The Petraeus Report

General David Petraeus testified to Congress today giving his much anticpated report on "progress" in Iraq. There were no surprises in what it contained.

Once again, John Andrew Prime of The Times asked me to comment on the Iraq issue, specifically Petraeus' testimony.

Here's what I said:

General Petraeus' recommendations are sneaky. His plan would only reduce current post-surge troop levels in Iraq to their pre-surge level within about a year. It's akin to the shameful business practice of raising prices to then have a sale. Further decisions on troop reductions would be deferred at least six months.

The American people don't want that. Poll after poll shows we have lost patience with the war, with the horrible suffering on both sides. Most Americans want out, and we want it to happen starting now. In one CBS/New York Times poll, a majority believe the surge has either had no impact or made matters worse.

I grant that Iraq withdrawal is a challenge. We must find a plan that will disengage us from the Iraq debacle while maximizing chances for an end to violence there and a stable government that can keep the strategically vital oil flowing. Long term, we need a better oil plan for the country that reduces our dependence substantially. And we need to change our focus in the War on Terror from large-scale military engagement of whole countries to smaller, more-focused attacks against only those who truly threaten the country.

We need principled representatives willing to take political risks to resolve this issue. Who will step up to lead? I am not confident in our current leadership to do so.

Ambassador Crocker also testified, but I consider his report the least reliable. While Petraeus I think, despite his slanted statistics, had some independence, Crocker was just carrying Bush's water. There was nothing from him that wasn't standard administration propaganda.

The whole affair is mostly portrayed as a partisan battle. But both parties are ignoring what most people want -- to get out of Iraq now. Instead, Democrats are trying to craft a position that will allow the U.S. to stay in Iraq permanently while somehow "ending the war." Of course, that can't be successful, so it's ridiculous to think of the Democrat party as any real help, despite the admirable positions of a few loners within the party.

Many comments I'm reading are savvy to that. Some urge voting Green or Libertarian to elect people who will end the war. Both of those parties oppose it on principle. It's looking good for alternative parties this year. I know I'll be voting Green.