PDA

View Full Version : Petraeus cites Bush-era shortcomings in Afghanistan



Roger Perry
08-16-2010, 11:00 AM
In the interview, which was conducted last week in Kabul and aired Sunday, Petraeus did not specifically criticize former President George W. Bush, who promoted him to head of U.S. Central Command in April 2008. But the timetable he described left little doubt that he believed the Bush administration inadequately laid the groundwork for integrating Afghan leaders into the allied military structure.
“Over the last 18 months or so” — Bush left the White House 18 months ago — “what we’ve sought to do in Afghanistan is to get the inputs right for the first time,” Petraeus said. “We needed to refine the concepts — to build, in some cases, concepts that didn’t exist” seven years after the Afghan war began in October 2001.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38698040/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press

ducknwork
08-16-2010, 11:05 AM
yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..............................................

badbullgator
08-16-2010, 12:26 PM
yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..............................................


yeah but that is Viagra for Roger

Roger Perry
08-16-2010, 12:27 PM
yeah but that is Viagra for Roger

Perhaps if the war in Afghanistan had been run right from the git go we could have been out of there already.

ducknwork
08-16-2010, 12:50 PM
And if frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their ass.

But neither situation gets changed one iota by complaining about it, does it?:rolleyes:

Franco
08-16-2010, 12:55 PM
Always easiest to general from an armchair, after the fact.;-)

We should have been out after 90 days!

M&K's Retrievers
08-16-2010, 01:17 PM
Perhaps if the war in Afghanistan had been run right from the git go we could have been out of there already.

I'm not sure it can be run right short of nuking the entire country and even then, what would you win? A pile of rearranged rocks and some fried opium fields. Al-Qaeda would pop up in some where else.

Roger Perry
08-16-2010, 01:30 PM
And if frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their ass.

But neither situation gets changed one iota by complaining about it, does it?:rolleyes:

Petraeus cites Bush-era shortcomings in Afghanistan

‘We did not have the organizations that are required,’ U.S. commander says



Video
http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Video/__NEW/mtp_petr_deadline_100815.grid-2x2.jpg


Petraeus: Political deadline not ‘stifling’ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38698040/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press#slice-2)







updated 8/15/2010 11:54:54 AM ET

I did not write this story. The interview was aired yesterday.

dixidawg
08-16-2010, 01:48 PM
Perhaps if the war in Afghanistan had been run right from the git go we could have been out of there already.


And perhaps if Clinton had taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance, we wouldn't even be in Afghanistan.

Living in the past regards,,,,,,

badbullgator
08-16-2010, 02:22 PM
And perhaps if Clinton had taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance, we wouldn't even be in Afghanistan.

Living in the past regards,,,,,,


Touché

:p

ducknwork
08-16-2010, 02:23 PM
I did not write this story. The interview was aired yesterday.

I didn't accuse you of posting old stuff. However, it does grow old when the only purpose of anything you post is to find a 'new' way to bash Bush. So what was your point by posting this?

road kill
08-16-2010, 02:24 PM
I didn't accuse you of posting old stuff. However, it does grow old when the only purpose of anything you post is to find a 'new' way to bash Bush. So what was your point by posting this?

OOOH OOOH, I know, I know........

Waving hand wildly in there air so I get picked to answer!!!!



To Bash Bush!!!!:D



RK

M&K's Retrievers
08-16-2010, 02:41 PM
OOOH OOOH, I know, I know........

Waving hand wildly in there air so I get picked to answer!!!!



To Bash Bush!!!!:D



RK

Very good!

Arnold Horshack regards,

Roger Perry
08-16-2010, 02:44 PM
I didn't accuse you of posting old stuff. However, it does grow old when the only purpose of anything you post is to find a 'new' way to bash Bush. So what was your point by posting this?


I did not bash Bush at all. A General that Bush hand picked to run the Iraq war did a fine job all by himself on national television.

In the interview, which was conducted last week in Kabul and aired Sunday, Petraeus did not specifically criticize former President George W. Bush, who promoted him to head of U.S. Central Command in April 2008. But the timetable he described left little doubt that he believed the Bush administration inadequately laid the groundwork for integrating Afghan leaders into the allied military structure.
“Over the last 18 months or so” — Bush left the White House 18 months ago — “what we’ve sought to do in Afghanistan is to get the inputs right for the first time,” Petraeus said. “We needed to refine the concepts — to build, in some cases, concepts that didn’t exist” seven years after the Afghan war began in October 2001.

dnf777
08-16-2010, 03:34 PM
Al-Qaeda would pop up in some where else.

Where were you when we invaded Iraq, and decided to stay in A-stan? I made the comparison of al-qadea to cockroaches in a garage when you turn the light on. You can spend all your energy running around stomping on them, but you'll never get them all!

dnf777
08-16-2010, 03:39 PM
I did not bash Bush at all. A General that Bush hand picked to run the Iraq war did a fine job all by himself on national television.

In the interview, which was conducted last week in Kabul and aired Sunday, Petraeus did not specifically criticize former President George W. Bush, who promoted him to head of U.S. Central Command in April 2008. But the timetable he described left little doubt that he believed the Bush administration inadequately laid the groundwork for integrating Afghan leaders into the allied military structure.
“Over the last 18 months or so” — Bush left the White House 18 months ago — “what we’ve sought to do in Afghanistan is to get the inputs right for the first time,” Petraeus said. “We needed to refine the concepts — to build, in some cases, concepts that didn’t exist” seven years after the Afghan war began in October 2001.


Roger,
Don't you understand? Its far, far easier, with an election coming up, where the ONLY chance of victory is that the sheeple will have forgotten who and how we got into this mess in the first place, than to accept responsibility for their party's actions! Bush? Bush who? Everything bad is Obama's fault!--don't you know?

In order to win seats, the American people MUST have a state of amnesia induced, and the place to start is denying W ever existed. Or had anything to do with anything, except attending pig roasts. Hell, its Obama's fault my dog switched to an old fall this afternoon.

badbullgator
08-16-2010, 03:44 PM
Progression of a Roger Perry thread

BUSH IS BAD/STUPID/IDOT/CRIMINAL….in LARGE LETTERS (Actually this time he left off the large print)contained in an article he found some place or another. He then waits for the first person to say “Roger is bashing Bush again” so he can chime in that HE DID NOT SAY IT, SOMEONE ELSE DID as if to prove the point that he is not alone in his hatred for Bush.
Pretty Old actually but he sure has fun with it!
http://forums.floridasportsman.com/sites/all/modules/smileys/packs/IMOsmiley/horse.gif http://forums.floridasportsman.com/sites/all/modules/smileys/packs/IMOsmiley/drunk.gif


ooops, forgot Jeff will then agree that Roger is wise and all knowing in that Bush is at fault and then along comes dnf.......

dnf777
08-16-2010, 03:50 PM
Progression of a Roger Perry thread

BUSH IS BAD/STUPID/IDOT/CRIMINAL….in LARGE LETTERS (Actually this time he left off the large print)contained in an article he found some place or another. He then waits for the first person to say “Roger is bashing Bush again” so he can chime in that HE DID NOT SAY IT, SOMEONE ELSE DID as if to prove the point that he is not alone in his hatred for Bush.
Pretty Old actually but he sure has fun with it!
http://forums.floridasportsman.com/sites/all/modules/smileys/packs/IMOsmiley/horse.gif http://forums.floridasportsman.com/sites/all/modules/smileys/packs/IMOsmiley/drunk.gif


ooops, forgot Jeff will then agree that Roger is wise and all knowing in that Bush is at fault and then along comes dnf.......

I like the cartoons and fancy print, but found the content totally lacking in any meaningful substance!

Marvin S
08-16-2010, 04:02 PM
In the interview, which was conducted last week in Kabul and aired Sunday, Petraeus did not specifically criticize former President George W. Bush, who promoted him to head of U.S. Central Command in April 2008. But the timetable he described left little doubt that he believed the Bush administration inadequately laid the groundwork for integrating Afghan leaders into the allied military structure.
“Over the last 18 months or so” — Bush left the White House 18 months ago — “what we’ve sought to do in Afghanistan is to get the inputs right for the first time,” Petraeus said. “We needed to refine the concepts — to build, in some cases, concepts that didn’t exist” seven years after the Afghan war began in October 2001.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38698040/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press

Let's really look at this - Who was in charge in A-stan 18 months ago. I believe it was General Petraeus. Now if they were getting things wrong, it would be the General's fault.

I believe what you are hearing is more BS for an early withdrawal with 0 results.

JMO

road kill
08-16-2010, 04:06 PM
I like the cartoons and fancy print, but found the content totally lacking in any meaningful substance!
Well, in all fairness, he was describing RP's posts!!!:D


RK

ducknwork
08-16-2010, 10:11 PM
Well, in all fairness, he was describing RP's posts!!!:D


RK

With amazing accuracy, I might add!

Roger Perry
08-17-2010, 10:00 AM
Let's really look at this - Who was in charge in A-stan 18 months ago. I believe it was General Petraeus. Now if they were getting things wrong, it would be the General's fault.

I believe what you are hearing is more BS for an early withdrawal with 0 results.

JMO

If I am not mistaken, wasn't General Petraeus just recently put in charge of Afghanistan about a month ago?

Marvin S
08-17-2010, 11:00 AM
If I am not mistaken, wasn't General Petraeus just recently put in charge of Afghanistan about a month ago?

Prior to that I believe he was in charge of the who got fired! :confused:, you or me?

ducknwork
08-17-2010, 11:04 AM
If I am not mistaken, wasn't General Petraeus just recently put in charge of Afghanistan about a month ago?

From wikipedia--


On October 31, 2008, Petraeus assumed command of the United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) headquartered in Tampa, Florida. Petraeus was responsible for U.S. operations in 20 countries spreading from Egypt to Pakistan—including Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.

So, I guess you would be mistaken.

Julie R.
08-17-2010, 11:34 AM
Hey Roger, who appointed Petraeus? Do you think that person made a bad choice? C'mon now, don't be shy.

Roger Perry
08-17-2010, 01:20 PM
From wikipedia--



So, I guess you would be mistaken.

By Dan Murphy (http://www.csmonitor.com/About/Contact/Section-Editors/Dan-Murphy), Staff writer / July 2, 2010
Kabul, Afghanistan With the US-led Afghanistan war in its most precarious position since it began nearly nine years ago, Gen. David Petraeus arrived in Kabul today to implement a strategy similar to the one he successfully pioneered in Iraq.
It includes not only removing the Taliban from the villages they have occupied for years, but also overseeing reconstruction, helping create a more accountable government, and building up the Afghan military and police.
The capital of Kabul is an oasis of relative security. But the situation in the south of the country – the Pashtun heartland that gave birth to the Taliban in the early 1990s – is deteriorating, say average Afghans, aid workers, and some diplomats. June was the deadliest month ever for foreign troops here.

Or not mistaken

Roger Perry
08-17-2010, 01:23 PM
Hey Roger, who appointed Petraeus? Do you think that person made a bad choice? C'mon now, don't be shy.

President Bush appointed General Petraeus to head the Iraq war and yes I think he made a good choice, however we should not have invaded Iraq based on the lies the Bush administration told about having WMD when Bush was told there were no WMD there.

david gibson
08-17-2010, 07:12 PM
President Bush appointed General Petraeus to head the Iraq war and yes I think he made a good choice, however we should not have invaded Iraq based on the lies the Bush administration told about having WMD when Bush was told there were no WMD there.

you still believe that? we found MIGS buried in the sand and and former iranian general Georges Sada - "The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein‘s air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed." and you still believe Iraq had no WMD even after they used them on their own countrymen.

so did they use them all up? why would a rogue nation and despot like saddam hussein get rid of them correctly yet deny access from the UN?

let me guess - you are a 9/11 truther too, right?:rolleyes:

road kill
08-17-2010, 07:19 PM
you still believe that? we found MIGS buried in the sand and and former iranian general Georges Sada - "The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein‘s air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed." and you still believe Iraq had no WMD even after they used them on their own countrymen.

so did they use them all up? why would a rogue nation and despot like saddam hussein get rid of them correctly yet deny access from the UN?

let me guess - you are a 9/11 truther too, right?:rolleyes:

Easy Dave, RP is just repeating something he over heard the BIG kids talking about at recess!!:D


RK

ducknwork
08-17-2010, 07:23 PM
President Bush appointed General Petraeus to head the Iraq war and yes I think he made a good choice, however we should not have invaded Iraq based on the lies the Bush administration told about having WMD when Bush was told there were no WMD there.

Reliable link please.

david gibson
08-17-2010, 07:35 PM
Reliable link please.

link? he aint got no steeeenkin link! all he knows is john kerry said there were no WMDs after he said there were WMDs.

Roger Perry
08-18-2010, 12:22 PM
Reliable link please.


Iraq Had No WMD in Fall 2002http://www.informationliberation.com/space.gif
Tonight on 60 Minutes, Tyler Drumheller, the former chief of the CIA's Europe division, revealed that in the fall of 2002, President Bush, Vice President Cheney, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and others were told by CIA Director George Tenet that Iraq's foreign minister -- who agreed to act as a spy for the United States -- had reported that Iraq had no active weapons of mass destruction program. Watch it (http://images1.americanprogress.org/il80web20037/ThinkProgress/2006/60min.320.240.mov):


BRADLEY: According to Drumheller, CIA Director George Tenet delivered the news about the Iraqi foreign minister at a high level meeting at the White House.

DRUMHELLER: The President, the Vice President, Dr. Rice…

BRADLEY: And at that meeting…?

DRUMHELLER: They were enthusiastic because they said they were excited that we had a high-level penetration of Iraqis.

BRADLEY: And what did this high level source tell you?

DRUMHELLER: He told us that they had no active weapons of mass destruction program.

BRADLEY: So, in the fall of 2002, before going to war, we had it on good authority from a source within Saddam's inner circle that he didn't have an active program for weapons of mass destruction?

DRUMHELLER: Yes.

BRADLEY: There's no doubt in your mind about that?

DRUMHELLER: No doubt in my mind at all.

BRADLEY: It directly contradicts, though, what the President and his staff were telling us.

DRUMHELLER: The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=18934

road kill
08-18-2010, 12:27 PM
"Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html


RK

Roger Perry
08-19-2010, 09:51 AM
"Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html


RK

CIA confirms Bush lied about WMDs

Published by Fred Soto (http://whitehouser.com/author/admin/)• September 7th, 2007 http://whitehouser.com/img/feed.png RSS News Feed (http://feeds.feedburner.com/political)2diggsdigg
What did President Bush know about Iraq WMDs?


Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction | Salon (http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/index_np.html)
On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior IA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again. Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. (http://dir.salon.com/topics/weapons_of_mass_destruction/)


No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA (http://dir.salon.com/topics/cia/) among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.


On April 23, 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam’s foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. “We continued to validate him the whole way through,” said Drumheller. “The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.”
Was Iraq a target with or without September 11th?

Read more ------

http://whitehouser.com/war/cia-confirms-bush-wmd-lie/

Wesley Clark, on a tirade over the summer let us all know that an invasion of 5 middle eastern States was in the plans and it was drafted prior to the September 11th attack. What September 11 terrorists did was give the President the opportunity he needed to carry out his Iraq invasion. Sure, he needed to avenge dad and finish the job his father refused to take on. While, I grant that there may be good reason to attempt to stabilize the middle east and even ‘control’ oil resources, using the murder of 3000 innocent civilians was not the way to do it. Everyone, since Saddam Hussein became America’s #1 enemy, has been asking why the heck didn’t we go after Osama Bin Laden?

Roger Perry
08-19-2010, 09:56 AM
"Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html


RK

CIA’s final report: No WMD found in Iraq

WASHINGTON — In his final word, the CIA’s top weapons inspector in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction has “gone as far as feasible” and has found nothing, closing an investigation into the purported programs of Saddam Hussein that were used to justify the 2003 invasion.
“After more than 18 months, the WMD investigation and debriefing of the WMD-related detainees has been exhausted,” wrote Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, in an addendum to the final report he issued last fall.
“As matters now stand, the WMD investigation has gone as far as feasible.”
In 92 pages posted online Monday evening, Duelfer provides a final look at an investigation that occupied over 1,000 military and civilian translators, weapons specialists and other experts at its peak. His latest addenda conclude a roughly 1,500-page report released last fall.

Do you think faux news got it wrong?

gman0046
08-19-2010, 09:59 AM
Perry looks as if your off your meds again and still blaming W. I'd ask your therapist for your money back as its not working.

Roger Perry
08-19-2010, 10:42 AM
Perry looks as if your off your meds again and still blaming W. I'd ask your therapist for your money back as its not working.

I was asked to provide information that Bush knew there were no WMD before he invaded Iraq, which I did. Now to hear from the horse's mouth or should I say the other end of the horse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKX6luiMINQ