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.

Gerritsen Fallout

There’s an article in The Times today about Roy Gerritsen’s outcome: “Man avoids solicitation of minor conviction, pleads to lesser charge.”

Check out some of the comments:

• “How in the hell can you people live with yourself knowing that you let him plead to a lesser charge. I hope and pray if he ever does it again, it isn't my kid because someone will answer for this.”
• “Wow the LA Justice system let a perv walk free!”
• “This is terrible. Why let the pervert get off with a slap on the wrist? Let's send the illegals in our jails back to their own countries and make room in our prisons for some of our homegrown scum...”
• “Just what makes this perv so special that he faces reduced charges and does not have to register as a sex offender. He won't change but you can bet he will be much more careful in the future.”

I’m glad I’m not alone in thinking he was let off too easy.

New Studios for Red River Radio

There was an interesting article in The Times the other day, “Public radio network outgrowing facilities.” Read it quick before you have to pay to see it.

Essentially, it boils down to, as the article states, “KDAQ has outgrown its current location at LSUS, and needs to move into a new facility in the next three years, according to station manager Kermit Poling.”

This is completely true and accurate. KDAQ, the flagship of Red River Radio, is consigned to hovels on the LSUS campus. It’s disgraceful and shameful. In fact, the university is just plain lucky no one has gotten seriously ill from working there or that the buildings haven’t been blown away by a bad storm.

Kermit goes on to mention that the station has plans for a new studio that will cost about $3 million, which he is trying to raise through federal and matching grants.

This plan was bandied about before I left Red River Radio, and I saw the artist’s conception of the new studio. It was very nice but not extravagant, and it would serve Red River Radio well for many decades.

It seems, though, that little progress has been made towards fruition since I left. So I’m going to say this yet again: LSUS should pay the lion’s share in funding the new studio.

Every time you tune in to Red River Radio, you hear that KDAQ is a community-supported service of LSUS. They are very proud to provide public radio to such a large area. For decades, Red River Radio has helped LSUS achieve a positive image throughout the region.

Yet the university has kept the network based in tin shacks all this time.

It’s time for some reciprocation. After all the benefit Red River Radio has provided LSUS, coming up with at least half the construction cost can easily be viewed as both a reward for that service and as an investment in continued service. It just seems fair to me.

What can you do? Write the chancellor and tell him your thoughts! Surprisingly, he has yet to make a public comment on the situation.

Thoughts on Iraq for a Gannett Newspaper

John Andrew Prime of The Times is working on a story about the Iraq War and asked me a few questions. The opportunity made me cohere my thoughts into something short and sweet.

Here’s what John asked:

• Do you think the public’s opinion on the War on Terror and the War in Iraq have changed over the course of the past year or so, and why?
• Have your views changed? Why or why not?
• What do you think this nation should do with regard to the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?
• Will anything change under a new administration after the ‘08 election?

And here’s my response:

Over the past year, measured public opinion about the war has remained relatively constant. Only about 35 percent “approve” of the war. The rest express various degrees of “disapproval.” Locally, more people support the President’s policies than that, but his support is rapidly waning.

Essentially, what’s left is a hard core of supporters pitted against growing opposition. The rhetoric from both sides will get worse.

Regardless of our Iraq War opinions, we can all agree the war merits civil discussion. We can treat each other respectfully in disagreement, and rhetoric of the right-wing-talk-show or leftist-rant ilk only puts us further from a solution.

My personal opinion about Iraq has remained constant since it started. We should withdraw all of our forces, abandon plans for permanent bases, turn control over to the Iraqis assisted by a regionally-based coalition and begin reparations payments.

I don’t think a massive conflagration will erupt if we withdraw. The same prediction was made of Vietnam and proved to be gross exaggeration. Iraqis can manage their own country better than we can manage it for them.

Profiteering corporations should be booted from Iraq, particularly oil companies and mercenary armies like the Blackwater forces. The growing trend to use these mercenary armies is troubling.

In Afghanistan, we have a better prospect. Our conduct there, while not exemplary, has generated some goodwill to build on. The people there are ready for peace. There is ample opportunity for coalition building if we respect all interests. I think we can manage with our special forces aiding indigenous forces. We must settle the Osama Bin Laden problem finally and unequivocally.

The Democrats are just as much a war party as Republicans. Regardless of who wins the White House, the next president won’t withdraw from Iraq entirely. A Democrat might withdraw some forces, but the plan of opening permanent bases will continue, the oil companies will still get their due and mercenaries will still operate without oversight.

The main problems in ending the war comes from two areas. First, we spend so much money on the military that the war industry dominates our polity. And we've built a propaganda machine that constantly trumpets how great our nation is because of that military spending.

Anyone who challenges the war machine is either ignored or ridiculed. But I think soon we'll be discussing these issues seriously. I hope that’s the big change this election -- getting the nation to really look at industries supporting and profiting from war and what that means for our way of life.

I don’t know what of that, if anything, will make it to the final article, but I’m glad to have had the opportunity to comment. We’ll see what happens.