Middle East News
PROFILE: Petraeus framed as man to rescue Bush Iraq policy
By Gabriele Chwallek Jan 26, 2007, 16:10 GMT
Washington - Lieutenant General David Petraeus is a picture perfect military officer. He has leadership qualities, is highly intelligent, purposeful, ambitious, brave and physically fit.
Following his confirmation by the Senate early Friday as the new senior US commander of the multinational forces in Iraq, the 54-year- old Petraeus will face the biggest challenge of his career: reversing the course the violence-drenched country is on with the help of an expected 21,500 additional soldiers.
Petraeus' new position places him in a central role in US President George W Bush's new war strategy as a possible saviour for Iraq and at the same time for the president, whose policy in Iraq is causing rebellion even among some loyal Republican Party friends.
Many Bush critics and some US media outlets have called the assignment for the new commander a 'Mission Impossible,' doomed to fail. But this pessimistic view has nothing to do with a lack of respect for the abilities of a professional soldier who in 1991 was wounded so severely in an accident during a military training exercise that he nearly died.
If it's at all within the power of the military to improve the situation in Iraq, then Petraeus seems to be the man to rely upon.
His nomination moved smoothly through the US Senate, further confirming the confidence in his abilities. He has broad support even though he has been an outspoken advocate of the controversial Bush proposal to send more troops to Iraq. He long ago suggested such a move.
Even retired US generals who have criticized Bush and rejected the idea of raising the level of troops have said good things about Patraeus, the son of Dutch immigrants.
'If anybody can figure it out, Dave Petraeus can,' retired Gen. John Batiste, a Bush critic, said recently.
A government official was quoted by Newsweek magazine as saying when Petraeus walks into the room, everyone's body language changes. They stand up straight.
Petraeus, who is rumoured to have an inclination to compete over things to the extent of obsession, is seen as a realist.
'The situation in Iraq is dire,' he told the Senate Armed Services Committee, which easily approved his nomination for the Iraq command on Wednesday to the full Senate. 'The stakes are high. There are no easy choices. The way ahead will be very hard ... But hard is not hopeless.'
That Petraeus appears genuinely to give Bush's strategy a chance, not just out of loyalty to the commander-in-chief, is one of the main reasons for Bush's decision to select him to replace the current commander, General George Casey. No one comes with the type of broad practical Iraqi experience he has.
Petraeus, who received top marks at West Point, the army's elite academy, and a doctorate at Princeton University with a dissertation entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam, has been part of the war in Iraq since it began. At the time of the US-led invasion in 2003, he commanded the 101st Airborne Division on its push to Baghdad and immediately afterward took over control in the northern part of the country, including the city of Mosul.
The relative peace in the region earned Petraeus praise. He instructed his soldiers to pay due respect to the culture and traditions of the country and also deployed them intensively in projects to improve the infrastructure.
While commander, he was quoted as saying that during a military action, you always have to weigh whether to motivate insurgents to come in from the cold or take them off the streets. After his transfer, Sunni rebels gained a foothold in the north.
From 2004 to 2005 Petraeus led the effort to educate the Iraqi army. He was not personally held responsible for the fact that the effort did not work out as hoped. That was blamed instead on enormous pressure to do it fast.
Upon his return to the US, the married father of two who some consider to be the most intelligent man in the US military, incorporated his experiences in Iraq in an army manual on counterinsurgency operations that was produced under his control.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Jerusalem prelate tells Arab Spring youth to have confidence
- 2. More than 100 killed in Syria ahead of ceasefire deadline
- 3. At least 43 killed in Syria, despite UN criticism
- 4. 19 killed in Syria as ceasefire deadline approaches
- 5. Pilgrims flock to Jerusalem for Easter, Passover
Older Talkback
page: 1
We are truly fortunate to have a thinking man at the helm now in Iraq.
General Petraeus has already proven that the long haul, however unpopular with the Americans who want everything 'right now,' is the best bet in Iraq. The American media, also infamous for supporting the bad guys with their habit of 'down mouthing' the commander-in-chief's EFFORTS should settle down and maybe even throw some words of support toward our military leaders and troops.
Most American citizens do this every day!! Let's roll!
US electorate policy, note the first time the US could not blame bush, but the second time they elected bush, they MUST blame themselves, thus ME {middle east} policy is USA people policy.
1.) Kill all living life in Iraq - 2003 - operational
2.) Kill all in Iran - 2009 google 'operation tirrant'
3.) Kill all in Saudia-Arabia - 2012 still classified
Muslim is gone, west gets 'portable energy'.
Google 'litton bionetics', how the cia created aids and wiped out the black man in Africa, problem is that muslim are not promiscious so what worked in Africa doesn't work in ME. What works in the ME is shots to the head, poison-gas, depleted uranium.
Not since the UK wiped out a whole people, e.g. the Tasmanians have a entire populations been wiped from the face of the earth.
In 100 years we can all read about what happened to the muslim, like we read what happended to the american indian.
The good news is that in 20 years the asians will rule the world, and the white man will get his reward, as malcolm-x once said 'the white man aint' smart enough to rule the world', he may be able to murder the world, but he'll never rule the world.
Personally what I think will happen is that christian-muslim destroy each other, and asian win. The chinese must be laughing their tail's off watching the west squander their wealth, knowing that when the ME perpetual war is over that neith er the muslim nor the christian will be left standing.
....yes Bob ,,,all the way to WWIII..you numpty.
'It is time for a National Strike to get the attention of a President who has apparently been blinded by God.'
I think we can go without french fries until they get someone else to operate the Frialator, Jimmy. You go ahead and strike. WORKERS UNITE! You have nothing to lose but your Clearasil and hacky sack!
I can't stand that the right sees the left as unsupportive. I'm neither, but if the different sides would just listen to each other, they'd realize they have a common goal: the safety of our troops and the success of the war. Democrats know just as well as Republicans that an admitted defeat in Iraq would bode terribly for our country. They don't want to see us fail.
And that may be the strongest reason they don't believe sending a 'surge' of troops in the coming year is the best idea. The left doesn't see this as a war that can be won with soldiers on the ground, rather, as it should've been, the consolidation of ideas and roundtable talks. Terrorists blow themselves up because they're trying to send a powerful message that we don't listen to... short of them blowing themselves up in crowded places.
Does this mean we concede to any and all demands that they have? Absolutely not, but in the American spirit, we should certainly be sitting down with the people behind all of this conflict, and figuring it all out, since we're there. When you let someone talk, you give them enough rope to hang themselves. Right now, we're making them look like freedom fighters, by being the imperialistic country that they claim we are.
Of course, as a liberterian, I would've rather we had never gone in the first place.
First of all 'all living life', I may be just a degenerate republican, but I could of sworn that to kill life it had to be living to begin with anyway. Secondly I really hope that all that crap you posted you don't actually believe. Of course if you can find it on google it's generally true, and not just made up crap that some conspiracy theorist put up in his spare time. Because of course if the Agency had done that they probably would've kept it pretty quiet, but whatev. Hey Good Luck convincing any educated person to agree with you.
White House Policy...try this,
1. Operation SINBAD.
2. Operation TIRANNT,
3. WWIII.
Democrats know just as well as Republicans that an admitted defeat in Iraq would bode terribly for our country. They don't want to see us fail.
I think they DO want to see us fail. For short term political gain they want to see us lose in Iraq so they can point to the failure of 'Bushes war'(never mind that most of them voted for it) as a way of getting the reflexive among us to vote for them by voting against it. Never mind the consequences for the country. We won't even have an intelligent examination of that.... It is all about getting short term, domestic political power at the expense of the long term status of the USA.
' Right now, we're making them look like freedom fighters'
Well, they sure are fighting freedom.
'Hey Good Luck convincing any educated person to agree with you.'
Gee, how could anyone remain unconvinced by: 'Kill all living life in Iraq - 2003 - operational, 'Kill all in Iran, Kill all in Saudia-Arabia - 2012 still classified...the cia created aids and wiped out the black man in Africa, shots to the head, poison-gas, depleted uranium...In 100 years we can all read about what happened to the muslim,...'
I think, Bob, you need to Google thousands of conspiracy websites and take some brown acid and maybe drink a pot of espresso... Then perhaps you will be able to see that the 'truth is out there'.....
Lets just hope that General Petraeus can get a handle on this fiasco, and get the USA out of Iraq sooner rather than later.
Petraeus success will depend more on the Bush administration listening and supporting him, more than any support, or lack there of, the public can give. This administration's record of listening to military experts in very poor.
As far as this surge goes, this more of a squirt than a surge.
Even when all the troops that compose this 'surge' are finally in country (that will take months it is being reported...the true legacy of Rumsfelds disastrous 'transformation') the total levels will not even equal the high of about 165,000 of a few years ago. This does not inspire confidence.
Even in the unlikely event that Petraeus can rescue some measure of success from this abysmal mess, this administration needs to be held to atone for it's extraordinary blunders and the lives and treasure they squandered
How about that Senate! No wonder slavery went on for 100 years.
SP4
page: 1
Jimmy RocketJan 26th, 2007 - 16:46:40
It is time for a National Strike to get the attention of a President who has apparently been blinded by God. The public is the decider in this country.
Report this comment