What would you ask Petraeus? Rep. Wexler (rec this)

This diary was posted yesterday, as well as today, by Congressman Wexler.

What would you ask Gen. Petraeus?

It has just fallen off of the new diary list.  This is a unique opportunity, and I hope someone will put it on the recommended diary list.  

Please don't post responses here!  Go to the link above and post them - I don't know how to get any responses here to Wexler.

Here is a Congressman who will be sitting face to face with General Petraeus next week.  He has asked the members of DailyKos for input.  Please respond, recommend, and distribute.  We don't get these opportunities every day.

I want you to be the ones asking the questions to General Petraus.

Write a comment and tell me what - specifically - you would like me to ask.  Please include your first name and your city and state.

I will choose the best two questions and ask them to General Petraeus this Wednesday.  You will be able to watch his answers directly on C-Span.

•  Is he an expert in Iraqi politics?

  If not, then why should we listen to him regarding the advisability of staying in Iraq?  The underlying problem in Iraq is political: the country is involved in a complex civil war involving numerous disparate factions.  I won't pretend to fully understand the situation, but I know enough to realize that there can be no military solution.  Why is Petraeus getting involved in the U.S. politics involving troop levels?  Isn't his job to advise on the likely effects of different policy decisions an then execute whichever policies are agreed to?

  by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:13:17 AM PDT

  •  I suppose...

    The burning question of whether Hillary threw her bookbag in 1968 on hearing of Dr. King's assasination is a much more important question than what the hell we are doing in Iraq.

    His opinions have a direct effect on our policy in Iraq.  Congressman Wexler is asking for input.  I think that's important.

    Silly me.

    by haremoor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:21:15 AM PDT

    •  You misunderstood my post

      These are questions that I was proposing that Congressman Wexler ask General Petraeus.  I am skeptical of generals making policy, since it isn't, you know, part of their job description.  Wexler and his colleagues in Congress are precisely the ones who should be deciding our policy in Iraq, at least if one believes in the Constitution.

      Sorry for the confusion caused by my careless use of pronouns.  I wholeheartedly support your diary, and I rec'd it enthusiastically since I missed the diary yesterday.  Nothing is more worthwhile than holding military and political leaders as accountable as we can during a time of war.

      by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:38:41 AM PDT

      •  Sorry. Your're right.

        I did misunderstand.  My bad.

        by haremoor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:12:52 AM PDT

        •  No worries

          Except that I really do worry about generals getting involved in the U.S. political process and working to actively shape and promote particular policies.  As citizens they certainly have the right to do so, but in their military capacity they are part of the bureaucracy and they should be providing advice and information, not dictating policy.  I'm not optimistic, but I hope Wexler and others call him out on this.

          by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:18:35 AM PDT

•  Questions poking holes in reasons for staying

  What are Al Qaeda's objectives in Iraq and, if we were to leave, would they be likely to achieve those objectives given the opposition they face from the population and surrounding nations?

  Could we provide enough supports to indigenous forces -- without being in country -- to tip the scales against them?  If not, why not?

  Are we in Iraq primarily to fight Al Qaeda or are we mostly staying to meet what we feel is our moral obligation to leave it stable?

  To what extent does our presence there draw in fighters from other countries because they want to fight us -- the so-called flypaper theory? And if we are flypaper drawing in these fighters, why wouldn't our leaving mean fewer "flies", lowering the violence?

  Doesn't the fact that the most recent violence was quelled primary through negotiations among Iraqis and Iran rather than the assertion of force by troops demonstrate that the Iraqis -- if left to there own devises -- can and will resolve their conflicts once they see it as in their interest to do so?

  Will they ever see it as in their interest to resolve their conflicts so long as we are there to deal with the violence for them instead of them having to deal with it themselves?

  Wasn't it the spiral into violence and the threat of increase chaos that led all sides including Iran to negotiate in this most recent incident?

  Are we therefore in fact postponing the eventual resolution of this conflict by keeping a lid on it?

  by Spock36 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:18:37 AM PDT

•  Does Petraeus believe in the PNAC!

  That would tell us everything we need to know. But I also recognize he wouldn't answer it, if he did.

  by Owllwoman on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:23:35 AM PDT

•  I asked Wexler to ask Petraeus

  paraphrasing, about the corruption in the contractors situation, most notably the deficient armor and ammo, on how a 19 year old can get a $300 mil contract, and how KBR can rape without fear of impunity.

  The toughest questions need to be asked.

  by danger durden on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:34:30 AM PDT

  •  my question, too..

    relates to the obvious conflict of interest found in all the gleeful profit-making going on while our forces are worn down to a nub and fat cats are laughing all the way to the bank. I asked it in yesterday's wexler diary and just reposted part of it in today's.

    by Wide Awake in NJ on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:53:55 AM PDT

•  I'd ask why he was so wrong in 2006

  Petraeus wrote the military manual about what resources are necessary to successfully conduct counter insurgency operations.  By all accounts it is brilliant as far as military documents go.

  My question to Petraeus would be:  were you wrong in your assessment when you wrote that manual, or are you lying to Congress when you testify that the surge is working?

  by whereisboblafollette on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:10:58 AM PDT