Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US Senate confirms Iraq commander ~ Army Lieutenant General David Petraeus (puh-TRAY'-uhs) ....
BBC ^ | Friday, 26 January 2007, 16:06 GMT | BBC Staff

Posted on 01/26/2007 8:39:22 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 01/26/2007 8:39:24 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"Petraeus"

Sounds like a fer'ner to me...

2 posted on 01/26/2007 8:51:44 AM PST by USMMA_83 (Tantra is my fetish ;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The White House, President George W. Bush

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 26, 2007

President Bush Congratulates General Petraeus on Senate Confirmation, Discusses Way Forward in Iraq
The Oval Office

     Fact sheet In Focus: Defense

10:20 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: I just had a full briefing with General David Petraeus about the way forward in Iraq. I want to thank the Secretary, and General Pace, National Security Advisor, for joining this discussion. Congratulations.

GENERAL PETRAEUS: Thank you, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: The Senate confirmed this good man without a dissenting vote. I appreciate the quick action of the United States Senate. I appreciate them giving General David Petraeus a fair hearing, and I appreciate the vote. My instructions to the General is, get over to the zone as quickly as possible and implement a plan that we believe will yield our goals.

I thank the General and his family. I particularly want to thank your family for supporting you and supporting our nation. One of the amazing things about our country is that we've got military folks who volunteer to go into a tough zone to protect the American people from future harm, and they've got families who stand by them. Whether you be a general or a private in the military, there is a U.S. -- there's a family member saying, I love you and I support you.

And so, General, I congratulate you and I congratulate the volunteers and their families for making the hard decisions necessary to protect its people from a grave danger. And you're going into an important battle in this war on terror, and I give you my full support, and wish you Godspeed.

GENERAL PETRAEUS: Thank you, Mr. President. If I could thank the Senate, as well, thank my family, and above all thank those great soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and civilians who are out there on the front lines of the global war on terror.

THE PRESIDENT: All right. I'll answer a couple of questions. Jennifer.

Q Thank you, sir. The other night in your State of the Union address, you asked Congress to give your plan a chance. But lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans, didn't really miss a step in starting to turn out resolutions against that plan. Why do you think it's okay to go ahead without their support?

THE PRESIDENT: One of the things I've found in Congress is that most people recognize that failure would be a disaster for the United States. And in that I'm the decision maker, I had to come up with a way forward that precluded disaster. In other words, I had to think about what's likely to work.

And so I worked with our military and I worked with Secretary Gates to come up with a plan that is likely to succeed. And the implementor of that plan is going to be General Petraeus. And my call to the Congress is, is that I know there is skepticism and pessimism, and that they are -- some are condemning a plan before it's even had a chance to work. And they have an obligation and a serious responsibility, therefore, to put up their own plan as to what would work.

I've listened a lot to members of Congress. I've listened carefully to their suggestions. I have picked the plan that I think is most likely to succeed, because I understand, like many in Congress understand, success is very important for the security of the country.

Let's see -- Steven.

Q This policy of going after the Iranians inside Iraq, are you concerned that that could be a provocative act in the region?

THE PRESIDENT: I made it very clear, as did the Secretary, that our policy is going to be to protect our troops in Iraq. It makes sense that if somebody is trying to harm our troops, or stop us from achieving our goal, or killing innocent citizens in Iraq, that we will stop them. That's an obligation we all have, is to protect our folks and achieve our goal.

Now some are trying to say that because we're enforcing -- helping ourselves in Iraq by stopping outside influence from killing our soldiers or hurting Iraqi people that we want to expand this beyond the borders -- that's a presumption that simply is not accurate. We believe that we can solve our problems with Iran diplomatically, and are working to do that. As a matter of fact, we're making pretty good progress on that front. As you know, the Iranians, for example, think they want to have a nuclear weapon. And we've convinced other nations to join us to send a clear message, through the United Nations, that that's unacceptable behavior.

And so, yes, we're going to continue to protect ourselves in Iraq, and at the same time, work to solve our problems with Iran diplomatically. And I believe we can succeed. The choice is the Iranian government's choice. And one of the things that the Iranian government has done, is they've begun to isolate their nation to the harm of the Iranian people. And the Iranian people are proud people, and they've got a great history and a great tradition.

Our struggle is not with the Iranian people. As a matter of fact, we want them to flourish, and we want their economy to be strong. And we want their mothers to be able to raise their children in a hopeful society. My problem is with a government that takes actions that end up isolating their people and ends up denying the Iranian people their true place in the world. And so we'll work diplomatically, and I believe we can solve our problems peacefully.

Thank you all very much.

END 10:26 A.M. EST


Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070126.html


3 posted on 01/26/2007 8:52:22 AM PST by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (We are going to win!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

When did the Senate get the power to approve an appointment of an individual to a particular military command? Wouldn't that be the exclusive power of the President as the Commander in Chief?


4 posted on 01/26/2007 8:53:13 AM PST by John Jorsett (scam never sleeps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
From the Blogosphere:

In the Senate Committee hearing :

*************************

When questioned directly, Petraeus said he would not be able to do his job as commander of MNFI without the additional 21,000 troops President Bush has pledged to Iraq.

See :

Re: What would you say to this sending a message thing if you could say what you thought...

**********************************************

Commentary link at the Blog:

So, the Politicans will not let the General do his job.

5 posted on 01/26/2007 8:54:03 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett

They want to manage the War effort.....I'm not sure when....


6 posted on 01/26/2007 8:55:12 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: USMMA_83
Sounds like a fer'ner to me...

More than Shinseki, Abizaid, and Shalikashvili? ;)

7 posted on 01/26/2007 8:55:34 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves ("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USMMA_83

Sounds Greek to me.


8 posted on 01/26/2007 8:55:59 AM PST by hsmomx3 (Steelers in '08--Go BIG BEN!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
No Senators asked him about the implications of this:

Troops Died After, Not In, Sneak Attack ~ Karbala Attack ~ Soldiers abducted then killed.....

.....Possible message from Iran......

9 posted on 01/26/2007 8:57:40 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: USMMA_83

What about Schimdt? Hrabe? Ramos....etc....We are a melting pot over here...


10 posted on 01/26/2007 9:00:03 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett

Exactly my question too. The Senate has no business confirming a MAJCOM appointment. They need to BUTT OUT!


11 posted on 01/26/2007 9:01:12 AM PST by agincourt1415 (Democrats still not in Power! Make them get 60 votes for all their Bills)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: agincourt1415
Exactly my question too. The Senate has no business confirming a MAJCOM appointment. They need to BUTT OUT!

Does the appointment carry with it a fourth star? If so, Senate is required to confirm flag officers. In this case, the MACOM appointment may be a 4-star rank, so they have to promote him before he can become the commander there. I'm not sure if the appointment is a 4-star billet, though.

12 posted on 01/26/2007 9:05:32 AM PST by Terabitten (How is there no anger in the words I hear, only love and mercy, erasing every fear" - Rez Band)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

What about Senator be-tray-US?


13 posted on 01/26/2007 9:13:50 AM PST by NonValueAdded (Pelosi, the call was for Comity, not Comedy. But thanks for the laughs. StarKisses, NVA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USMMA_83

Why would the Senate need to confirm an appointment to command?


14 posted on 01/26/2007 9:14:16 AM PST by quadrant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten

He may be up for a fourth star, but I think a LTGEN. can have the post. Central Command requires a 4 star I believe.


15 posted on 01/26/2007 9:18:21 AM PST by agincourt1415 (Democrats still not in Power! Make them get 60 votes for all their foolish programs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Why would the democrats vote to confirm the man who thinks we can win the war in Iraq by increasing troops? Don't the democrats think it's stupid to increase the troops? Do they think we should have stupid people running our military operations?


16 posted on 01/26/2007 9:22:20 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44
I'm the decision maker,

IMO, he needs to say this again and again and again, and LOUDER, until Congress finally "gets it" that Bush is the Commander-In-Chief, and nobody else. His is the sole and final authority when it comes to directing the military!
17 posted on 01/26/2007 9:34:32 AM PST by BMIC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

" Why would the democrats vote to confirm the man who thinks we can win the war in Iraq by increasing troops? "

Last night on Special Report , they showed the Quisling Senators , including Susan Collins and Biden , happily wishing Petraeus success in his new position .
Fred Barnes made the point that this is in effect, Petraeus's plan now and with one hand they gush over him and wish him well
and with the other-
they're trying to cut him off at the knees , so he will fail.


18 posted on 01/26/2007 9:38:15 AM PST by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
See the links at post #5 for discussion on that point .....maybe this will be more direct:

Beat Me
[Soldier's Dad]

Scroll down....and you will find this:

General Patraeus will be confirmed by the Senate soon.
Probably by close to a unanimous vote.
He has said he needs more troops to secure Baghdad.
Various Senators, who will vote for General Patraeus as the "Man to Accomplish the Mission", will then vote to deny the man the tools he has told them he needs.

Then we wonder why after decades of trying to find solutions to the problems if the Middle East we are standing at square one. In the insanity called Washington, the "Man with the plan" is denied the tools to do the job, while the "Man with no plan" gets all the tools he needs to accomplish nothing.

19 posted on 01/26/2007 9:40:35 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wild Irish Rogue

See post #19.


20 posted on 01/26/2007 9:41:44 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson