C-Span: Jim Webb counters Petraeus's Claim of Surge Success in Anbar
By Nicole Belle Monday Sep 17, 2007 1:45pm
Sen. Jim Webb fields a question from Richmond Times-Dispatch's Peter Hardin on his son, recently returned from Iraq, and uses it to dispute Petraeus's claims last week on the success of the "Surge" in Anbar province.
Download | play 
Download | play
Gen. Petraeus was advancing the success in Anbar Province as evidence that the surge is working and I thought it was very important in terms of the facts of the matter to point out that the successes in Anbar are...began well before the surge and my son's battalion the first 6th Marines basically took Ramadi back block by block and street by street September October November December of last year and not to in any way diminish the command perspective of Gen. Petraeus but it's wrong to say that was due to the surge.
Login or Register to post comments.
"Jim Webb, retired Marine who has a son in Iraq, why do you hate the troops?"
~Malkin, Hannity, Coulter, Rush, O'Reilly
Webb is a tool...pure and simple
He is what he campaigned as
Oh yeah...former Reagan employee!!
[Deleted-Sitemonitor]
Dr. Patriot @ 3:
sniggle fritz ud seigh hiel!
I heard about this "success" in Anbar starting last year, by Martha Raddatz Sunday morning on one of the shows. I've also heard it someplace else, just can't remember where. Martha said that the surge couldn't be given full credit for what is happening there today.
Translation: "Patraeus was blowing smoke."
Nice job of diplomacy there, Senator Webb. I imagine the taste is bitter, as you swallow the words you'd really like to say about "Betray-Us."
Webb hates America.
Questions Blog @ 2:
Webb is a Virginia Democrat and he's previous job as Sec. of the Navy under Reagan makes his opposition to the war even more important.
kudos to Webb. The cons see the world through the prism of their urine soaked bedsheets
Bush lied, Petraeus is warping the truth, the war was predicated on lies, so Jimmy-Boy votes with the republicans to give 'em a blank check without timelines, plus votes with the republicans to give Bush his spying program. Anyone want to lay odds he'll vote more funds to Prez'nit Shortbus's quagmire?
But hey, Jimmy-Boy can sit on his hands and bang his gums with the best of 'em! Gutless and spineless indeed....
Webb is right, and the presurge success has been reported by other sources. Gen. P is indeed blowing smoke. Gen. P is the tool and even other generals who served with him have called his ass kisser. Gen. isn't fit morally shine Webb's shoes. Webb is a true American.
And why do these Commie supporting so called patriots come here calling us commies? They are the one who gladly support the Communists- they want to borrow money from China to pay for this oil grab war. All Communist China has to do is to call in those loans and America folds. Bet this guy shops at Wal Mart, whee most of the goods come from- guess where!- China!
hanshiro @ 10:
Webb voted FOR the timelines.
Straight Shooter @ 6:
I got that feeling too.
webb voted to let them tap yer phones without a court order...
who the fuck gives a shit what he thinks about the war or anything else?
he's a piece of shit.
hah betray us...
webb is a wold in democrat clothing ppl
WAKE UP!
salt @ 14:
That piece of shit is helping to get us out of Iraq.
CD @ 12:
I never said he didn't for the first vote, but then voted with his old party to grant Bush a blank check, timeline-free:
05/24/2007 Emergency Departmental Supplemental Appropriations Bill of 2007 - Y(es)
That's stickin' to yer guns, like you promised when you RAN on ending the war, Jimmy-boy....
plus his 'reasoning' to explain his caving to Bush was specious and intelligence-insulting.
Eamon @ 7:
no, you're getting him mixed up with Bush.
Y'all Chickenhawks to Me - by Elmo (MP3)
(If you have trouble with the link, right click and "save target as")
If only the 'contributors' could respond with facts and politeness. We don't need the smoke screens of all the hype, chest thumping and name calling. If, as azureblue says, we will be at the mercy of the Chinese when they call in their markers, we had better be able to get along as our society turns upside down. Urban and suburban America would fold in a week and we would be like life in Iraq. So rethink the bravado and the issues.
The US surrendered in Anbar. They are now arming and funding their former attackers. How long before they turn again?
Petraeus is little more than a puppet of Dick Cheney. Take a look at Alexander Cockburn's article:
Many senior army and navy officers loathe the toadying Petraeus. According to an amusing column by Gareth Porter of IPS, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM), “derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad last March, according to Pentagon sources familiar with reports of the meeting. Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be ‘an ass-kissing little chickenshit’ and added, ‘I hate people like that’, the sources say.”
http://counterpunch.org/cockburn09152007.html
hanshiro @ 17:
And what were they supposed to do refuse the troops any funding till the end of times?
CD @ 23:
So, then you are ok with funding Bush's illegal war until the end of time???
oh, webb has a son in the marines? I HADN'T HEARD!
Rufus Xavier Sasparilla @ 24:
I'm ok with our troops being brought home ALIVE for that to happen they have to EAT.
michael @ 25:
You're joking right?
Jimmy Webb has done multiple tours of duty now.
In December 06 GWB confronted Jim Webb as to "how is your boy doing?" That was between Webb and his boy. Now we know what and how Jimmy Webb was doing. The chimp must think we are all stupid.
Someone provided Gen. Petraeus with a name that is a warning to all. Now the General has been flushed out for the sycophant he is.
GWB said God told him to start the War In Iraq. That is his best lie yet. Does the little turd realize who he is fucking with? Maybe the chimp ought think who he is "with or against".
CD @ 26:
No, it WOULD bring them home alive, because it would bring this illegal war to an abrupt end by forcing the issue. The body counts go on as long as does this illegal war. Ending the funding will result in fewer casualties than senselessly lingering in Iraq month after month. It likely would also put impeachment on the table in a very serious way. Instead, many Democrats in Congress have chosen to make themselves accomplices in the crimes of the Bush regime.
Rufus Xavier Sasparilla @ 29:
That would be playing a game of chicken with our troops lives.
CD @ 30:
You are already playing that game by keeping them in Iraq in the first place, in fact with a very predictable monthly loss of life, and no end in sight.
Oh goddammnit Jim stop being a politician and just call a spade a spade. Petreaus LIED!
Rufus Xavier Sasparilla @ 31:
Which is why we need Congress to pass a bill to bring them home.
Oh wait congress passed one of those and the President vetoed it.
CD @ 23:
And what were they supposed to do refuse the troops any funding till the end of times?
Actually, yes. No one will play chicken with our troops' lives. That is a BS argument designed to sucker a dense public into funding this atrocity, but don't take my word for it, listen to Russ Feingold:
"Some have suggested that Congress may have the power to end funding for the war, sure, but they won’t dare to use it because the White House has convinced so many people that to support the troops you have to keep funding the war effort, and keep those Americans in harm’s way. That’s the worst form of political manipulation and a shameful effort to suppress debate on ending the war and bringing our troops home....Congress should use its main power, the power to cut funding, to end this disastrous war." ~Russ Feingold
http://www.feingold.senate.gov/opinion/07/20070111blog.htm
It's a specious and ridiculous argument to think that if funding is cut, troops'll be walking around barefoot with slingshots. It won't happen. The Pentagon budget is more than adequate to fund the re-deployment. Only 51 Senators are needed to attach funding language to any funding bill:
"It's true that under current Senate rules, on a free-standing bill, 60 votes would be needed on an Iraq bill to overcome a filibuster threat. (Why we tolerate that only 51 Senate votes are needed to confirm nominees to the Supreme Court who oppose fundamental civil rights protections for all Americans, but 60 Senate votes are needed to pass free-standing legislation to end the Iraq war, is a question that deserves a great deal of further scrutiny.) But as we saw on the fight over the supplemental, only 51 votes are needed to attach withdrawal language to legislation that continues to fund the war."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091207F.shtml
More lying to the public by Pelosi and Reid about 'not having the override margin':
"In June Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting's Extra! Magazine wrote: "If the Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to force the Bush administration to accept a bill with a withdrawal timeline, it didn't have to pass the bill over Bush's veto--it just had to make clear that no Iraq War spending bill without a timeline would be forthcoming."...Democratic leaders know that. And here's how I know they know: days after taking control of Congress, on January 30, they invited five constitutional law experts to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask them how they could end the war. Four out of five of the experts swore that the Democrats could stop the Iraq War just...like...that."
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/9905
We're being bound in a 'Webb' of lies while Pelosi, Reid and the other 'savior' Democrats continue to catapult the propaganda. Bush should be impeached and cooling his heels in Gitmo right now. If the Congress really felt threatened about their jobs, rather than jawboning on teevee they'd be scrambling @ss over teakettle to save their cushy Washington offices by throwing Cheney et. al. under the bus. The Dems are outright lying and we're letting them by believing the horsesh*t! Stop it and guarantee to your particular Dem 'savior' that he's gonna get crucified come election day if he doesn't end this war N-O-W!!
hanshiro @ 34:
nice snowjob.
I'll accept your capitulation. You've obviously nothing to counter my information/links with other than an accusatory "hurrrrumph!" The lying Dems can end this war tomorrow and have Bush and Cheney impeached, but they won't for some reason. Then again, they voted to let Bush spy illegally..again, for some reason. The invertebrate Dem rationale/propaganda stinks to high heaven...
hanshiro @ 36:
Snowjob=the sending of large amounts of informations in the hope that the other person has better things to do than read all that crap.
CD @ 37:
Sore Loser= Someone who, lacking any coherent reply or contribution to ANY BIT of linked evidence supporting the truth, first relies on misdirection by stating an irrelevency (Webb's first vote, which wasn't the point of course,) then comments with untrue 'finalities' like a veto means you stop trying...then, with the quiver empty, resorts to the verbal equivalent of a parting raspberry, adding nothing but sour grapes to the smorgasbord of half denials in defending the spineless Dems. CD, you got nothin but a sore backside from getting spanked. That, and a short attention span since my post already chews your intellectual food for you. Try starting with "The Pet Goat..."
I pretty much have stopped reading comments because so many people get unreasonably out of line in what they say. Further, I cannot help but notice that most of the meanest, nastiest comments come from people expousing a conservative point of view. Why is there so much anger amongst conservatives? I work in an office of 28 people. Two - I repeat - two of them are conservative Republicans and when anyone foolishly tries to discuss politics with them, the Repubs get downright mean and nasty. They are so full of anger! Why??? My grandfather was a Republican politician from Ohio and he was not at all angry - just a real conservative always willing to listen to the other side's point of view. Go back up and look at comments 14 and 15 by someone who calls himself (herself?) "Salt" and you'll what I am talking about.
hanshiro @ 38:
blah blah blah no one is reading your long winded rants.
CD @ 40:
Hmmm. A very mature and thoughtful rebuttal. Now, if only everyone kept such a level of civility ...
CD @ 40:
I read it and I think he kicked your dumb ass so bad, you better gaze behind, I think you have an extra crease back there
I'm from Virginia. I still have not forgiven Webb, and probably never will, for his indefensible vote on FISA. I am holding him in deepest suspicion until he redeems himself on that issue and all others relating to protecting the Constitution. He doesn't seem to grasp how deeply he has pissed off Virginia voters with that betrayal.
Al Anbar was never a part of the "surge" escalation. Period.
pitman @ 42:
Nice sockpuppet.
Paul @ 43:
I'm glad to hear that someone here is mature and thoughtful enough to allow him a chace at redemption.
CD @ 46:
So let's see: anyone who disagrees with CD is automatically a sockpuppet. Anyone who provides links and information to support their position is automatically engineering a snowjob. Gosh CD, you have more excuses than Gonzales. And "redemption???" Webb's vote to screw us (TWICE) wasn't the same as dropping, say, an egg and saying "oops," Webb went on to JUSTIFY such indefensible votes! He ran on ending the war!!! OOPS! Webb votes to give Bush a blank check.....OOPS!! Webb votes to give Bush expanded powers not ONLY to avoid being held responsible for illegal spying in the past, but to allow Bush MORE options to invade privacy. Where the hell has Webb earned any shots at "redemption?" Where the hell has Webb even acknowledged screwing us over? While you're lauding others for being "mature and thoughtful" with Jimmy-boy after Webb screws our privacy and condemns more soldiers to die, we stay in Iraq and lose more good troops.
Ooops, another soldier is dead, but hey, let's all be mature and twiddle our thumbs while "real patriots" like turncoat Webb figure it out by voting with his republican buddies. I was out of patience with this kinda excuse-making in 2001 when Bush sat in an elementary school while we got attacked and the GOP made excuses for him. Well, here we are in 2007, still getting attacked while Webb sits in his office and slow-learners like CD make excuses for him.
hanshiro @ 47:
That's right keep making personal attacks you'll sure prove your right that way.
CD @ 48:
Being as how you've offered absolutely no counter to my information other than personal attacks, condescending innuendo and wrong information, I just point out the obvious. The jokes write themselves, so if you come off looking asinine, maybe it's your lack of any coherent defense, your lack of debate material, your lack of presenting anything other than drive-by ignorance. If you were paint, CD, you'd be "Lack Lacquer," if you were a burger, you'd be a "Big Lack," and if you were twins, you'd be twice the pointless dumbsh*t you are now.
Login or Register to post comments.