BCT Editorial – 9/13/07

This page was last updated on October 6, 2007.

Bush’s pride; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 13, 2007.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“The so-called Petraeus report changes nothing.”

[RWC] I don’t know about you, but I’m shocked the Times would take this position – not.

“Earlier this week, Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker delivered their reports to Congress. The general said the troop surge is working and that more time is needed. If progress continues, he sees the United States being able to withdraw 30,000 troops by next summer.

“Petraeus is playing a numbers game. Those 30,000 troops represent the number of troops involved in the surge. If the drawdown comes about, 130,000 U.S. troops will remain in Iraq. That’s the same number that was there when the surge began.”

[RWC] A “numbers game?” Did Gen. Petraeus claim his figures represented something other than a drawdown from current levels?

“The Army and Marine Corps are at the breaking point because of the unreasonable demands that the Bush administration is placing on them in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it’s spilling over in other areas.

“In August, Gen. George Casey, the Army’s chief of staff, told reporters at the National Press Club that he is worried that long and repeated battlefield tours have knocked the Army out of balance so that it can no longer provide ready forces as quickly as it should for other missions.

“It’s not just the operations end that’s being affected. It’s personal, too. The constant troop rotations and shorter recovery times are taking an emotional and mental toll on many soldiers, Marines and their families. In August, Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, Bush’s so-called war czar, told National Public Radio’s ‘All Things Considered’ that repeated deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan affects not only the troops but their families.

“Then there was Crocker’s testimony. While it was possible to spin the military surge, the same could not be said about the progress the Iraqi government has made toward the benchmarks Congress established. Try as he might, Crocker couldn’t hide the reality that little progress has been made when it comes to Iraq having a viable government. Like Petraeus, all he could do was plead for more time.”

[RWC] “[S]pin the military surge?” What did Gen. Petraeus say that was not true?

“And they’ll get it because nothing is going to change until after the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.

“Bush is adamant in pursuing his policies, and as commander-in-chief he can pretty much do what he wants. Congressional Democrats don’t have the numbers to override a Bush veto of any legislation aimed at affecting the situation in Iraq. One reason for that is that the Petraeus report gave some wavering congressional Republicans just enough political cover to continue supporting the president.”

[RWC] This paragraph is misleading and is intended to provide cover for Democrats.

Congress holds the purse strings. Democrats don’t need to override a veto to end the war. All they need to do is not approve President Bush’s funding requests and there’s nothing President Bush could do about it.

“And more troops will die. And more will be wounded. And more will be maimed.”

[RWC] Isn’t that what happens in a war? If avoiding troops dying or getting wounded or maimed is our top priority instead of victory, we should dissolve our armed forces and surrender right now to our enemies.

“And for what?

“It’s time for the American people to put pressure on congressional Republicans who back this disastrous policy. They only need to ask one question: How many more men and women are you willing to see die because of Bush’s pride?”

[RWC] Why congressional Republicans? Don’t Democrats hold the majority in both the House and Senate and weren’t they elected to end the war? That’s what we keep hearing. In truth, the Times wants Republicans involved so surrender can’t be labeled a Democrat surrender.

Wrong question. The real question is, how many more men and women are we willing to see die to preserve our freedom?