Sen "regular Joe" Biden says the surge is failing, but American Military General Patraeus says it's working?

Question

Who should we believe?
Regular Joe or American Military General?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070911/ts_alt_afp/usiraqpoliticsbiden_070911155733;_ylt=AiJX_ogae668eDoMsu6PFxeMwfIE

Answer 1

Well since I was in the military and I would go with the 4-Star General who has honorably served for decades with a career of distinction and integrity . The same 4-Star General that was only recently unanimously approved by the democrats . The same 4-Star General who they asked to go do a job and get back to us in September . The same 4-Star General who did what he was told, but before he could deliver his results , or even utter a word , he was ambushed by the very people who voted for him in the first place . And for what ? -- Nothin but hatred and power .
This will not stand .
This will not do .
And I am one American who'll make sure this does not go away until it's properly resolved .

Answer 2

I would say to be careful of always believing a General is correct 100% of the time. If all Generals made the right decisions then we wouldn't still have 160,000 servicemembers in Iraq 4.5 years after the invasion. Although you can argue that a General would have more experiences of what the deal is in Iraq since he has spent more time there. I also think that some believe the point of the surge was to reduce violence but I believe the point was reducing violence so that the Iraqi government can solve some problems, most importantly ethnic reconciliation. That part has not progressed one bit.

Answer 3

Col. Wilkerson said it best on Bill Maher:

"Bill, I’ve been so confused by all the different reports that have come back: GAO, Jim Jones – General Jim Jones in the Marine Corps. I’ve emailed some friends of mine in Iraq who have been emailing me all along. And one of them has been there about four years. And he came back to me today, and others have come back to me also, and said, “Nothing really has changed other than the fact that we’ve been able by the surge to bring some security to certain areas. But nothing has really changed. No good political situation. No good security situation. No good economic situation.” And to sum it up, he said, “We’re going to be here another ten years, and in some strength, if we’re going to build any kind of stability and any kind of political system to this country."

" My view all along has been that this is a war of ideas and not a war of bombs, bullets and bayonets. And therefore, to lead with the military instrument – and I’m 31 years in that instrument – is the wrong way to go. We should be leading first and foremost with our ideas, which I think – I happen to think – are much more powerful and much better than Bin Laden or Ayman Zawahiri’s ideas. And we should be leading with instruments of our power such as our economics, our financial might, our law enforcement, our intelligence capabilities, and so forth. The military should be the last instrument we’re using....."

Answer 4

The regular Joe biden is a real joke. As long as he has been in congress he live in the tower on the hill looking down on you.

Some of the war efforts are working and some aren't.

The words are no different then when we say the USA is rich country. Well it depends where your standing when it is said
If one is stand in the middle of the ghetto someone would question that statement being fact. But, if one is standing in front of Bill Gates house they will agree. So again some is true and some not so true.
What we do is what is most important dealing with this war.
But, I can guarantee who ever gets elected nothing will change. Neither side can handle domestic problems and they are getting worse but they do nothing or talk about it.

That's what will happen in Iraq and if the media stopped talking about it we wouldn't exist. Poof it is gone.

Answer 5

Because we do. We're already under-manned in Afghanistan. So we've needed more troops there for awhile now. As a result, the U.S. fatalities in Afghanistan has RISEN more quickly as of late. The surge in Iraq was something totally different. Look it up for yourself if you don't believe me.

Answer 6

Actually, you can reconcile both statements. However, I think Biden is griping at the wrong person.

If one listens more closely to what Petraeus said, one should recall the statement that the surge was achieving its military objectives. However, that closely circumscribed statement does not consider the broader political objectives.

As the surge was sold as a means to bring enough stability to Iraq to let the Iraqi government make some headway and achieve some necessary political objectives to bring some peace to the country, Petraeus himself has admitted that such has not come to pass. In fact he has consistently stated that military objectives alone are not enough to succeed in Iraq.

Why Biden is then complaining to Petraeus is not clear, since his complaint is best directed not at Petraeus but at the civilian leadership directing this whole thing. Perhaps Biden is saying it here to take some of the shine off of Petraeus' positive presentation. More likely Biden's saying it in the testimony because all the cameras are there and it's the best way to get the statements out to the media.

Answer 7

The troop escalation's purpose was to give the political process in Iraq an opportunity to come to a reconciliation.
And that has been a dismal failure.
That's not the fault of the military, who have been doing amazing work under sh!t conditions, but the fault of the political leaders who don't know what the hell they are doing.

Answer 8

How about believing what the evidence suggests?

Why is reality the last thing most conservatives consider as relevant?

All reports from disinterested sources paint the same horrible picture.

Why does fact have no weight in WHAT (not whom) to believe?

Answer 9

Even the Democrats are finding that a policy of appeasement is not helping them any more than it helped Neville Chamberlain, so many are starting to act just a triffle more like Churchill, but just the barest triffle. Joe is behind the herd. The general who had 100 per cent voting support until he started to make progress, is there, and is honest.

Answer 10

Neither. We should never put all our faith in one person's opinion. We should believe the weight of the evidence, and it says the surge isn't working or at best, it's had only limited temporary success.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/03/AR2007090301486.html