• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

General Petraeus Would Rather Betray Us Than Tell Us The Truth, After All.

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
This thread is now temporarily locked until the report actually arrives.

This will allow tempers that are flaring within the thread to cool down.

When the report arrives, the thread will be unlocked, bumped to the top and the report itself can be dissected.

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy




































General Petraeus would rather betray us than tell us the truth, after all.

When the Whitehouse produces the pile of excuses the general reports in the fall.

Buried toward the end of this article from today's L.A. Times on page 2 is this shocking revelation about how much honesty we can expect from the good general's long anticipated report:

Top general may propose pullbacks

Petraeus is expected to tell Congress that Iraqis can assume duties in some areas, freeing U.S. troops for other uses.

By Julian E. Barnes and Peter Spiegel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
August 15, 2007
.
.
Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.
.
.
(continues)
Click to expand...

So, Bush says he's waiting for General Petraeus' report and asks everyone else to do the same before making any decisions. Uh-huh!

Now, we learn that the only picture the general will be allowed to present will be from a page in a Whitehouse produced paint by number coloring book.

This is nothing short of per-fscking-verted! :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:
 
I don't know why anyone would be suprised Harvey. The generals take direct orders from Bush, and will give whatever POV the President demands. It's always been this way. It's only now that there has been such a need to have them appear before Congress, since this whole war is a cluster.
 
Dude you are spitting so much foam from your mouth I can't make heads or tails of what it is you are attempting to communicate with your thread title and the OP contents.

Calm down, wipe the foam from your mouth, taka a zanac or something, and tell us again what it is that we are all supposed to be rabble-rabbling about here?
 
It is pretty deceitful of the White House (shocking) to say that you're waiting for a report to be issued that you are writing yourself.

Who wants to bet that it will say "Things are hard over there and a lot of work remains to be done, but we see progress." The same way we've heard since the war began.
 
Originally posted by: Idontcare
Dude you are spitting so much foam from your mouth I can't make heads or tails of what it is you are attempting to communicate with your thread title and the OP contents.

Calm down, wipe the foam from your mouth, taka a zanac or something, and tell us again what it is that we are all supposed to be rabble-rabbling about here?
Click to expand...

I think he's attempting to express his dismay. The Patreus Report was supposed to be nothing but red meat for Harvey and his bretheren... Now he finds out that his report will be part of a wider ranging report issued by the WH and he's upset.
 
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I think he's attempting to express his dismay. The Patreus Report was supposed to be nothing but red meat for Harvey and his bretheren... Now he finds out that his report will be part of a wider ranging report issued by the WH and he's upset.
Click to expand...

WTF are you talking about? Bush and his cabal have been pimping Petraeus' report as the best independent judgment his generals can provide.

Some independence we're getting! Sounds like Petreaus is just another Bushwhacko whore. :|
 
Perhaps General Petraeus is just a bit too damn busy running a war to sit down and type up a report?

Where's Patton when you need him . . . sheesh.
 
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: Idontcare
Dude you are spitting so much foam from your mouth I can't make heads or tails of what it is you are attempting to communicate with your thread title and the OP contents.

Calm down, wipe the foam from your mouth, taka a zanac or something, and tell us again what it is that we are all supposed to be rabble-rabbling about here?
Click to expand...

I think he's attempting to express his dismay. The Patreus Report was supposed to be nothing but red meat for Harvey and his bretheren... Now he finds out that his report will be part of a wider ranging report issued by the WH and he's upset.
Click to expand...

Seriously, do you not see a problem with the WH coming out in public and stating that this general will issue an independant and authoritative report from which they will base their decisions about Iraq, and then turn around and write that report themselves?
 
I don't think it should come as any big surprise that this "report" will be whatever the Bush admin wants it to be. The ones that will act shocked and claim that THIS is the proof we need to show just how great our romp in Iraq is, of course, will be the fanbois. Cue..
 
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: Idontcare
Dude you are spitting so much foam from your mouth I can't make heads or tails of what it is you are attempting to communicate with your thread title and the OP contents.

Calm down, wipe the foam from your mouth, taka a zanac or something, and tell us again what it is that we are all supposed to be rabble-rabbling about here?
Click to expand...

I think he's attempting to express his dismay. The Patreus Report was supposed to be nothing but red meat for Harvey and his bretheren... Now he finds out that his report will be part of a wider ranging report issued by the WH and he's upset.
Click to expand...

Seriously, do you not see a problem with the WH coming out in public and stating that this general will issue an independant and authoritative report from which they will base their decisions about Iraq, and then turn around and write that report themselves?
Click to expand...

Folks in this thread have a serious misunderstanding of how power and government work.

The good news, for those of us that dislike anarchy, is that it is precisely the same factors that created their ignorance that will likewise prevent them from ever being able to do a dam thing about it.
 
L.A. Times.

Enough said. False reporting and poor journalism, yet again.

"expected"

This is not news. This is op-ed and more BS.

-edit
bwahahahahaha

This article is pure junk. "expected", "top officals", "UFOs told us so!"
No source named. just "expected" and "an offical".
 
I think the Daily Show might get canceled after Bush leaves office, because there's no way whoever gets elected after this can provide such comic sustenance.
 
To a certain extent, no matter what happens, its going to be slicing and dicing of red raw meat. At least in public. We all know what happens to honest men and Shinseki bears silent witness to any in the military that fail to be GWB politically correct.

And to be politically correct and semi honest, Patraeus has to say three things come September 15. (1) We are mucho making progress. (2) We are not making enough progress yet but we need a few more months to actually show the results we are seeing evidence of now. (3) That Patraeus is 137.235% confident, based on trend lines, that we will be able to start with drawing troops come January of 08.
 
Originally posted by: spidey07
Nonsense. It will just embarass the wackoo's heresay and expose LA times yet again.
Click to expand...

That's twice you've knocked the L.A. Times without providing a shred of evidence to support your statement. At least, they're a few steps ahead of anything owned by Rupert Murdoch.
 
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: spidey07
Nonsense. It will just embarass the wackoo's heresay and expose LA times yet again.
Click to expand...

That's twice you've knocked the L.A. Times without providing a shred of evidence to support your statement. At least, they're a few steps ahead of anything owned by Rupert Murdoch.
Click to expand...

Have you actually read the article you posted?

"According to the officials, Gen. David H. Petraeus is expected to propose the partial pullback in his September status report to Congress, when both the war's critics and supporters plan to reassess its course. Administration officials who support the current troop levels hope Petraeus' recommendations will persuade Congress to reject pressure for a major U.S. withdrawal.
"

"The expected recommendation "

'"That is the form of the recommendation we are anticipating him to come back with," a senior administration official said WHO!!??? WHEN!!!??? FIVE W'S. But referring to the redeployment options, the official added, "I just don't know which of those categories he is going to be in."'wtf!??? you have no source

""He doesn't want to lose the gains we have made," said the military officer who, like others, spoke on condition of anonymity because the report is still being developed.
"
---------------------
This is just as bad as "I heard", or "I hear". In all honesty, if you can't see through this BS then I don't know what to think. I say this not as an attack, but come on......does that not raise flags about the validity of this article? I'll try to make an analogy....

"According to an iranian official there is no involvement in iraq."

*Source does not live in Iran
**Source has never lived nor had public service in Iran
***Source did spend a 2 week gig as a temp in Iran, we wish her well
****Source is somebody who spends a lot of time on the intarweb and likes 'reporting'.
 
Originally posted by: spidey07
L.A. Times.

Enough said. False reporting and poor journalism, yet again.

"expected"

This is not news. This is op-ed and more BS.

-edit
bwahahahahaha

This article is pure junk. "expected", "top officals", "UFOs told us so!"
No source named. just "expected" and "an offical".
Click to expand...

Have you ever read a newspaper before? The use of the those words can be found frequently in all of them. News is more than just transcripts, and not every source wants to be named.
 
Originally posted by: Balt
Have you ever read a newspaper before? The use of the those words can be found frequently in all of them. News is more than just transcripts, and not every source wants to be named.
Click to expand...

Understood, but notice how at the end of the article sources are named. Oh, gee, they go against the point the article was trying to make and are at the end of the article.

I call BS and yet another example of the liberal times of LA.

Let's keep bumping this until the report comes out. Please.
 
Originally posted by: Idontcare

Folks in this thread have a serious misunderstanding of how power and government work.

The good news, for those of us that dislike anarchy, is that it is precisely the same factors that created their ignorance that will likewise prevent them from ever being able to do a dam thing about it.
Click to expand...

What a crock.

We've seen how this gov't works. It's 1967-68 all over again.

partial pullback ???

Yup. And it took 6 years to finally get out of Vietnam after our President promised to bring our soldiers home.

 
It has always been intended that this report would be presented by Petraeus and the ambassador to Iraq together. Do you really expect these two men to sit in a tent in the green zone and pound out a major policy paper on their own?

Harvey, you will be happy to know that these two are suppose to go in front of congress and present the report and answer questions. That will give the Democrats a chance to question anything in the report they don?t agree with.

Sadly for you though the Democrats themselves are slowly starting to admit that the surge is making a difference. Read the stories about Dick Durbin and the other Democrat Senator who went to Iraq recently. We have gone from ?we must leave Iraq because it is a failure? to ?now that we are succeeding in Iraq we can start to leave.?
 
I didn't expect Petraeus to hand type the report, but for the Whitehouse to control the content is beyond ridiculous. I'm sure Petraeus and the other commanders can provide the big picture input while some lackey at the Pentagon can put the paper together.
 
I think some of you have unrealistic expectations.

It is a Republican White House do you expect them to let the Democrats write the report?

I hope we get an honest report, but I expect the White House to play up the good news and talk around the bad news. It would be no different if a Democrat was in office.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top