Petraeus Weighs In, Supports Obama Policy

[one...two...tree 2,762]

When Defense Secretary Robert Gates endorsed President Obama's policies on torture and closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Republicans were unmoved. Gates doesn't count, they said. He may have been Bush's Pentagon chief, but he's not a neocon, and he now serves at Obama's pleasure. When Colin Powell (Bush cabinet) endorsed the same policies, Republicans were still unconvinced. Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a Bush appointee, doesn't count, either.

Fine. How about David Petraeus?

General David Petraeus said this past weekend that President Obama's decision to close down Gitmo and end harsh interrogation techniques would benefit the United States in the broader war on terror.

In an appearance on Radio Free Europe Sunday, the man hailed by conservatives as the preeminent military figure of his generation left little room for doubt about where he stands on some of Obama's most contentious policies.

Indeed, Petraeus seemed to reject the Republican arguments altogether, embracing only those interrogation techniques "that are completely in line with the Geneva Convention." The administration's plan for Guantanamo, Petraeus added "sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees."

Sam Stein added, "The remarks appear to be the first from Petraeus since the closure of Guantanamo and Bush Administration use of enhanced interrogation techniques became hot-button partisan issues. They couldn't come at a better time for Obama."

Now, I've been critical at times of Petraeus (and Powell, for the matter), and I'm not suggesting their arguments have merit only when I agree with their conclusions.

The point is that Petraeus' position makes the Republican attacks that much less credible. In most GOP circles, there's practically a religious reverence for Petraeus, and yet he now seems to have no use for the right's single most important arguments of the day.

As a matter of policy, Obama is obviously right and his detractors are clearly wrong. But as a matter of political optics, we're now dealing with a situation in which the president's position -- the one the right thinks is dangerous, naive, and terrorist-friendly -- has been endorsed by Bush's Defense Secretary (Gates), Bush's chairman of the Joint Chiefs (Mullen), Bush's Secretary of State (Powell), and the general Bush tapped to head U.S. Central Command (Petraeus).

On the other side, we have Newt Gingrich, ####### Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and some craven members of Congress.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

On the other side, we have Newt Gingrich, ####### Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and some craven members of Congress.

And the usual coterie of bloodthirsty, traitorous (as evidenced by their support for secessionist scum like Governor Perry) anti-American scumbags on VJ.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

On the other side, we have Newt Gingrich, ####### Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and some craven members of Congress.

And the usual coterie of bloodthirsty, traitorous (as evidenced by their support for secessionist scum like Governor Perry) anti-American scumbags on VJ.

Git off Obama's teet, son! Cheney owned that boy!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Steven, when are you going to learn and / or accept that Limbaugh, Cheney, Hannity and Gingrich are the only true Republicans anymore? Sheesh.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steven, when are you going to learn and / or accept that Limbaugh, Cheney, Hannity and Gingrich are the only true Republicans anymore? Sheesh.

You mean Gen. Petraeus is really a skirt wearing communist pinko underneath that uniform of his?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Steven, when are you going to learn and / or accept that Limbaugh, Cheney, Hannity and Gingrich are the only true Republicans anymore? Sheesh.

You mean Gen. Petraeus is really a skirt wearing communist pinko underneath that uniform of his?

Isn't that obvious from his support of Obama's dangerous approach to national security issues?

[_Simpson_ 250]

tortures a dirty word and no one wants to be associated with it. I dont think they see it in the same light that the liberals do or anything close.

[alienlovechild 75]

You'd think somebody would know about the chain-of-command and where General Petraeus fits in. Obama is his superior and previous generals have been dismissed for publically disgreeing with the president.

Again, its a dumb issue that has little relevance to the current battlefield except maybe as a negative and you'll notice he didn't say squat about releasing more photos to drum up support for enemy morale.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You'd think somebody would know about the chain-of-command and where General Petraeus fits in. Obama is his superior and previous generals have been dismissed for publically disgreeing with the president.

Again, its a dumb issue that has little relevance to the current battlefield except maybe as a negative and you'll notice he didn't say squat about releasing more photos to drum up support for enemy morale.

You know that's essentially the argument that some Lefties made when Gen. Petraeus gave his opinion to Congress about Iraq. It's funny how the shoe fits now.

[mawilson 2,133]

Torture, don't torture, whatever.

Jack Bauer will still find a way to get information out of you.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Torture, don't torture, whatever.

Jack Bauer will still find a way to get information out of you.

He wouldn't get anything out of Chuck Norris.

[scandal 951]

Torture, don't torture, whatever.

Jack Bauer will still find a way to get information out of you.

He wouldn't get anything out of Chuck Norris.

Chuck Norris counted to infinity - twice.

There is no chin behind Chuck Norris’ beard. There is only another fist.

Contrary to popular belief, America is not a democracy, it is a Chucktatorship.

http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Torture, don't torture, whatever.

Jack Bauer will still find a way to get information out of you.

He wouldn't get anything out of Chuck Norris.

Chuck Norris counted to infinity - twice.

There is no chin behind Chuck Norris' beard. There is only another fist.

Contrary to popular belief, America is not a democracy, it is a Chucktatorship.

http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/

Yeah...take that Eddie Bauer!

[alienlovechild 75]

You know that's essentially the argument that some Lefties made when Gen. Petraeus gave his opinion to Congress about Iraq. It's funny how the shoe fits now.

Wrong shoe size again. MoveOn.org slammed the general BEFORE he even testified before Congress.

Also all this stuff about detainee dates to 2004 and before and has little impact now beyond what I already told you. It's far more accurate to say Obama has adopted most of Bush's foreign policy and kept many of the same people in charge of their respective positions.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You know that's essentially the argument that some Lefties made when Gen. Petraeus gave his opinion to Congress about Iraq. It's funny how the shoe fits now.

Wrong shoe size again. MoveOn.org slammed the general BEFORE he even testified before Congress.

Also all this stuff about detainee dates to 2004 and before and has little impact now beyond what I already told you. It's far more accurate to say Obama has adopted most of Bush's foreign policy and kept many of the same people in charge of their respective positions.

My point is that you are saying it is a given that Gen. Petraeus' opinion will always be politically motivated, so it doesn't matter whether you criticize his opinion before or after he gives it. In other words, your position is really no different than those who dismissed his opinion as being political back when his Commander in Chief was Bush.

Edited May 27, 2009 by Col. 'Bat' Guano