Democratic Candidates Offer Their Questions for Petraeus

by: Matt Stoller

Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 18:06


3500 people and more than 50 Democratic congressional candidates have endorsed a Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq.  I've been asking these candidates all day what they would ask Petraeus were they in Congress.  Here are some of their questions.

Darcy Burner, Democratic candidate for WA-08:

Gen. Petraeus, in March 2007, a few weeks after taking charge of U.S. military forces in Baghdad, you said, "There is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq." More than a year later, rockets are still falling in the Green Zone and Iranian-backed Shiite militias are fighting each other for power in Baghdad and Basra. The political reconciliation the surge was intended to foster has not happened, nor has any significant diplomatic breakthrough been achieved. So, given that we agree that there is no military solution to the problems we face, is our costly open-ended military commitment to Iraq really making the Unted States safer?

Steve Novick, OR-Senate:

1) The hope of the surge was that it would create the space for political reconciliation and compromise in Iraq. But the Iraqi government and other power centers in the nation remains mired in disagreement with little real progress. Last week, it was the Iranians that reportedly brokered a truce between the Iraqi government and Sadr's Mahdi Army. The level of violence has settled back to 2005 levels. Where is the light at the end of the tunnel?

Jill Derby, NV-02:

"The question I would ask Gen. Petraeus is this:  'The Army is saying that more than 25 percent of soldiers on third or fourth tours suffer mental health problems and Army Chief Of Staff General Casey called the Army "out of balance." What are we doing to help our troops, vets and their families deal with these issues?'"

Donna Edwards, MD-04:

My first question for the General is:  When are you prepared to discuss and implement a multi-tiered approach to Iraq that includes economic, diplomatic, and political options to bring stability and sustainable progress to Iraq? Has the war in Iraq made the United States safer? Is the current U.S. force level in Iraq covering up the lack of political progress in the country and isn't that troop level unsustainable?  Doesn't the violence of the last several weeks demonstrate that the central government is weak and that the Iraqi forces are not trained or prepared to defend against the insurgents?  

I believe "The Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq" is a critical step in the right direction and is the kind of discussion we need to start having in Washington and across the country."

Bill O'Neill, OH-14:

"The question that needs to be asked is how is our current policy making us safer and why we wouldn't be better off spending that money to address problems at home?"

Don Wiviott, NM-03:

Has the War in Iraq actually made America safer?

What plans are in place to both get our troops out of Iraq and give the Iraqi army a chance to step up to the plate and protect their own country?

Since there is no military solution in Iraq, what steps are we taking to ensure Iraqi officials are working together and moving towards lasting political reconciliation?

The President and other top officials talk about winning the war. What criteria constitutes "winning" the war in Iraq? How will we know when we have "won"?  

Leslie Byrne, Democratic candidate for VA-11:

General Petraeus: Since our National Security is at risk from a "broken military" according to many of your peers, how do you plan to salvage the military, given the lack of political and economic progress in Iraq, which after all you said was the purpose of the "Surge"?

Chellie Pingree, ME-01:

The number one question General Petraeus should have to answer is this:  Has the war in Iraq made America safer?

Eric Massa (NY-29):

"General depending accounting used, this war will cost us from $2 - 3.5 trillion. Help me explain to my constituents why it is more important to rebuild Iraq and not rebuild America."

Alice Kryzan (NY-25) (in this video):

After five years in Iraq, are we really any safer?

Tim Cunha (FL-06):

When General David Petraeus and U. S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker meet with Congress Tuesday and Wednesday, Tim Cunha, Democratic 6th district congressional candidate, wants them asked: "Is the continued American involvement in the Iraq civil war making America safer?"

Steve Harrison, Democratic candidate for NY-13:

1.  General do you believe advocating for a withdrawal from Iraq necessarily indicates either a lack of support for our troops, or a lack of patriotism?

2.  General, troop withdrawal is a military operation.  Given the current conditions in Iraq, in your expert opinion, what would be a reasonable time frame for complete withdrawal assuming the planning started tomorrow?

3..General, Prime Minister Maliki's surprising attack on the Sadr militia last week showed great weakness in the government's ability to provide security as well as weakness in the government's political ability to unite the country. It also showed great lack of judgment in the capabilities of his military. The Iraqi situation shows no signs of near term stability and it does not appear American military presence has facilitated that goal.  In the absence of being able to meet that political goal, what other military goals, in your opinion justify American military presence in Iraq?

Richard Carter, NE-02 (who also sent this video):

"If the United States removed the combat forces in Iraq, would there be any direct threat to the United States?  If any threat, what would it be and how could it be mitigated?"

Samm Simpson, FL-10:

In July of 2006, The Lancet, a British Medical Journal, estimated that over 600,000 Iraqis had been killed as a result of the invasion.  According to Opinion Business Research, those estimates have risen to over 1 million dead.  General Petraeus, how do you ascribe the term "victory" in these circumstances?  Additionally, how do these deaths make America safer?
Matt Stoller :: Democratic Candidates Offer Their Questions for Petraeus

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Go Simpson (4.00 / 1)
for finally acknowledging the elephant that's been in the room for such a miserably long time. It's way past time somebody talks about the killing of so many real people besides the 4000 Americans we so readily obsess about. The million dead and millions of refugees are what make this occupation the shameful and useless and criminal activity that it is.

Can We Do A Switcheroo??? (4.00 / 5)
Normally, there's an orientation process for incoming congressmembers.

I'm just wondering if we couldn't switch things around a bit this time, and have the incoming members do an orientation for all the incumbents, who clearly have nary a clue as to what they're supposed to be doing there.

I know it might seem like a stretch.  But, as Judy Tenuta says, "It could happen."

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


I've been thinking something along those lines (0.00 / 0)
Right now it seems like a fairly simple pyramid of power in Congress, with longer sitting members generally nearer the top in terms of influence. I guess committees and leadership roles and personal relationships complicate that, but I wonder if things won't altogether move away from that for a time as things readjust.

If a good number of the "Responsible Plan" candidates win, and they can use that mandate to force a real end to the war (probably only possible with a sympathetic president), or join the Out of Iraq Caucus en masse, they could really rearrange the power dynamics. Another factor may be that elections like 2006 and 2008 (and 1994 for the Republicans?) attract a lot of strong candidates and natural leaders who over-perform. I don't think our Freshman are necessarily great, but on average they seem pretty damn good compared to the rest of the caucus.

Does anyone who was, say, out of middle school in 1994 have any insight into whether this happened with the Republicans? It must be complicated by the fact that they took the majority the same year as their wave election. Or were the dynamics really different because Gingrich got so much credit for the "Contract with America".

I support John McCain because children are too healthy anyway.


[ Parent ]
1994 (4.00 / 1)
Gingrich had a grand plan, and part of it was dethroning the rest of the GOP leadership, empowering newer, more conservative members who owed him something, and were more in his mold.  This was all quite deliberate and explicit on his part.

He called it "reform," naturally.

Pelosi would never do something like that. She is too colleagial.  But shw would do something more nuanced that could help--as she did in 2007, giving important assignments to freshmen, in part to strengthen them against challengers in their first re-election campaigns.

So we would probably do well to have a two-pronged strategy, one pushing for dramatic change--to build necessary pressure--and the other to try and float something that she really might sign onto.

Don't forget, some of those committee and sub-committee chairs are pretty damn good, though some aren't.  Then there's Steny Hoyer & co.  The top leadership under Pelosi is the worst part of our leadership problem, IMHO.  And they are the ones who are customarily the hardest for her to oppose.  If anyone's going to do it, it's got to be us.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Difficult Environment for Democrats (0.00 / 0)
Petraeus has the advantage. He's telegenic, and to beat him up looks like beating up on the troops. Not only that, but the news media (the than a couple of programs on a comedy channel, and a commentator on MSNBC) is completely captured by the Republican Party and its propaganda.

I don't envy the Democrats in this situation.


correction (0.00 / 0)
... the news media (other than ...

[ Parent ]
Congratulations! You've Just Been Certified As Concern Troll First Class! (0.00 / 1)
Well done, sir!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I Thought "Concern Troll" Was A Daily Kos Term (0.00 / 0)
Aren't they the ones who specialize in labeling anyone whose concerns are different than theirs a "concern troll," or does every obnoxious lefty do that on every website now?

[ Parent ]
You Might Be A Concern Troll If... (0.00 / 0)
...the subtext of every other comment you post is "Oh, No! We'll all be killed!"



"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Oops, I Disagreed with Mr. Rosenberg (4.00 / 1)
So, like every other ideologue on every other website, he brands those who don't see things exactly his way as "trolls," i.e., invalid.

[ Parent ]
Nonsense! (0.00 / 0)
This has nothing to do with ideology, or disagreement.  I disagree quite productively with all sorts of people all the time.

This is distinctively different.  All you've done here is mindlessly repeat a rightwing talking point.  That does nothing to further our conversation here.

To prove you're not a concern troll, all you have to do is do is tell us how your mindless repetititon of a rightwing talking point contributes something positive to this site.

Go ahead, surprise us.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Iraqi civil war frame (0.00 / 0)
I especially like the comment made by FL-06's Tim Cunha which highlights the fact that the war in Iraq as a civil conflict.   Framing the hostilities there as a civil war will further emphasize the need for the U.S. to get out and force the Iraqi government to take responsibility in its own future.

Cunha for Congress (FL-06)

P.S. I'm not a big fan of John McCain


Has The ICORP of Iraq Made "Us (US)" Safer? (0.00 / 0)
You think maybe he's going to say "No"?
What does anybody mean by "safer?" "Safer" than what? We weren't "safe" even when we thought we were "safer" than we think we are today, which is in fact no more or less "safe" than we have ever been. There is no quantum of "safeness," no way to measure it. Yes, apparently there have not been any further bloody "terror" attacks in the last 6+ years. But there hadn't been all that many before the last one, come right down to it, at least ones that mattered/counted to white folks.

It seems to me the only sane question to ask of Betrayus is: If defeat is intolerable, and withdrawal is regarded as 'defeat,' (Sen.McStain calls it "surrender"), please describe in detail, and with specific examples how the citizens of the US and/or the rest of the world will know what "victory" will look like, and how it has been won?


I believe the question about being safer is being asked... (0.00 / 0)
... knowing fully that the answer is hard to quantify.

That's the point of asking the question. Bush et al. are constantly claiming that the war has made us safer, but can they explain exactly how that is true? No.
Which I believe is exactly your point, because there is no quantum of "safeness".

Hopefully by asking the administration to answer this question (posed using their own words) we reveal that their claims are all smoke and mirrors.

Cunha for Congress (FL-06)

P.S. I'm not a big fan of John McCain


[ Parent ]
I Think The Only Way For Dems To Hope To Succeed ... (4.00 / 1)
... on this one would be to get together before the hearing and coordinate their message and their questions. That's what Republicans in Congress have been doing for the last 15 years. They meet very often, and in their meetings they pick their message, and then they practice it.

In those meetings, Republicans will assume the role of a Democratic interlocutor, or a media figure. This way, they'll sharpen everyone up, and unify themselves. Ever notice how, when you turn on the tube, you see Republicans saying very similar things no matter what channel you're listening to?

Ah, but not the Democrats. Our side is too good for to practice. And the Democrats who'll be questioning Petraeus will surely be too egotistical to actually coordinate an approach. Who knows, maybe lightning will strike and the questions will get the better of Petraeus, but no one should hold their breath.

One of these years, the Democratic Party will figure out some basics of public communication. Until that day, our side is going to be firing on half its cylinders on a good day. 'Tis a shame.


Now This Is NOT Trollery! (0.00 / 0)
See, I gave you a "4"!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
The Escalation (4.00 / 1)
It is not the "surge" - it is "Bush's Escalation".  Now, tomorrow, and consistently.  The inability to get that simple tactic right on the part of the Democrats really leads me in the direction of despair.

sPh


Or "The SPLURGE" (0.00 / 0)
for the more snarky among us.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
What specific threat does the US face from Iraq, should the US (0.00 / 0)
soldiers be withdrawn?

Follow-up: What is currently being done to alleviate that threat?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox