Hearings full of sound and fury, changing nothing

In September 2007, Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker offered very high-profile testimony in Congress on the state of the war in Iraq. At the time, it was characterized as some kind of watershed moment, with Petraeus and Crocker assuring officials and the nation that progress is right around the corner, and with some more time, we can turn this thing around.

With the benefit of hindsight, the hype surrounding the congressional hearings last September didn’t live up to their billing. The Bush administration’s policy didn’t change, congressional Democrats couldn’t muster the votes to force the president’s hand, American public opinion was unaffected, and Iraqis are no closer to achieving political progress now than they were then. Arguably the only memorable angle to the entire ordeal was the “Betray Us?” ad MoveOn.org placed in the New York Times.

With this in mind, expectations for this week’s sequel are low.

In a reprise of their testimony last September, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker plan to tell Congress today and tomorrow that security has improved in Iraq and that the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has taken steps toward political reconciliation and economic stability.

But unlike in September, when that news was fresh and the administration said a corner had been turned, even some of the war’s strongest supporters in Congress have grown impatient and frustrated. Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, and Crocker will face many lawmakers who had expected more by now and who are wondering whether any real change will occur before the clock runs out on the Bush administration.

“I think all of us realize we’re disappointed at where we are,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said at a hearing last week. Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) asked, “How do we get out of this mess?” While the cost in U.S. lives and money increases, said another senior GOP senator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity: “We cannot … just say we’re coasting through and waiting for the next president.”

Actually, that’s precisely what we’re going to hear from the administration. And while congressional Republicans will make noises about “impatience” and “disappointment,” very few are prepared to vote with the Democratic majority to change the policy, meaning we’ll necessarily have to wait for the next president.

To be fair, it appears there may be at least some semblance of a consensus around changing one aspect of the administration’s Iraq policy: spending lots of U.S. dollars on building the infrastructure of a country with $30 billion in reserves.

Among the questions these and other lawmakers said they plan to ask Petraeus and Crocker is why the United States is still paying for Iraqi domestic needs ranging from military training to garbage pickup when the Maliki government has $30 billion in reserves — held in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland — as well as $10 billion in a development fund, significant budgetary surpluses from previous years and a projected 7 percent economic growth rate for 2008.

Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Sen. John W. Warner (Va.), the panel’s ranking Republican, who projected that Iraqi oil income would reach $56.4 billion this year, asked the Government Accountability Office last month to investigate how much money the Iraqi government has.

“I think it’s a very significant issue that has not had sufficient exposure,” Levin said in an interview. “They’re perfectly content to watch us spend our money while they build up these huge cash reserves from oil windfalls. It’s a real stick in our eye, as far as I’m concerned.”

Republicans might be willing to vote with Dems on this one. Something to keep an eye on.

As for questions, the New York Times had an editorial today noting, “Among the questions General Petraeus needs to answer is when will the Iraqi Army be ready to fight? How — after all of the American training and effort — does he explain the 1,000 defections in Basra? And why should Americans believe that his strategy deserves more time or has a real chance of success?”

And speaking of questions, in September, Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) asked Petraeus if the current strategy in Iraq “is making America safer.” The general responded, “Sir, I don’t know actually.”

Expect to hear the same inquiry today. I have a hunch Petraeus will be prepped for it this time.

Screw Petraeus, Bush,the Bush Crime Family, the Quagmire. The only “action” since last summer was August 29, 2007 when Moqtada al-Sadr declared a cease fire, shaky but still in effect. It lessened the daily death rate for US troops.

Our response was both predictable and silly: we took sides in the civil war, and “our side” is losing due to tribal loyalties taking precedence of national ones. We still don’t get it, and from what I’ve heard so far, it looks like we’ll still be wrong under either Democrat.

The only positive thing we can and should do is create a Truman-style commission to publicize those companies which made obscene profits from this unnecessary military adventure. And that investigation ought to include members of Congress and the Administration who derive personal profit from its continuance.

  • The republicans aren’t going to say anything but good job, where winning, surge is great and all that. McLame is going to be up there kissing this guys ass. The dems will ask some tough questions and the nightly news will tell us how much McSame was right and the dems hate the troups. Sad but predictable.

  • Can the Democrats, at the very least, stop using the administration’s language?

    This isn’t a “surge,” it’s an escalation. Period.

  • If the Iraq war will be deemed illegal as of 12.31.08. What is really the next step?

  • Expect to hear the same inquiry today. I have a hunch Petraeus will be prepped for it this time.

    That’s not his job, in all fairness.

    I’d rather see him asked why the Joint Chiefs were opposed to the escalation to begin with, and whether they were right.

  • I’m anxious to hear how Petraeus can spin 11 soldiers dead since yesterday into into the fabric of his “surge success” suit. My prediction is this cloth will be as invisible as the clothes of the emperor, Bush, yet McCain will stand before the committee and rave at the astounding fineness of the fabric and even comment on the wondrous cut of the lapels.

  • Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.):
    They’re [Iraq gov.] perfectly content to watch us spend our money while they build up these huge cash reserves from oil windfalls. It’s a real stick in our eye, as far as I’m concerned.”

    One of many Dems who still doesn’t get the math:

    They’re ≠ Iraqi government

    They’re = US Republican party

    For republicans one of the great things about the Iraq war is that it enriches certain republican corporations while depleting the US treasury. That’s beautiful math! Drowning the US treasury in debt makes killing various social contracts an easy slogan to sell: We can’t afford it! We can’t afford it! We can’t afford it!

    I bet my ranch, my family, my life, my things…
    That: We can’t afford it! will be the main argument the republicans will sing and slur to stop health care reform and greenhouse gas reduction in 2008.

    [Insert clip of a venerable time-worn train wreck here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBhQhKWOZmk%5D

  • ROTFLMLiberalAO,

    Actually, I’m seeing that a lot of people (even hard core cons) are saying to the Repubs, “We can’t afford YOU.”

    It seems that you can send poor and the crusading kids off to war, but fuck with gas prices and cause house values to fall off a cliff then the majority of people suddenly get mad.

  • ml johnston #4: “If the Iraq war will be deemed illegal as of 12.31.08.”

    What happens on that date?

  • The magic of the Surge Success Suit is now overwhelming the committee. At a cost to taxpayers of only $50 billion or so, an amazing feature: the suit is REVERSIBLE! It’s shock and awe all over again.

  • It is really pathetic but who rules presently in USA: a military and oil lobby which set country in such way that on the top of the power is a perverted, sadistic mega imbecyle – alcoholic as president and they make practically there what they want: they commit genocide and war crimes . They do not understand that this war is lost it was lost from the beginning. They can withdraw with honor or maybe to make it in USA way as just in Vietnam ( very quick pathetic escape ). Besides these military genocides must be jailed and judged in the future for war crimes and crime against humanity. People can be offsprings of primitive British outcasts ( just as majority of US citizens ) but it does not give rights to murder another people and invade another countries.

  • From TPM – you can find this petition on Senator John Cornyn’s website:

    To General David Petraeus,
    Please know that we in Texas support you and all of the men and women serving our country with honor. We have entrusted you with a mission and respect the dignity you bring to our country and the job of leading our military in such a dangerous region of the world.

    Thank God my parents had the good taste to leave Texas and take me with them before it came down with whatever it is down there that is “catching” and results in mass brain rot.

  • […] spending lots of U.S. dollars on building the infrastructure of a country with $30 billion in reserves.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that *that* piggy-bank had been raided long ago. Whatever Maliki is or isn’t, he *is* a good student of Bush/Cheney’s Foolproof System of Asset Stripping… And, of course, we’re not pumping the taxpayers money into rebuilding I-wreck, either; we’re pumping it directly into the pockets of contractors with contacts and, indirectly, back to Cheney.

  • Tom @14, I seem to recall reading that there is so much cow shit in Texas that it percolates down into the state’s aquifer and thence into the public water supplies. This may account for some of the brain rot. 😉

  • Obama looked extremely uncomfortable questioning General Petraeus. He did not appear comfortable with his knowledge of the situation in Iraq.

  • Comments are closed.