And let's not forget that PETRAEUS’ REPORT TO CONGRESS WAS CRIBBED FROM … ‘MONARCH NOTES’

Hispanic! I kan spell too!

Col. Boylan is too busy defending the e-mails he didn't send.

Leave General Petraeus Alone!

God save this country from illiterates.

The world will always need people who can do Manuel labor. Not everyone can work in an office.

Musharraf sets example for Bush:

<

strong>Musharraf Declares Emergency in Pakistan

Gen. Pervez Musharraf declared a state of emergency in Pakistan on Saturday, suspending the constitution, replacing the chief justice before a crucial Supreme Court ruling on his future as president, and cutting communications in the capital.

The lunatic is on the grass
The lunatic is on the grass
Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs
Got to keep the loonies on the path

Bush would never say this, would he?

"A copy of the emergency order obtained by The Associated Press justified the declaration on the grounds that "some members of the judiciary are working at cross purposes with the executive" and "weakening the government's resolve" to fight terrorism."

"The ass kissing little chickenshit" - The general's former boss

xoites defends Constitution @ 17:

Bush would never say this, would he?

"A copy of the emergency order obtained by The Associated Press justified the declaration on the grounds that "some members of the judiciary are working at cross purposes with the executive" and "weakening the government's resolve" to fight terrorism."

Didn't they mean "members of the Executive Branch are working at cross purposes with the judiciary" ? Must be a misprint.

By the way, his name is BETRAY-US. Please tell FOX to start using the correct name. Hahaha.

does anybody REALLY expect any better than this from a Bush appointee?

c'mon folks. Look into Petraeus' face. It's the same chickenshit face McCain wears. Am I the only one who sees the similarity?

all these suckers--and now Feinstein and Shumer included--are feathering their nests so they can enjoy a comfortable retirement. Only problem is that, in retirement, they have to live with themselves--people who caved in to the crummiest person ever to live in the White House. What a record to carry into one's retirement! May it make them as miserable as this administration has made the vulnerable in this country. And look how many more of us are vulnerable since the bushboy went to Washington.

Now, who are the terrorists again?

Can someone tell me what REMF stands for?
Thanks.

Rear Echelon Mother Fucker.

edgecity @ 2:

BTW, Manuel is my hipsnaic neighbor, a manual is I think what you want here.

Hispanic! I kan spell too!

Although "hipsnaic" is a *GREAT* word for which we MUST find a meaning! "Quick, Robin! To the hipsnaic-mobile!" : )

DannyEastVillage @ 23:

does anybody REALLY expect any better than this from a Bush appointee?

c'mon folks. Look into Petraeus' face. It's the same chickenshit face McCain wears. Am I the only one who sees the similarity?

I don't see "chickenshit," honestly. I more see "deceiving-myself-to-further-my-own-agenda-and-future-power-grab."

That’s Right! it’s the Talking Jesus and Freinds Action Set (exclusiely at Walmart!).

Think of the Joy!

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2007/11/03/talking-jesus-doll-made-in-ch...

(was just going to get you the Moses one! It’s the closest thing I could find to Maude…)

In your haste to denounce Petraeus, you neglected to do some research. First, Petraeus did not write the whole thing himself and doesn't claim to have done so - he helped lead the project.

Second, military doctrine is not written for academics and does not need to adhere to academic rules of citation. It is written for soldiers, marines, etc. to read in the field and put into action as quickly and easily as possible. It was published by an academic press as an afterthought, and the team that wrote the manual had already dispersed and so weren't going to put in the hours necessary to make it an academic text. The issue of the University of Chicago publishing the text and thus lending it academic credentials certainly is an issue, but that's an issue for the UofC rather than Petraeus, Nagl, Mattis, and the others who actually wrote the thing.

Third, the individual authors of the chapters of the COIN manual have been encouraged to publish their chapters in academic journals, reworked as academic articles with full citations.

Petraeus' testimony was politicized, but that doesn't mean every single thing he's associated with is deserving of automatic condemnation.

For more informed views on this specific controversy, try these sites:

http://abumuqawama.blogspot.com/2007/10/controversy-fm-3-24-plagarism-sc...

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/11/desperate-people-with-limited/ (a rebuttal to the original article)

Damn. I wonder if Richard Cohen will even acknowledge this, or how he'll spin this one, since he's so in love with the scholar-general.

Johnny2Bad @ 22:

I'm no fan of Petraeus but it seems that Prof. Price is mostly attacking the style of a few pages of the manual. Apparently these military manuals routinely "borrow" and "gleen" from other govt. sources. Go figure. Price's other problem is that the General and his co-authors didn't cite sources...That's a big No NO in academia but hardly worth the big hubbub. This is what they will call a pasty-faced professor telling "real men" how to fight a war. Its a weak, petty attack for the Left.

Look, I know the COIN manual a big bullet point on Petreaus' resume and there's lots of crap to bitch about where he is concerned but this seems like a picky picky much ado.

Next outrage please.

I second the entirety of this response.

If the military had published the manual themselves, or from a shoddy press like Regnery, there would be no story.

But the Bush regime and the military brass have presented Petraeus to us as a scholar-soldier. And this shoddy manual is an exposure of that. Moreover, they published the re-issue Price is writing about through an academic press--The University of Chicago. And unlike your Ann Coulter or Bill O'Reilly, academics have standards, not the least of which is attributing material to its sources.

(The U of Chicago Press is stained in this as well).