Doesn't What Libs Say about Patreaus make you sick?

Question

This is the man that the liberals unanimously appointed the head of multinational forces in both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senate. Now they say he is nothing but Bush's mouthpiece and is lying. It makes me sick, how about you.

war_hero_bush, actually have proof before you say he lied, would help.

CaptainCollector, that's a load of BS. Get real. They could have said no, end of story and Bush would have appointed somebody else to try to pass muster. Your argument doesn't fly.

Answer 1

You're going to have to provide some links. I've heard many Democrats today condemn "moveon.org" for its nasty ad, and listening to Petreaus' testimony, the Democratic representatives were as respectful to him as the Republicans were. Unless you can point to major liberals--not just extremist flakes--who are saying Petraeus is lying, I'll have to assume you're hearing one voice and assigning it to everyone you hate. Again.

Answer 2

Nope and I find it interesting that the LIbs had all that power, seems to me he had to be appointed and confirmed and you can't let a war go without a commander now can you, so see all the Dems did was confirm him he's not our choice but someone who had acceptable creditentials to do the job but since he has already been caught lying about Iraq progress I think we can all draw the appropriate conclusion why can't you?

He tell the foriegn press this
“It has not worked out as we had hoped,” the general said

“Many of us had hoped this summer would be a time of tangible political progress at the national level,” Petraeus wrote. “All participants, Iraqi and coalition alike, are dissatisfied by the halting progress on major legislative initiatives,” he wrote.


but tells the American press this
“Based on the progress our forces are achieving, I expect to be able to recommend that some of our forces will be redeployed without replacement,” he told the Boston Globe by email on Friday…. “Few of these political solutions would have been possible without the improved security provided by coalition and Iraqi forces.”


and here's a link to the artcle where he states the surge DIDN'T WORK
http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?are...

Answer 3

He was questioned as a mouthpiece because he submitted his report with the full knowledge that the White house would have final edit.

Why would an honorable man agree to putting a political spin on the fate of American men and women's military risk of life in the realm of vote getting in '08?

Answer 4

Makes me very sick.
“Our aim should be to support our troops and Gen. David Petraeus as he reports on the troop surge in Iraq, which is working. We need to let Congress know that the United States has the best warriors in the world and defeat can only come through the white-flag brigade’s determination to lose.”

The Democrat Party’s “white-flag brigade” has “slithered to a new low in its campaign to surrender in Iraq” and launched an attack on everyone who is pro-troop.

“It does not surprise me to see that party , sink to these lows.”

In my opinion, the most important thing to consider when thinking about our next president is hardly discussed at all - which is the safety of our country in the face of the terrorist threat. As a friend of mine put it, "I would put out feelers to see who the terrorists most want as president and I'll vote for the other candidate."

Bin Laden's last video, proves he has the same agenda as the left, I am beginning to wonder if that party did not make this video themselves, because he speaks just like they do, and wants exactly what they want. Suspicious !! He spoke like the left party, like he was reading their words, word by word.

Answer 5

I haven't seen anything bad from liberals about Petraeus. There are a lot of people who call themselves liberal but are really closer to being neo-Nazis, though, and if those are the people you're talking about, then I agree.
Keep in mind that liberalism requires a different mindset, so liberal thinkers almost by definition can't make those accusations.

Answer 6

I go back and forth with this. The disunity it brings to America during the war makes me sick. I think it makes the world think we're nuts. JMO.

Beyond that, however, I am a free speech advocate. I believe that stifling speech leads to violence, not the other way around. Within the bounds of civility and the law, of course and it sickens me to have to add this.

And I practice criminal defense as a Conservative, so I tend to look at things broadly. I think we choose our reactions, and I think they revel in our frustration with them.

Answer 7

One name: Tom Lantos

Called Patreaus a liar.

I'm sure it gave the enemies of America a good laugh.

Answer 8

Questioning is Democracy at its finest!
So far the General has said nothing, you can't spin anyway you want, just platitudes

Answer 9

Yes, when they say before hand that there don't believe him, then why go through the motions of having a hearing (answer: free TV time)? If he's that dishonest, why did they approve his appointment in the first place?
That's not Democracy, that's Demagoguery.

Answer 10

Well, he's not saying "We've lost", and thereby handed the liberals a win in '08. He has in fact said that things are turning around and starting to be better, you know, bad news for the Dems. Therefore, he must be destroyed! At least in liberland. I personally would like to thank him for his years of service and admirable job he is doing leading our forces in Iraq.