Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

What Does the Petraeus Appointment Mean?

By Ilan Goldenberg, Huffington Post. Posted April 23, 2008.


As the head of U.S. Central Command, Petraeus will have to answer some tough questions he has thus far been able to avoid.
Advertisement

General Petraeus has been tapped to be the next commander of CENTCOM, which leads to a number of quick questions/observations.

First, it'll be interesting to see how he handles the tension of Afghanistan and Iraq from that position since Gates, Mullen and Fallon have all made clear that Iraq is hurting our mission in Afghanistan. Somehow I have a feeling that he will advise that we continue to place all of our strategic eggs in the Iraq basket.

Second, the confirmation hearings should give Democrats an opportunity to finally get Petraeus to answer some central questions. Is the mission in Iraq hurting Afghanistan and Pakistan? What is the central front in the fight against Al Qaeda? What about our overstretched forces? Is Iraq making America safer? Petraeus was able to dodge (Somewhat legitimately) on a number of these questions in the past by arguing that this wasn't his job. Well, now it is. So he really needs to answer.

Third, there was speculation that Petraeus was going to move off to NATO right around January. This guarantees that if there is a Democratic administration, Petraeus may end up playing a central role in helping design an exit strategy. Of course, in testimony last month he brought into question whether he'd actually be willing to do that. Which is huge, and must be asked again during the hearings.

Finally, there is the question of how many quotes Mike O'Hanlon will get today in the media. Because naturally, that's the only military expert worth talking to. I'm hoping we see some comments from Andrew Bacevich, Larry Korb, Tammy Schultz, Michele Flournoy, Tony Cordesman and a slew of retired generals (Who aren't part of the Pentagon media strategy). But I doubt we'll see that.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, afghanistan, war on terror, petraeus, centcom

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
DOES THIS MEAN ANOTHER PAINFUL HEARING ?
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Apr 24, 2008 7:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If so I'd like someone to ask Petraeus about the ex-officers tied to military contracts that bacame TV war analysts. He may not be one of them but he ceratinly knew what was going on. If he didn't he's not qualified for the job. Either way, It's important for him to respond to the overwhleming evidence that our soldiers are being fed to the beast by their esteemed and highly decorated superiors. This is not a war on terror. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Does the "Promotion" of Patraeus mean ? NFL !
Posted by: hadashito on Apr 25, 2008 1:11 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Regarding the late "promotion" of our Cheney's lick-spittle general in Iraq, and given the highly unfavorable political climate in the USA, one is reminded of the comment of an NFL lineman who "retired" from pro-football after only a few years. His definition:
NFL = Not For Long

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What does the promotion of Petraeus mean?
Posted by: Quannah on Apr 26, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It means the way is clear to launch the attack on Iran that this administration has been itching to do! No more Adm. Fallon to stand in the way.

Did anyone notice the sudden reporting of "skirmishes" between the Afghans and Iranians in southwestern Afghanistan?

They're setting the stage. And now they have the commander who is more than willing to see it is carried out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]