left holding the bag!
With a $3 trillion price tag!
The American taxpayers!!
Yep McCain is right!
The SPLURGE is working!
That is likely what lies ahead.
The questions are, have we truly defined what it is that we seek that makes the likely cost worthwhile, and how will we know when we have succeeded?
Goalless, open-ended war is a chickhawk, war-profiteer''s approach; I hope the last five years of Bush, Cheney, & PNAC, LLP have finally taught us better.
The sons and daughters of America who are in our military certainly deserve better.
And we cannot neglect our own country forever...
And you can''t win anywhere when the News Media and the Liberals are supporting Terrorism.
Posted by neo268 at 01:49 AM : Sep 15, 2008
Typical neocon doublespeak.
If you want to end Halliburton''s war in Iraq, you''re supporting terrorists.
If you want to support our troops, send them to die in Bush''s and Cheney''s war.
If you want to be a patriotic American, wage more wars on Israel''s behalf.
It''s this kind of half-assed cockamney thinking that''s bankrupting our nation!
To the tune of $400 million a DAY!
And that''s the greatest irony of all.
When it comes to spending, no one can beat the republicans.
They''ve become the SPEND AND SPEND PARTY!
Give it a new name - "War on Terror"
Get the cannon factory back up and running.
And, most importantly, profitable.
And the cultural warriors back here at home are trying to take us back to the fifties, too.
Posted by votefreedom
We have been fighting for "freedom" for 5 years and have less of thgem today than we did at the beginning.
Posted by votefreedom at 02:48 AM : Sep 15, 2008
Are you in high office? Are you one of the elite who is benefiting from this war? Do you pay and do your fair share? Do you deserve the right to call other people fools?
----
As I''ve been saying here for years now, a standing army never defeats competent guerilla forces.
Maybe the xenophobes who''ve been arguing to the contraty will now believe Bush''s boy about the matter....
You''ve got that right, General! WE need Obama/Biden ... we''ve all just about had it with Bush/Cheney!!!
Posted by Guyfrompa49 at 07:47 AM : Sep 15, 2008
Why is it YOU in the "Party" think YOU can only be American''s. When I think of what COULD have been had we NOT listened to you people in 2000 and in 2004 it makes me sick. Al Gore would have gone after the Taliban and Al Queda, not have invaded Iraq and would NOT have taken all those Regulations off Lenders. John Kerry would have gotten us out of the ill advised Iraq War and back to the fight in Afganistan. EITHER way we have both the funds and man power to get the job done. Now? All we have is an enemy as strong as ever and a nation in an ECONOMIC CRISIS. What are you freaks going to do? Blame THAT on Clinton?
Posted by Guyfrompa49 at 07:46 AM : Sep 15, 2008
You are so desperate you''re getting ridiculous. It''s one thing to support LIES and FRAUD of the Bush Administration but lets just accept that fact and move on! We need another 4 years of the Incompetence and lack of Judgment we''ve been through in the last 8 like we need ANOTHER Bank Failure. Now suck it up... YOU bought into a LIE and a FRAUD!!
Posted by Guyfrompa49 at 08:04 AM : Sep 15, 2008
Like I said your getting so scared and desperate you''re post are just plain stupid. How in this WORLD can we elect anyone who can''t tell the truth, after living with a compulsive liar like Bush, and a Ding Bat who has no idea what the Mess in Iraq is called? LOL Yeah YOU are going to be living with a BLACK President Sparky... I know it KILLS you to think of that but it ain''t even going to be close.
Posted by Guyfrompa49 at 08:11 AM : Sep 15, 2008
Oh Please you people have worn these LIES out. You can''t possibly think people still buy them... Well okay NORMAL People. LOL McCain is the one who has flip flopped on EVERY major issue AND can''t seem to tell us the truth about ANYTHING. Obama is a fresh new leader who can inspire people. When you have MAJOR banks going belly up you''d better have someone who at least KNOWS what it''s like to pay bills.
Posted by Guyfrompa49 at 08:08 AM : Sep 15, 2008
That''s all you got out of that post? You didn''t read anything else? I know he got carried away but after 8 years of stupidity, failure, Lies and outright fraud, it''s easy to understand how someone would. THE POINT you poor simple minded loser is that BUSH allowed them there, HE agreed to that Safe Haven, HE told us they didn''t matter and HE lied to us to start another war that had NOTHING to do with the Attack on this nation. TRY LISTENING to and UNDERSTANDING your fellow citizen while at the same time saying "you went to far".
Posted by Guyfrompa49
Everyday Grandpa McCain changes his policies to where I doubt most of you have a clue what he is for or against. You might as well face it moron Palin is an extremist who was put in the position to please the religious fruitcakes in the Republican Party! It was strictly a political move. Regardless of whether they are Moslem''s or Christian''s an extremist is an extremist. The woman isn''t qualified to be dog catcher!
If they had thought of this before we would have been out of there by now and Iraq and the USA would have a nice friendly relationship where they''d be selling us all kinds of oil.
We''ve missed so many opportunities and blown so chances. As soon as that statue of sadam was pulled down we should have had boatloads of equipment and supplies going over there to make their lives better (after all, that was the whole idea wasn''t it? Making their lives better with democracy. Or maybe the WMD? Or maybe badboy Saddam. I can''t remember.).
TO accomplish this, our army could have made things safe (at that time they could handle it) and our national guard with their tons of knowledge in the civilian sector could have helped teach them skills to make their country better. We had Drs and nurses and electritians and plumbers and construction workers and farmers and a wealth of knowledge that would have gone a long long ways in relations, but we squandered it over the "shock and awe" of the bush administration. And now we''ve got McBush coming up where everyone''s googly-eyed over Caribou Barbie, and not thinking through the fact that if they get in there they''ll be running us into the ground more with stupid decisions.
THIS IS WHAT OBAMA HAS BEEN SAYING.
OBAMA HAS A BRAIN (McCain/Palin thinks foreign policy is being able to see Russia from her house! The Russians are laughing at them too.)
Further indications of failure came with the backsliding provincial elections (another claimed success) as they were first delayed and then canceled entirely for 2008. The Sunnis remain under represented and their regions remain disorganized due to a boycott of the national elections and the cancellation of provincial elections.
The formal sharing of oil revenues between the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds is only a interim agreement as the Oil Law is not completed.
Sunni insurgents (most are still disqualified from government jobs) were paid and guaranteed future jobs (government) by US forces in exchange for their cooperation (the "Anbar Awakening") cannot be satisfied with the proceeding issues. Especially considering the risks associated with the eventual withdrawal of US troops, opening the real possibility for civil war a between the factions considering all the unresolved issues.
It sounds like General Petraeus'' advice also still applies to Iraq?
The heralded troop surge was the creature of Washington politics, not military planners, and unfortunately another deceit foisted on the American people.
The principal criticisms of the troop surge are (1) US troops have neither the numbers nor the staying power to function as the permanent police of Baghdad and (2) Bush has not increased troop levels elsewhere, so The Thirty Thousand must come out of the US budget for other Iraqi provinces.
The surge becomes simply a Bush public relations exercise, robbing Peter to pay Paul-- last seen when Bush pulled combat units from Afghanistan into Iraq.
In contrast, the so-called "Anbar Awakening" is widely-credited for the reduction in violence. The Awakening councils are locally-driven by Sunni nationalism (not to be confused with an Iraqi nationalism under Saddam). The Awakening is not pro-American, per se, but an effort to recapture local control of local politics. The Americans are a means to an end, and most Iraqis (especially Sunni) want US troops out.
---
Critics of the war advocate long-term success as national policy--and invading Iraq is a non-starter. As you point out, if pulling out the troops does nothing to change local politics, we must ask, why have American troops there, at all?
Bush, Cheney and certain advisers, however, are naive neocon militarists with an ulterior agenda, and focused on Iraq well before 911. Cheney acknowledged before his secret 2001 meeting wiith the oil majors (to craft a "national energy policy") that Iraq was the last largely untapped asset in the geopolitical scramble for oil. It was clear Bush and Cheney intended to capture Iraq first-- no matter what means, fair or foul, would be required.
What supporters of the Iraq invasion never understood is military occupation is not a sustainable option for this country. We are not a colonial power, and cannot justify any pretext for the occupation offered by Bush-- especially his bogus claims of national security.
Bush has led the country on a consistent path to disaster. Our blood and treasure have been spent at a profligate rate by the same Bush who inherited a budget surplus in 2001. Bush neary doubled the national debt because he refused to raise taxes to pay for his war. But the costs have been incurred, and must be paid. The cost of Bush''s war will be passed along to the next president (regardless of party).
---
Yours not only doesn''t fly, it doesn''t clear even a pre-flight check. Bush wants to escape taxes, so he routinely shovels his deficits upstairs to be passed along to his successor.
This debt overhead is called the national debt, which is debt and only debt-- no matter how much you want to believe Cheney when he lectured Secretary of Treasury O''Neill, "Reagan proved deficits don''t matter".
Bush deficit spending nearly has doubled the national debt. That means Bush aleady has passed tax hikes onto the next administration, whoever wins the election. The sole objective for Bush is to escape blame for his own fiscal irresponsibility.
Bush also desperately wants a rewrite of history about Iraq. Yet, the embarrassing stories persist about Bush seeking to capture Iraq for the oil companies from his first day in office. By no small coincidence, it is the oil majors which fund his politics-- and which fund McBush''s politics, as well.
McBush opposed offshore oil drilling back in June. Days after his speech, however, McBush reversed his position. Days after that, McBush attended a San Antonio fundraiser, closed to the public, which raised $1.8 million from the oil industry.
The USSR found this out the hard way - and the US has yet to learn...
I hate to tell you this, but it is ALREADY crashing down, thanks to a former governor from Texas with big oil connections. The crash is Bush''s fault. Let''s see, Afghanistan is slipping back to chaos, the economy is in recession (I know you and McCain are in denial though), and we''ve got a dinosaur and chipper lady in lipstick (who like to hide e-mails just like Bush) that are going to save us?
"We need to counter the shcokwave of the evildoer by having individual rate cuts accelerated and by thinking about tax rebates." - George W. Bush, 10/04/2001. What intellect you have Georgie!
The fact still remains that Obama was right from the get go. You can''t change facts well, you wing nuts try but it will not work.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 54 Comments