Live Blog #8 - Petraeus and Crocker

Do NOT recommend this diary.  

Recommend Live Blog Mothership: Petraeus & Crocker to keep it on the Recommended list.

There will be 2 Committee Hearings today:

    * Senate Armed Services Committee 9:30 a.m EDT on C-Span1.
    * Senate Foreign Relations Committee at 2:30 p.m. EDT on C-Span3.

Link to C-Span's Media Players
Senate Armed Services Committee Members
Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing Notice
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Members
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing Notice
MSNBC live stream

•  Two live blog motherships going?

  Now I'm confused...

  by darthstar on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:06:32 PM PDT

  •  One is from a parallel universe.

    Haven't you noticed everyone there has a beard and seems very mean and violent?

    by Dartagnan on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:10:12 PM PDT

    •  Klingons? n/t

      by sockpuppet on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:04:56 PM PDT

      •  Of the starboard bow

        by David Kroning on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:06:51 PM PDT

        •  LOL! n/t

          by sockpuppet on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:08:08 PM PDT

          •  There Is Nothing

            funny about this ......

            by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:14:26 PM PDT

            •  Sorry, but

              
              your comment cracks me up, too.  

              No doubt you are quoting Chris Matthews from yesterday.  Good one.   ;)~

              by sockpuppet on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:20:11 PM PDT

              •  Well No

                this just isn't funny.

                by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:21:59 PM PDT

                •  The General's testimony

                  
                  is not the subject of the amusing aside to which we were referring.  I take the "report" of Gen Betrayus deadly seriously, that's why I watched it for hours today.

                  You intruded on a small side joke that had almost nothing to do with the gravity of the events on Capitol Hill today.

                  Whatever.

                  by sockpuppet on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 06:46:09 PM PDT

  •  We've got some new people

    Handling Live Blogging duty today.  It's been difficult with 2 Senate commitees, 2 Motherships both on the same subject and witnesses.

    Show the newbie Live Bloggers some love.  They've really stepped up!

    by donnamarie on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:26:45 PM PDT

    •  Major mojo

      for our newbies.  Thank you.

      by gchaucer2 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:31:20 PM PDT

•  Just watching Bush on CNN...giving...

  out the Medal of Honor.

  I have never seen an adult at such a solumn ceremony so disrespectufly twitch and play with his nose and fuddle around like a complete jackass.

  The man has not a stitch of empathy.

  Back to you regularly scheduled blogging.

  by David Kroning on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:18:30 PM PDT

  •  The timing of the ceremony is not respectful

    This political exploitation of a personal sacrifice is one more reason why I can't stand Bush.

    by crystal eyes on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:22:53 PM PDT

  •  Shameless photo op

    to pre-empt coverage of the Iraq hearings. I would like the thank the MSM for playing along. It's a disgrace to that navy seal's memory to use his heroism to distract us from hearing the truth about the war he died in.

    by eclecticbrotha on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:24:52 PM PDT

  •  It's impossible for someone like

    George W. Bush to understand that level of personal sacrifice. If he were in a similar situation, as highly unlikely as that would be, he probably would have pushed one of his comrades on top of the grenade to save himself.

    by Treg on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:39 PM PDT

•  Who are these Coalition forces...

  ... that they keep referring to?

  by carver on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:28:27 PM PDT

  •  Your Bothers & Sisters

    at least in my family that is how it breaks down.

    by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:29:28 PM PDT

  •  Well, there was THE soldier from Iceland,

    but I think he was withdrawn already.

    by Treg on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:45:40 PM PDT

    •  She, I believe.

      by Dapremonster on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 02:00:51 PM PDT

•  Is this related to the afternoon hearing?

  If so, you may want to retitle it so that it's clear it belongs to the FRC meeting and not the ASC meeting.

  by DemocraticOz on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:29:15 PM PDT

•  the link is House Debate

  from c-span, and msnbc is replay of earlier testimony.  I think I'm lost?

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:31:39 PM PDT

  •  Go to CNN

    Click Live Video in the upper right corner.

    The stream is called "Gen Petraeus Testifies"

    by DemocraticOz on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:33:58 PM PDT

    •  Gosh, I Am Just Getting

      along to the happy classical music at C-SPAN.

      by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:35:44 PM PDT

      •  Please change your

        diary to #3 -- this is a second hearing.  Thanks.  I think #8 is confusing because of the numbering in the Mothership.

        by gchaucer2 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:24:58 PM PDT

•  I found it here

  at msnbc online.

  He's talking live. The table is red now, the table was green this morning.

  by JG in MD on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:34:30 PM PDT

  •  Live or from this morning? nt

    by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:39:22 PM PDT

    •  Live n/t

      by cosette on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:42:26 PM PDT

•  thank you nt

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:43:10 PM PDT

•  Hey, We Got Brownback

  preaching about Kansas. Nothing else we should worry about.

  by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:44:41 PM PDT

•  Biden is starting it off

  Mentions that treaty requires approval of Senate.  

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:47:07 PM PDT

  •  Lets Get It On

    ........

    by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:48:49 PM PDT

•  When does Obama go - did I miss it?

  by GB1437a on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:47:24 PM PDT

  •  this committee is just starting

    So I don't think we missed Obama.

    by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:50:58 PM PDT

    •  He Is Coming ...

      by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:52:05 PM PDT

•  Biden: How much progress on scale 1-10

  to get to the point we can recommend lowering troop levels.

  Answer:  6 or 7.

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:49:02 PM PDT

•  Biden: Is Al Q a greater threat in Af or Iraq?

  which would you choose to eliminate?

  a:  Af/Pak border area (due to great progress in Iraq!)

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:50:12 PM PDT

•  Deer & Headlights

  That is what these folks seem to see ......

  by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:51:33 PM PDT

•  They Can't Freaking Say It

  no lowering of our troops.

  by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:53:49 PM PDT

•  My Gosh Lugar

  asks another hard question.

  by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:58:30 PM PDT

•  Lugar is babbling, but seems skeptical

  basically asks what can happen that is so bad?

  Answer: Al Qaeda! Al Qaeda!

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:59:03 PM PDT

  •  That Is The Response

    Al Qaeda! Al Qaeda! is there for one reason. We're there.

    by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:01:55 PM PDT

•  Badr Organization

  The moment I was waiting for was their characterization of the SIIC's armed wing, the Badr Organization, because right now the Iraqi gov't is trying to pass a law exlcuding any party with an armed wing from being able to participate, a law obviously aimed at Sadr.

  But almost every major party in Iraq has an armed wing, most significantly the two Kurdish parties, SIIC and Fadhilla. Petraeus said that the Badr Organization is no longer a militia, that they have been incorparted into the status security apparatus, and I assume the same is true for the Kurdish peshmerga. Taht leaves Fadhilla with an indterminate status, they pulled out of parliament last month so that might be an indicator of where they stand, but they were not targeted in the recent Basra fighting.

  So it looks like the Americans are planning to hand the Shiite South completely over to SIIC, by disenfrenchizing all voters for Sadr or Fadhilla. The Interior Ministry forces have previously been given over to the Badr Org., so this will mean a consolidated power block that controls half the government forces and hafl the country's territory. Maliki is their dependent. This will be in addition to the Kurdish region which is controlled by the Kurdish autonomous forces, and the Sunni region which is under the control of the Sons of Iraq militias and tribal armies whihc have not yet coalesced under unified leadership. Looks like they are implementing a federal solution and trying to prevent civil war by trying to simulteneously raise up and balance three self sufficient armed factions. Highly unstable combination, but I guess Petreaus thinks it's the best they can do.

  by Marcion on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:00:32 PM PDT

•  Joe Biden looks very

  
  Vice Presidential, to me, at this point.  I would certainly feel comfortable with him in the C-in-C backup position.  (I have heretofore been a "Wesley Clark for Veep" advocate.)  Biden is asking very acute, necessary questions, like the Senior Stateman he is.  Bravo.

  by sockpuppet on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:01:49 PM PDT

  •  I Would Prefer Dodd

    which is now on stage. My father worked at the highest levels of the DoD. I won't be voting for Biden.

    by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:04:59 PM PDT

  •  Obama thinks that IR is his best topic

    and wants a VP on his weaker areas

    by GB1437a on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:11:28 PM PDT

    •  "Experience" IS Obama's weakness

      He needs a Senior Statesman (or woman) who has extensive experience dealing with the Iraq debacle and who wields significant power and gravitas on Capitol Hill.  Imo.  Biden or Dodd certainly fit this profile.

      Obama's strengths, imo, are his views on domestic issues.  It's his international foreign-policy experience that is a bit light.  Although I'll take his sagacious judgment against the invasion of Iraq over many Beltway policy wonks any time.

      by sockpuppet on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:17:51 PM PDT

  •  He'd be an asset in the VP debates to be sure -nt

    by jay w on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:32:12 PM PDT

  •  Biden's of greater value in the Senate.

    As a VP candidate, he would be a liability. He's a smart guy, but he often doesn't know when to stop talking. That's fine for a Senator but could be a disaster waiting to happen in a long Presidential campaign.

    by Treg on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:49:13 PM PDT

•  Biden

  Q:  Where is most of the threat from AQ?

  A:  AQ in Pakistan/Afghanistan area.

  Q:  Assume progress has occurred, what further is required for you to suggest that the progress can be sustained at levels under 140/k troops, 12 billion month, 30-40 deaths, 225 wounded a month...what has to happen for us to be able to reduce the costs in life and in dollars and in deployment?

  A:  Progress in various local areas that we look at.  Battlefield geometry, political military calculus, province by province -- we already have four or five locations

  Q:  Tell me whether or not there are any conditions under which you would recommend us leaving, conditions meaning they got a lot worse -- you say  maintaining progress, if this time in Nov or Oct the American deaths have spiked to 2006 levels, if awakening is awake and it's not going to get better -- if, in fact, numerous militia -- any conditions such that you would say that we would withdraw and contain, or would you automatically say to infuse more forces to settle it?  Sustaining progress -- notwithstanding the pause, what happens if progress is reversed, what do you do?  come back and tell us the same?

  What if violence re-ignited in Sept from an bar into Baghdad, same level of ethno-sectarian violence, what do you do?

  A: Can't have productive conversation about hypotheticals -- how did it get that way.  

  Q:  What happens if elections don't happen because of violence?  

  Sen. Biden concluded that he cannot imagine a scenario where Crocker and Petreaus would recommend a change in strategies.

  [sorry it's so rough]  

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:02:38 PM PDT

•  Dodd asks about condition of our troops

  but it's turning into a long speech.

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:05:30 PM PDT

•  yeah, they're meeting recruiting goals

  ..by lowering the standards to include more admission of criminals, if reports are to be believed.

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:08:54 PM PDT

•  Petreaus says we're better equipped

  I should hope so.  Did you see that picture of the Humvee with VINYL doors from the recent recommended dailykos daily?

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:09:58 PM PDT

•  oh, Petreaus factors in stress levels

  ..of over-deployed troops in shaping his recommendations.  Yep.

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:10:21 PM PDT

  •  The only stress level

    that concerns Petraeus would be his own if his ass got canned by Bush for deviating from the White House line. Hence, he will avoid that potential stress no matter the cost to the people under his command.

    by Treg on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:54:54 PM PDT

•  Whats happening my cspan bugged out

  during Dodd

  by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:13:48 PM PDT

•  Has Obama spoken yet?

  by David Kroning on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:15:50 PM PDT

  •  Nope n/t

    by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:17:08 PM PDT

•  Why Can't These Folks Ask A Question

  UGH ..........

  by webranding on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:16:36 PM PDT

•  Posturing

  Everyone is posturing. What acrocker of shite.

  by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:19:41 PM PDT

•  Ugh.

  If I hear Ryan Crocker say, "um...uh" one more time, I swear I'm going to reach through my screen and throttle him.

  by DemocraticOz on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:23:14 PM PDT

•  Webranding

  Can you change your title to:
  Live Blog 2, Part 3: Petraeus and Crocker

  We've created some confusion here with 2 hearings and 2 Motherships.

  by donnamarie on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:25:00 PM PDT

•  If anyone is looking for my transcripts

  from Biden through Hagel, they are over at this diary.  They are in response to the first comment.

  by Ellicatt on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:26:31 PM PDT

•  Kerry asks about open endedness

  does it empower Iraqis to NOT make the decisions they need to make.

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:28:00 PM PDT

•  Sen. Hagel

  Q:  Your hdqtrs in int'l zone last few days has been rocketed mortared, casualties there -- and there seems to me some disconnect in the abstraction we're dealing with today -- what you see as progress and direction -- reality is since the President announced surge Jan 2007, we've lost over a thousand soldiers.  6300 wounded. Those are the realities we're talking about here.

  One particular area -- where do we go from here.  Whether it's the pause, assessment, regional and international diplomatic surge -- (citing reports from other studies) whether in/out, or when we leave, we are going to leave at some point because unsustainable -- how we leave.  

  March last year, you noted "there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq" Citing Gen. Petreaus' remarks in Washington Post article -- "no one feels as there has been sufficient progress."  If we all generally agree that the sacrifices that we're making is - how Iraqis arrive at political accommodation.  The fact, by any analysis we're going to continue to see a bloody Iraq, and Iraq that will ricochet from crisis to crisis.  If we're not holding our process captive to Iraqi responses shouldn't dictate policy.

  Amb. Crocker's testimony, diplomatic surge, assume similar to military surge.  But as I read the testimony, Amb, it's pretty thin.  Political Surge = Iraq's meeting of neighbors in Nov.  (Hagel doesn't know if current efforts constitutes a political surge.  Political support from regional capitals not surging.)

  Citing realities.  What are we doing?  Sec Rice isn't doing anything Kissinger-esque flying around...where is the surge of diplomatic efforts?

  A:  Bi-annual ministerial meetings.  In between, working groups.  Border security meetings.  Does there need to be more activity on the part of the region? Yes.  Arabs need to be more engaged.  We have pressed them on that.  I have made a swing through the region, president, and vice-president visiting.  

  Iran, as noted in statement, we have taken a position that we are prepared to discuss face-to-face with Iran at Iraqi request.  We are ready to participate, up to Iranians.

  [again, sorry that it is rough]

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:29:43 PM PDT

  •  nice re-cap n/t

    by CeeusBeeus on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:30:53 PM PDT

  •  Thanks!

    by noabsolutes on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:31:17 PM PDT

  •  You're doing great work here!

    Its nice to see another transcriptionist, especially since my fingers are needing a break.

    by Ellicatt on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:33:45 PM PDT

    •  Thank you :) A little rusty here. nt

      by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 03:07:16 PM PDT

•  This "Sons of Iraq" BS needs to stop.

  by noabsolutes on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:30:01 PM PDT

•  WEBRANDING

  Please change your diary to #3.  The Mothership has started counting from #1 for this second hearing.  Thank you.

  by gchaucer2 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:30:18 PM PDT

•  Did I just hear Petraeus get snippy with Sen.

  Kerry?  Funny, because I think a United States Senator still outranks a General.

  by Ice Blue on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:32:40 PM PDT

•  The Green Goblin is speaking!!!

  Damn you Spider-Man!!!

  by Pragmaticus on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:32:44 PM PDT

  •  yeah, leading us down the bunny trail! nt

    by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:35:35 PM PDT

•  What's with the bottom-up narrative?

  David Brooks blathered the same crap in NYT this morning.  I have never heard this narrative before.  Is this a new administration talking point to justify the surge?

  by Matt W on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:33:21 PM PDT

  •  I've heard this in previous hearings

    They just keep repeating many of the same phrases in every one of these hearings.

    by kimoconnor on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:34:10 PM PDT

•  Webranding, Please!

  Can you change your title to:
  Live Blog 2, Part 3: Petraeus and Crocker

  We've created some confusion here with 2 hearings and 2 Motherships.

  by donnamarie on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:33:57 PM PDT

•  Green Goblin

  Ugh, Norm Coleman is up. One of the few things I don't miss about Minnesota.

  by smallfrog on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:34:20 PM PDT

  •  Hasn't he been thrown out of office yet?

    Where's Jesse Ventura when you need him?

    by Ice Blue on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:45:39 PM PDT

•  Did anyone catch the line about the "Zero Sum"

  Situation from Petraeus? I was doing something else, and didn't get it all.

  by Practical Progressive on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:34:34 PM PDT

  •  i noticed it too.

    He's talking about the factions in the new government and they have to feel comfortable before they can think beyond zero sum.  Or something like that.

    by dogheaven on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:37:15 PM PDT

    •  Interestingly, he just said Iraq remains

      in a state of anarchy. Petraeus is laying out a Realist model of viewing the interaction of groups inside the government. The Zero Sum situation that creates a prisoner's dillema requires anarchy.

      So much for progress, then.

      by Practical Progressive on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:17 PM PDT

•  A little frustrated?

  Damn I'm more than frustated and certainly not a little.

  by madgranny on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:34:40 PM PDT

•  who's this guy now?

  This Republican is pretty poor.  

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:35:49 PM PDT

  •  norm coleman

    by American in Kathmandu on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:36:52 PM PDT

    •  Hopefully the guy who will loose to Al Franken

      by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:37:32 PM PDT

    •  thanks

      I'll have to give to Franken.

      by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:39:13 PM PDT

    •  offtopic..what you doing in kathmandu?

      by mechlife on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:45:32 PM PDT

  •  Norm Coleman.

    by joy sinha on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:37:11 PM PDT

    •  needs to show he's not Bush puppy for Nov

      election.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:38:11 PM PDT

  •  The Green Goblin

    Also known as Norm Coleman, who is Willem Dafoe's doppelganger.  He has Wellstone's seat.

    by Pragmaticus on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:39:06 PM PDT

    •  he does seem just like Dafoe

      in Spiderman.  It's creepy.

      by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:39:50 PM PDT

•  Petreaus setting next 'benchmark'

  The next set of elections. Until they have them, and Sunnis get representation we will have trouble.

  And what evidence do we have that these elections will do that, much less will happen at all?

  by kimoconnor on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:37:23 PM PDT

  •  You have to admit, PET is much more palatable

    than Crocka'

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:39:25 PM PDT

    •  I guess, but that is not saying much n/t

      by kimoconnor on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:58 PM PDT

    •  He's still Bush's Pet.

      He's about the only general who tells him the war in Iraq is winnable.

      by Ice Blue on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:48:35 PM PDT

  •  Oh excellent

    Then the Shiia can be re-re-radicalized by fear of growing Sunni power. What brilliant planning.

    by Practical Progressive on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:42:40 PM PDT

•  pet - where do they want to take that risk.

  basically he's laying out that he has no choice but to say Continue Continue, because this is the policy he has been given.

  by dogheaven on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:39:52 PM PDT

•  Iran, he couldn't help himself!

  by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:40:01 PM PDT

•  In other times, that would

  be an act of war.  Thanks, Coleman, for reading the script Bush gave you.

  by madgranny on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:40:16 PM PDT

•  Russ is up!! n/t

  by CeeusBeeus on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:40:35 PM PDT

•  Its Russ!!!

  Go Feingold, go!

  by Feeling Blue on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:40:35 PM PDT

•  way beyond Coleman's expectations...

  woohoo!

  Oh, here Coleman goes talking about the new administration and all the changes anticipated.

  A:  From his military perspective as cmdr on the ground, given enormous effort to achieve this progress has to do with conditions -- look and determine where they can make reductions without incurring risks.  In Iraq, in the region.  Where do they take the risks.

  You try to take the hill with what you're given.  If this is the mission, then this is what we believe the resources will be to accomplish that with hypothetical projections -- up to policy makers where they want to take that risk.

  by Quicksilver2723 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:40:44 PM PDT

•  When will they ask how much longer before Draft?

  by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:40:58 PM PDT

•  Feingold! Wahoo

  by madgranny on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:03 PM PDT

•  blaming Iranians

  Coleman-Quds force-"act of war" on part of Iran.  Asks Petreus what has to happen to stop it.  Petreus talks about interdiction in Iraq, and the other stuff is above my pay grade.

  by bigforkgirl on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:13 PM PDT

•  Feingold! This should be good. nt

  by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:16 PM PDT

•  Russ!

  My hero!  Give 'em hell!

  by revelwoodie on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:21 PM PDT

•  Russ - kick some ass!

  by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:26 PM PDT

•  Vice President Feingold?

  Anybody?

  by Pragmaticus on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:41:55 PM PDT

  •  Nah, too liberal and not southerner.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:42:44 PM PDT

  •  I wish

    But it will be more centrist.

    by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:03 PM PDT

    •  That's also true. They are already branding

      Obama as 'too liberal' or some such crap.
      We have to have someone more centrist.

      by soms on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:44:38 PM PDT

•  I love Russ

  He is a real patriot and if I lived in Wisconsin I would vote for him twice!

  by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:42:15 PM PDT

  •  Obama/Feingold eom.

    by soms on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:01 PM PDT

    •  Hey soms

      We must think alike or something.

      by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:44:04 PM PDT

      •  WEIRD MOMENT.;)

        by soms on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:46:23 PM PDT

    •  Oh my god.

      I think I'd have a screamimg orgasm in the polling booth.

      by revelwoodie on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:48:29 PM PDT

  •  Where do you take risks? Al Qaeda or civil war?

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:42 PM PDT

•  Feingold - where do you take the risks.

  crocker - we have to look at this from an iraq perspective because thats where our job is.

  by dogheaven on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:32 PM PDT

•  Feingold goes after another

  Biden moment - getting them to say AQ is a bigger problem elsewhere.

  by madgranny on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:40 PM PDT

  •  But Crocker confounds AQI and Al Qaeda same w/PET

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:44:45 PM PDT

•  Russ

  Iraq - hurting our national security.  Cause celebre for islamic fundamentalists.  We need to address top priority, threat of AQ around the globe, particularly in Afghan.  AQ has ability to conduct attacks in the US, people being trained in tribal areas of Pakistan.  Quotes intelligence.  You keep saying general, where do you take the risks?  Do you agree top priority should be addressing threat posed by AQ?

  crocker - clearly AQ is a strategic threat.  Clearly we have to look at this from an Iraq perspective.  That's our job, our mission.  That's why surge has been so important  --- (my summary - totally avoids the question)

  by American in Kathmandu on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:48 PM PDT

  •  Petraeus

    Yes, agree, but central focus for AQ is in Iraq.  

    Russ pushes that safe haven is in Afghan.  Right?

    Petraeus - have to listen to intelligence, but his focus is Iraq.

    Russ - why does intelligence say it's getting worse everywhere else in the world if you say the key is dealing with them in Iraq?

    Petraeus - but it's Iraq! (my summary).

    by American in Kathmandu on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:45:53 PM PDT

  •  PET, if AQI is getting butt kicked why is AQ

    stronger?

    They are bankrupting US in Iraq!

    Ooh!  Militias Iran and Maliki!  Finally!

    Thank you Russ!

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:47:05 PM PDT

•  I am back!

  by GlowNZ on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:45:05 PM PDT

  •  Yayyy!

    You still have some time -- relax and enjoy the bullshite.

    by gchaucer2 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:46:30 PM PDT

    •  lol

      by GlowNZ on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:48:24 PM PDT

•  I think these hearings

  should have no time limit.

  by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:46:10 PM PDT

  •  you make me giggle woodstock007 .. you do

    by abarefootboy on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:47:02 PM PDT

    •  Thats my role here

      I hope.

      by woodstock007 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:49:33 PM PDT

      •  we are all facets on the jewel of humanity ......

        and yours dear woodstock007 is one of particular beauty and importance .. cause the phlegm of politics chokes up our pipes !

        by abarefootboy on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 02:47:32 PM PDT

  •  the problem is

    many of the senators would just talk for hours instead actually asking a question.  

    it's frustrating.

    by John DE on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:47:29 PM PDT

•  Russ nails it

  Al Queda-re forming ability to attack US from safe haven in Pakistan.  Where do you take the risk?  Top national security priority should be where we focus our efforts? Crocker:  have to look at this from our Iraq perspective.  In Anbar, Bagdhad and the north Al Q was positioning to do strategic planning in Iraq and we've stopped that.  Petreus:  central front of Al Q is in Iraq. Safe havens in Iraq under threat.

  Feinstein:  Intelligence community says it's worse than before in the rest of the world.  Petreus:  my job is in Iraq.  Feinstein:  Bin laden in 2004 says his goal is to destroy us economically.  We're playing into his hands by staying in Iraq. Bam!

  by bigforkgirl on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:46:12 PM PDT

  •  That sequence was just beautiful....

    Russ never disappoints.  He nailed it big time.

    by Ladyhawk on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:48:28 PM PDT

•  AQI is not the same organization

  as the one in Pakistan that planned the 9/11 attacks.

  by Matt W on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:46:14 PM PDT

•  Feingold