Damn it’s funny watching liberals squirm!

He didn’t just say any transformation. He modified the verb, transformed, with the clause “the way it has.”

You can dredge up whatever left-wing blog post you’d like, but can you contest any point in his testimony? All you can offer is a minor quibble over what appears to you (and an angry Bush-hating blogger) as a discrepancy.

Let me repeat, six months ago, he saw, “a trend in the positive direction.” He did not anticipate a province nearly completed pacified.

Six months ago, he noted that the trends were in a positive direction, but he didn’t say they would have been transformed as they have been — and as he said today.

Dan, here’s the quote now:

no one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months.

Yet, here he was six months ago:

And right now, there appears to be a trend in the positive direction where sheiks are stepping up, and they do want to be affiliated with and supported by the U.S. Marines and Army forces who are in Anbar province.

If you believed him then, it wouldn’t have taken a daring forecast to suggest a transformation taking place within six months. After all, weren’t you war supporters claiming six months ago that the surge would yield great progress by today?

I’m afraid Petraeus is just another used car salesman who’s been peddling the same BS for three years now.

Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn. It’s pretty sad and pathetic that gays keep gobbing on the politicians who lead the way in legislating against them. However, my happiness does not hang on who votes for whom or who wins elections. Much to your chagrin, I’m sure.

I guess I was wrong. You’re really only going to be happy when homosexuals vote for Republicans, take it, and like it.

Guess you were wrong. The reality is that there are a lot of people in this world who have a lot more meaningful life than you apparently do. As far as “take it, and like it”, you seem to have no problem with the anal rape the liberals have given gays because they tell you how much they love you at the same time and lord BJ claimed to have cried when he fcuked you over sans lube. Rape is still rape. What’s worse, the attacker has you convinced it was somebody else’s fault.

Maybe one day you’ll decide that you don’t like being fcuked over and lied to and you’ll grow a pair and declare that you won’t take it anymore. Until then, you’ll remain a miserable victim.

Petraeus is going to the network most likely to treat him fairly — as well as to the news network with the largest audience.

Should we now say that anyone who agrees to an interview for CNN or MSNBC will be looking for a whitewash on behalf of some leftist agenda, given that each network has shown a great bias to the left than Fox does to the right?

As to the report that Aravosis provided, it seems he has been digging pretty deep to claim that Petraeus is “fudging the facts” (as you put it). Six months ago, he noted that the trends were in a positive direction, but he didn’t say they would have been transformed as they have been — and as he said today.

Even Aravosis says he wasn’t lying, but he’s wrong to say he’s twisting his own facts. Note again what the general said — transformed the way it has. Amazing that your buddy John thinks the general was spinning. The very expression he quotes shows his description of this testimony to be off the mark, way off the mark.

Not if you want people to see it. Should it instead be on MSNBC-BS where both liberals can watch Matthews spit all over Petraeus?

quoting Andrew Sullivan on Iraq won’t advance your argument

Well, FauxNews is advertising their exclusive interview with Petraeus. This is pretty foolish on Petraeus’ part if he expects anyone other than FauxNews viewers to think he’s providing other than a whitewash on behalf of the Bush/Cheney administration.

You seems to be doing an about face on who was responsible for writing the report. In your post you seemed to criticize Dems for referring to it as the Bush report when that’s exactly how the legislation set it up.

As for his testimony to Congress, Aravosis has already caught Petraeus fudging the facts. I guess after Abu Gonzales got away with lying to Congress, they figure anyone can.

the fact that we *didn’t* take a hard-line approach and go to war against the Iraqi people is *exactly* the reason that there has been civil discord for so long in Iraq.

It’s not a question of a hard line approach rather it’s a question of going in with such overwhelming manpower that the insurgency doesn’t get a chance to start. You can wind up with far more violence with a small footprint than you can with a large one. At this point, even a large footprint is liable to fail and thanks to Bush-Cheney’s lack of planning, a large footprint is not feasible anyway. Still, we should not have attacked Iraq in the first place. It was simply wrong from a moral viewpoint and against our national interests.

I would also say that conservatives’ willingness to go to war against a people whose country had neither attacked us nor was in any way shape or form about to is quite simply appalling but probably shouldn’t be surprising.

As long as they keep demonstrating it…

But what happens is impossible standards are set and then people cry that impossible standards are not met. The whining and the crying about being deceived makes me think of that old saying “you can’t cheat an honest man.” I used to think that was a stupid saying, but I no longer do. How long to stabilize a country once its tyrant has been removed? How long to establish a stable government (of any type) taking into account Historical perspective in any country in the world?

Lied to? How is it possible that anyone with a brain can claim, not only that they heard these supposed promises of quick and easy but that they *believed* them?

Can’t lie to an honest man.

Petraeus is not going to report flowered meadows of sweetly twittering birds, he’s going to report the efforts to rebuild and promote public order in a war torn country.

Duh.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. The American people aren’t falling for it this time.

Great rant. You’ve just won my “Moonbat of the Week Award.” In recognition of this, your complimentary tinfoil hat is on the way. You don’t need to send me your address: being a member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy, Inc., I already know where you live.

Sleep tight!

The MSM, both politcal parties, and the White House has so poisoned the well of public opinion that I fear that no-one will read the Report; they’ll just parot their lines either for-or-against without any cogent study of the facts. And the American public is so mistrusting and disgusted with the whole apparatus at-this-point that the actual hearings will be just so-much noise. By Thursday afternoon, America’s living room TV’s will be tuned to Tiger Woods and the Fed-Ex Cup…not the Patraeus hearings. I know it will be at my parents.

I hate to break it to you, but the job of the military is to go to strange places, break things and kill people. In the process, they also get killed. They know this. Basic training makes it abundantly clear. Our death toll in this war is miniscule and far smaller than any military estimates would have dared to imagine. (Be sure to jump on the idea that I have implied “we should have more deaths!”)

Thanks for your patriotic, America loving comments. Too bad you and your merry band of geniuses are not in charge of the Pentagon, because we would never have to fear war again, would we? By the way, prescient one, what do you see happening in Pakistan in 2009?