Exclusive: General Petraeus' Iraq War Update
February 22, 2008

General David Petraeus, the pop culture face of the Iraq War, answers Military.com's questions about progress and morale . . . including his own. The general also offers an assessment of his warfighting needs and a peek at his forthcoming testimony before Congress in April. This episode is a 'must listen' for those who want to know what's really going on in Iraq.







Does anyone really believe setting up a 80,000 man force of former insurgents over the objections of the free, sovereign, independent, democratic, Green Zone Iraq government will strengthen it or bring the decade when the US gives up pseudo control of Iraq any closer?
Pseudo control = the boarders are allow enough apparently unlimited flow of ordnance and fighters from Iran and Syria.
Get back to me when the rate of acute malnutrition in Iraqi children is half not double at the beginning of OPERATION IRAQ LIBERATION or the END OF MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS, then I consider the US might be winning.
Posted by: Tom Baxter | February 22, 2008 at 06:59 PM
Excellent point, Tom.
Posted by: CP | February 22, 2008 at 07:30 PM
Stupid comment, Tom. The CLCs etc. are not "a force". They are a multitude of local collections of the willing and able, with hugely varying levels of independendence from ISF and MNF guidance and supplies, not to mention culture and ethnicity and sectarian allegiance (in both type and intensity).
The IG is being handed an opportunity to integrate and "co-opt" some of its enemies. What are its alternatives? Hostility and rejection promote the very outcomes it claims to fear.
Pusillanimous sectarian chauvinists.
Posted by: Brian H | February 23, 2008 at 12:26 AM
More of the same, nothing new, nothing changed.
We could get out of IRAQ totally - in 6 months, and the story would be the same there.
Posted by: Jimmy Jam Harfris | February 24, 2008 at 01:51 PM
More of the same, nothing new, nothing changed.
We could get out of IRAQ totally - in 6 months, and the story would be the same there.
Posted by: Jimmy Jam Harfris | February 24, 2008 at 01:52 PM
i don't think what's on his mind like tom but isurgent is like a fishbone to get out in iraq coz US-army are trying to peace that nation and to built a nice and strong republic
Posted by: anthony tuazon | February 25, 2008 at 02:03 PM
I find the comments by the commentors most interesting.
For whatever reason they ignore two significant facts - After 200 YEARS we still have not developed a republic, yet they expect one in Iraq in less than a decade.
We are in Iraq to fight an enemy who has stated every way it can that we either CONERT to their way of life or DIE. To ignore their position simply means that what is happening in Europe today will be happening in the US in the not too distant future.
The more we can accomplish in Iraq makes our way of life more secure.
Posted by: Gilbert Schumpert | February 26, 2008 at 02:15 PM
When we talk about progress what are we talking about. Now we'll mention about less people killed. What about the tens and hundreds of thousands that's been killed? Don't forget about those that fleed and are fleeing the country. How much is the violence enhance in Afghanistan because of limited resources because of Iraq? In time, if you kill off enough, and enough flee, numbers will come down. Afterall, you can't kill them twice and there are less targets as more and more flee. Numbers. When will the job be done? How will we know?
James
Posted by: James | February 27, 2008 at 07:24 AM
I can't imagine how our own country would be if our troops were home to protect us from the illegals coming in and those awful Taliban guys we are told to fear. Imagine that they can't get here to do harm because we are protecting our own country! What a novel concept. I will never buy the idea that we are in Iraq to protect ourselves. I'm sorry to state that we need to take care of ourselves and let Iraq work out it's own problems. I don't care about the oil there. I only care about the 4,000 troops that have died for a cause without an end. It isn't fair to them or their families. No one will be any happier than I when GW is no longer taking us blindly down his own dark path of getting rich on the oil and lives of our sons and daughters.
Posted by: Patty | February 27, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Well I have a Son Or HERO in Iraq. I spoke to him this morning. He says that the enemy is waiting for the yeller bellied Americans to chage leadership and then they will beat the hell out of us and we will turn tail and run like we did in Nam. Oh by the way we beat the shit outta the N.V.A. regulars in Nam. OUr on politicians lost the war. Well that will happen in this war and we will know longer have any dignity or respect from outside our own country. The truth is we are a bunch of spoiled little brats that want everything without so much as asserting it from a mouse pad. We are yeller bellied. We can't stomach war unless it's on a gameboy.
Posted by: James T Bradley | February 27, 2008 at 12:48 PM
James, I respect the fact that your son is in Iraq. I have personally waited for my wife to return from that country twice, and have served there myself. I appreciate the fact that your son is closer to the fight than the reporters who form most American opinions of the war, and therefore a better source of "accurate" information in you opinion. That being said, let me point a few things out that perhaps you have not considered. First, unless your son is carrying our a daily dialogue with members of the insurgency, I doubt he is privy to the thoughts and plans of our enemies. It sounds like the opinion derived in a barracks discussion, rather than actionable intelligence. As an old infantryman, I take offense to your comment about turning tail and running in Vietnam. The fact about Vietnam is that our battle plans there revolved around 2 basic strategies...1) Pacification of the enemy, and 2)Vietnamization (or turning over of the combat operations to the host nation government.) As I see this currnet war in Iraq, we seem to be attempting the same strategies here as in Vietnam. If this results in the same outcome as Vietnam, then how are we to be surprised? That being said, what are the soldiers in Iraq being asked to do? They are being asked to do their primary job of fighting a war against a tough and determined enemy, that incidientally does not wear uniforms identifying themselves as enemy(sound familiar, James?), and performing the primary job of the State Department, which is to build nations and international relations. Unfortunately, the politicians in the State Department are afraid to volunteer to go to Iraq, and walk around outside the Green Zone and do their jobs, so the tough job of getting Iraq to govern itself rests on the shoulders of soldiers like your son, General Petraus, my wife, and me. We are thrown into the fray while the Iraqi politicians attempt to gather power to themselves for their own comfort, rather than the benefit of their nation. While your statement about the citizens of our great nation being "yeller bellied", may have some basis in fact, someone standing up and saying if we don't have clear goals and standards of victory in this war then we should get out is not cowardice, but courage. Someone must advocate for the judicious use of our soldiers' precious life-blood, and I applaud people like Patty for having the backbone to do so.
Posted by: Kurk | February 28, 2008 at 03:08 AM
Editors - "pop culture face" of the Iraqi War? Is this what we get from Military.com? He's a bit more than that don't you think?
Kurk - James' son may well be in regular contact with Iraqis. I wouldn't dismiss his assessment so quickly. And I think it's naive to think the State Department was ever equipped to build nations. Easy.
Posted by: d3navy | February 28, 2008 at 03:40 AM
Kurk,
To take your argument seriously one would have to buy into your assertion that our strategy in Vietnam did not work and that simply isn't the case. We pushed all the way down to the bitter end and just picked up and left while the enemy sat and waited for us to come and finish the job. The same way we did in the First Gulf war. Don't blame our soldiers or our commanders. There is no Earthly fight our un-cuffed military cannot win. The politicians and media who don't tell the truth about the war to the people of America is where the problem lies! Before you make statements about history you should investigate it for yourself rather than buy into "commonly accepted" knowledge. The enemy was virtually defeated in Vietnam when our politicians pulled out the troops.
Posted by: David | February 28, 2008 at 04:31 AM
Please do not take my comments to be critical of the soldiers or military leaders. They are not. The reality is the military is not equipped to build nations, and if the State Department is not equipped to do so, then who? If the answer is nobody, then why are we attempting it? I agree that if the military is given a clear goal to complete, and a clear enemy to engage, there is no enemy in the world that can stand up to us. That being said, what is our mission (specifically) in Iraq? Who is our enemy in Iraq? Can you, or anyone walk down the street in Sadr City and point and say, "Him, he is the enemy"? Our soldiers are tasked to go into these areas and wait for the bad guys to attack, then react. We can never choose the battleground, or the battle. How can we win a war in which the enemy dictates the conditions of engagement? I agree, it is the politicians who are to blame. If the politicians commit our troops to war without clear goals, then they should be held accountable for setting soldiers up for failure. I, for one, intend to do that in November on election day.
Posted by: Kurk | February 28, 2008 at 05:47 AM
James, you know, I was in the end of the Korean Conflict,Lebadon Conflict, Cuban Crisic and Viet Nam, and this war in Iraq seems the same you have to ask permission to shoot at someone that is shooting at you first before you fight back, and if some get killed in the line of fire you had better be right or you will find yourself in front of a bunch of officers telling you were wrong and put in jail, the polliticans don't give a hoot about you just what they can get out of it. Thats the way its been in all of these, only the rich get richer, I was treated like dirt when I got home from the Viet Nham war and they still treat you that way now, its sad the way people can be swayed by politicans like whats going on now, the people had better wake up and in November put the right one in, because if they don't we will have the same mess as we do now, I had better quit now because I could write much more, I am 71yrs old and just fed up and you young people need to wake up to the fact that this country is being given away from the inside.
Posted by: Carl Harland | February 28, 2008 at 08:06 AM
Our Army or Military is just that they are NOT POLICE and that is now the role that our Military is being used as POLICE our nation should ask the UN to take over the building of the new Iraq and get out we are not nation builders we have never been any good at it just look at our past attemps In Iran and Panama.
Posted by: Eugene | February 28, 2008 at 08:54 AM
I did a year in Iraq already as an 88M (Transportation); I liked what I was doing. I came home this past September (because I am Army National Guard) and I wanted to redeploy; the process is so long and stressful; plus there is no real way to do it. I want to go back to Iraq for another year but some units are not willing to send the "troop" that wants to go; is that wrong or what?
Posted by: SPC Kulikowski | February 28, 2008 at 09:27 AM
Being a Vietnam Era Vet, I can appreciate the frustration of politicians running a war. Just three monthes ago the former commanding general of the North Vietnam military released a book in which he said imfatically that North Vietnam was just weeks from surrendering when he personally adivsed his leadership to hold on. He felt (which was substantiated) that our polirical leaders under pressure for the anty war crowd, would pressure our President and military leaders to cut bait........ He was right!
Posted by: BJ | February 28, 2008 at 12:41 PM
first let me say i am a military wife and am proud of my husband and his brothers who stand and fight everyday so you can have a place to spout your idiotic opinions. patty first let me say that WE ARE FIGHTING THIS WAR TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOMS how could you think otherwise i mean seriously if we were not there in the very near future our country would be like their country where a man can beat his wife in the street and it's common place and there is nothing she can do because she is his property. didn't we (women) fight our own battle in this country to win our freedom from man and the thought that we are their property? do people not understand the concept of fighting wars abroad so they are not fought at home? how can it not be understood that for america to be free wars must be fought and young men and women must die it's part of war. we fly the flag of the FREE in this country and we should remember the beliefs that we bound our lives around when we came over here so many years ago. we are Americans and with that comes responsibility i understand most of you would like to turn the other way and shirk this responsibility i mean that is the society we have become and i thank God everyday for the men and women that stand up and and put this responsibility on their backs like the packs they carry and march forward so i can sit at my computer in my warm house with food in the cabinets and write this, my opinion i can't really imagine it if i couldn't but i guess if i lived in lets say iraq i wouldn't be able to fathom a place where i could say my opinion and not be killed or jailed for it. also in closing i would like to leave you with a question to ask yourself, yes we could be out of this war in 6 months but what war would be at our feet 6 months after that, do you think terrorist are just going to say ok well you got out so i'm going to leave you alone?
Posted by: jennifer | February 29, 2008 at 02:22 AM
THE WESEN POWER ARE THE SELFS
A SORCE OF FREEDOM; AND LIBITARY TO THE POOR ENTRAPED
PEOPLE OF THE AREA;IF THE PEOPLE COULD ONLY EARN MORE LIBITY AND FREDOM TO BILD A
NEW WORLD; A LASS WITH TERROR
DEVELOPING NEXT DOOR THIS IS HARDLY LIKELY;
I WOULD ASK ALL SENCIBLE PEOPLE JUST TO VEW WHAT LIKELY TO HAPPEN;AND IF IT DOS THE LIKELY HOOD OF THE DANAGER TO THE PEOPLE OF BRITAN AND USA; ON THE MAIN LAND;
Posted by: MACMILLAN | February 29, 2008 at 03:15 AM
A war based on lies, with a reasoning and goal that changes like the wind, that only somebody who wasnt paying attention for the last 5 years could believe. Saddam was going to nuke the united states, hell iran wasnt scared of iraq. Lets spend trillions of dollars on a lie, in a country that could never hurt us in our wildest dreams. but the economy is going great! The rich are getting richer, and the poor poorer, no problems there, life is good. Dont worry only less than a year until the commander in chimp is out of office, and I am not ashamed to have the worst president ever.
Posted by: brian | February 29, 2008 at 07:46 AM
I agree that that UN should take over and rebuild Iraq, but we all know that they will not step in. We, the US, lied to the UN to get permission to step in and lead the coalition. Does anyone remember or feel sad for Powel when he took the word of our president and the false 'intel' about the WMD that REALLY wern't there! This whole mess was led by Bush to get back at Suddam. Now that we found him and hung him for his horrible treatment of the people, we step in and 'take over'. Is it any better really? Can't anyone see that there will never be peace in this region. There has been warring between the muslims and christians since the beginning of time! I just don't like being led by the nose down a path that I know has a bad ending. No matter what we do in Iraq, there will never be any pease there. We have build up their infrastructure (electric, sewer, rebuild buildings, schools etc) only to have the radicals come in and bomb them out again. If the Iraqi people stood up for themselves and at least tried to take care of themselves, then and only then would I be more supportive of the war. But I dont see or hear of it. We have given the Iraqi govt. several years to get their crap together and they still cannot. However we can train our troops for 8 weeks in bootcamp and then send them out to fight someone elses war. Why can't the Iraqi form their own army and fight their own fight? If they are doing so then why is it taking so long? (That ought to get some comments) Point is that they cannot and don't want to because they have us there doing it for them! I've had enough. The money could have built homes for people in New Orleans, homes for all the people who lost homes in the tornados and floods that occurred here this last year. New Orleans happened years ago and it still isn't close to being finished! Our schools suck and taxes are going up! Yes I'll vote in November! I encourage everyone to do so. By the way, I'm a disabled woman vet with 2 sons in the Army. I hate the war and don't feel that it is our fight to take care of the world at large. We can't take care of ourselves. Or do we want to? There probably isn't any real big money in it!
Posted by: Patty | February 29, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Kurk stated that:
The fact about Vietnam is that our battle plans there revolved around 2 basic strategies...1) Pacification of the enemy, and 2)Vietnamization (or turning over of the combat operations to the host nation government.) As I see this currnet war in Iraq, we seem to be attempting the same strategies here as in Vietnam.
This may have been our old strategy in Iraq but Gen. Petraeus clearly stated in his Counter Insurgency Field Manual and again in this interview what our current strategy is. It is our new strategy rather than just the surge in troops that is leading to Victory.
The strategy is based on the idea that local political concerns are primary and legitamancy is the main objective.
Primary goals are:
Protect the population through force dispersion.
Engage the population.
Gather intelligence on local motives, society and culture. Intelligence drives operations.
Multiple strategies based on the change in environnment in different areas based on intellegence.
Every area within the theater is unique.
Reconcile with as many as possible.
Kill, capture, or run off unreconcilables.
Dr. Maslow showed in his hierarchy of human needs that safty and security need to be met before man will focus on higher goals or asperations. Our military is providing safty and security in Iraq and now their politicians can start to deal with other issues.
Thank you Gen. Petraes and all Americans engaged in Victory.
Posted by: Dan | February 29, 2008 at 12:34 PM
General Petraes
I would like to know why the U.S. Army don't use the IRR to fill in the army's needs.They say the u.s. army don't have enough men to do the job,well if you would use the irr to fill the spots that you need you eould have them. I have been trying to come back into the active army
and no one has contacted me at all.I am willing to serve my country again to defend my country. I loss someone in 911 a cousin wtb,so i think i have a right to fight in this war too.So if you need men i am ready.you can call me anytime at 719-930-6336.I am tired of waiting give me a call.
thank You
MSG.Ronald E.Palmer
U.S.Army Ret.
Posted by: MSG Ronald E. Palmer Sr. Ret. | March 03, 2008 at 09:15 AM
I am currently in the middle of enlisting in the Marines I want to do it but I dont know if i am doing the right thing. I dont mean joining i know thats the right thing. More or less i am concerned with the fact that our goverment fights other peoples battles and battles we cant win.(I dont think its got to do skill just like the other guy said its hard to identify your target)
Posted by: Andrew | March 04, 2008 at 06:17 AM
The situation in Iraq has improved tramactically since the coalition intervention. Strategically and tactically from a military view, the coalition is holding all the cards.
The offensives have reduce in comparsion to our first arrival, when the situation shows improvement on the field, external consideration(eg Turkey) would play a non direct approach to the improved reports on the field in Iraq.
The resistance of pocket groups within the zones,are been eliminated or surrendering by the days, military involvement would be more bordering and policing,ie evacuation plans and stablisation structures to be implemented.
Posted by: David Raimona | March 10, 2008 at 04:42 PM
BASICALLY I CAN ONLY GET MY INFORMATION ON THE WAR FROM THE NEWS. AND LET'S FACE IT DEPENDING ON WHICH STATION YOUR WATCHING THEY ARE REALLY FOR OR REALLY AGAINST IT. WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS THERE AND VISION AS TO WHAT THE END WILL LOOK LIKE, WHAT ARE THE EXPECTATIONS AND WHAT WILL THE COUNTRY BE LIKE. I KNOW YOU CAN'T LOOK INTO THE CRYSTAL BALL BUT NOBODY SEEMS TO SAY WHAT THE END LOOKS LIKE. AND I'M NOT ASKING WHEN IT WILL END JUST WHAT ARE OUR EXPECTATIONS?
Posted by: LEN | July 15, 2008 at 01:42 PM
General Petraes...it's impossible to win the Irak war...you can't I can assure you...because they are batteling for home, land, their oil, their geography, their honour,...
Some days or months and You'll see how they come back!
Posted by: mani | October 06, 2008 at 12:03 PM