Petraeus: Extensions increase odds of success

[sabra]

Source: ArmyTimes

BAGHDAD — Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of the Multi-National Force-Iraq, said the move to increase war-zone tours for soldiers to 15 months “increases substantially MNF-I’s ability to accomplish its mission.”

Petraeus made the comment late last week in response to an Army Times query about his role in shaping the policy that adds three months to the war tours for all active soldiers, including those already there and those due to deploy. Pentagon leaders, in a bid to get ahead of reports of tour extensions that were leaked to the media, announced the new policy at a hastily called press conference late last Wednesday, while Petraeus slept in the war zone.

However, Petraeus said in a statement that he and his top deputy, Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, provided input on extended combat tours before the hurry-up decision to enact them was made. He said the announced plan “was very much in line with our way of thinking.” He did not respond to a question on what specifically was his input to the plan.

Petraeus learned of the change in policy during a briefing from his staff the morning after the Pentagon announcement, according to a senior military official. The Pentagon was forced to announce the shift “a couple of days” earlier than planned because the information had been leaked to the news media, the senior military official said.


Read more: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/04/Army_Petraeus_extensions_070416/

[soothsayer]

1. they increase the odds of commanders getting fragged

[wakeme2008]

2. This is what this VN Vet thinks too

:shrug:

[saigon68]

9. Petraeus is a War criminal

Maybe some day he will frog marched in the Hague

If it were up to that POS we'd still be in Nam

[UnseenUndergrad]

13. Speaking of the Hague

Anyone willing to compare this current crop of bunglers and party sycophants to Sir Douglas Haig, Mr. "Over the Top" himself?

[saigon68]

24. Sir Douglas Haig, Mr. "Over the Top"

A fitting comparison

Much of the nature of the fighting taking place in the First World War was alien to Haig, a cavalry man through and through. He did not rate very highly the war's new weaponry. "The machine gun is a much over rated weapon," he said in 1915; he made similar remarks over the use of the tank.

The Somme offensive with which Haig's name is most often associated (along with Third Ypres, also known as Passchendaele), began on 1 July 1916.

The first day of the Battle of the Somme saw the British Army suffer the highest number of casualties in its history: 60,000. Whether the attack was a success or not remains an area of controversy: however most historians agree that the cost in human terms was too high for relatively little gain.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

3. The odds?!

What are the odds we're going to be successful? They'd better be one-fucking-hundred percent or you're sending young men and women to their death for no damned reason.

So we're playing the odds? Trusting to luck?

Come On Seven! Big Number Seven! Daddy needs an up-armored Humvee!!

[MurrayDelph]

16. I just bought two lottery tickets

Now I have double the odds of winning as before.

[youngdem]

17. Precisely.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

22. So if we send twice as many troops to Iraq...

[bdamomma]

4. this just sucks for the troops and the families and the psychological and

physically well being of these troops, and they (neocons) say the Dems are undermining the troops, the neocons thugs are abusing these troops.

[babylonsister]

5. It also increases odds that soldiers who have served more than their

fair share of time in Iraq will not live to see the next tour. This pretty much shows what kind of puppet Petraeus is; lookee, dimson DID find one.

[brooklynite]

6. In that case, why stop at three months?

Why not extend tours for six months? A year? How about keeping them there permanently? As long as it "increases the odds" of course...

[Tempest]

7. Extending tours past 3 months is next

Petraeus was giving out the warning that the 3 month extension is just the beginning.

[autorank]

8. This guy is a real "true believer" and, thus, dangerous

He comes across as reasonable in tone but look at the content.

This is his chance to put his pet theories into play. Of course, it's a few years to late
but that doesn't matter to him. It's his chance.

Sad story.

[Karenina]

15. This is some SICK shit.

The inmates are running the asylum...

[autorank]

19. ...and running it badly!

:hi:

[brentspeak]

10. Yeah, and war = peace and 1+1= 3

[daleo]

11. It increases the odds of these soldiers being killed, as well

And the odds of "success" in Iraq are so small as to not be worth thinking about.

[endarkenment]

12. What mission? And why stop there?

WHAT GODDAMN MISSION?

And if +3 works, why not +6? +9?

[gratuitous]

14. Damn

I remember that many of the military rank-and-file were pretty strung out on drugs in Vietnam. The watchword in the early 1970s was that for the really good shit, you got in touch with somebody who'd been overseas. Now, either the quality of psychotropics has greatly increased, or Gen. Petraeus is totally out of his gourd. Whether he achieved it through pharmacology or not is immaterial, I should think. This man doesn't have the brain power to run this operation.

At any rate, the chances of anything that looks like "success" happening in Iraq are infinitessimally small; even two or three times that chance is still vanishingly small.

[PassingFair]

18. Extensions increase odds of success?

Yossarian looked at him soberly and tried another approach. "Is Orr crazy?"

"He sure is," Doc Daneeka said.

"Can you ground him?"

"I sure can but first he has to ask me to. That's part of the rule."

"Then why doesn't he ask you to?"

"Because he's crazy," Doc Daneeka said. "He has to be crazy to keep flying combat missions after all the close calls he's had. Sure I can ground Orr. But first he has to ask me to."

"That's all he has to do to be grounded?"

"That's all. Let him ask me."

"And then you can ground him?" Yossarian asked.

"No, then I can't ground him."

"You mean there's a catch?"

"Sure there is a catch," Doc Daneeka replied. "Catch-22. Anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn't really crazy."

[anotherdrew]

20. I'm sure the troops are glad to hear the general is playing the odds with their lives n/t

[davepc]

21. The longer you are in combat, the statistical probability of getting killed increases.

the longer you are under fire, the more likely you will be killed or injured.

And unlike World War II where one could expect 100 days of combat per year, in Iraq (like Vietnam) that number is much higher.

[Javaman]

23. boy, he's a good little nazi, isn't he? nt

[jmowreader]

25. Perhaps Petraeus can answer this...

So far, no one has given an acceptable answer to these questions:

Question 1: What, exactly, is the mission of MNF-I?
The George W. Bush answer seems to be to instill peace, freedom, democracy and brotherly love in a place that's never had any of those.

The REAL answer, although no one has the balls to admit it, is to return Iraq to exactly the state it was in the day before Kuwait began to slant-drill the al-Rumaila oil field. The reason I choose that date, instead of any other date one may think of, is that it was the last day Iraq was truly in a stasis. (You can't exactly call it "peace" when it's being enforced by the secret police.) When Iraq was in stasis, there was water, electricity, food, excellent medical care, free trade with the world...except for the fact The Scum Of The Earth was in charge, it wasn't that bad a place.

Unfortunately for Petraeus and his grand plans, there are two ways this shit is going to work. Neither one is universally acceptable. They can either invent a new Saddam (and since Bush's daddy invented the last one, this really shouldn't be all that hard), which would negate the reasoning for throwing away the 3200 Americans we've lost in Iraq; or we could divide Iraq into three countries along historical sectarian boundaries, which would piss off two groups: the Turkish government, because an independent Kurdistan is the LAST thing they want sitting on their southern frontier; and the Sunni population, since historical Sunni terrain doesn't have any oil under it.

and...

Question 2: What if we whip a little peace, freedom, democracy and brotherly love on the Iraqis, and they don't want it?

Bush has said on a number of occasions that he doesn't want to leave Iraq in the hands of a Muslim theocracy. (This is different from America, which he wants to leave in the hands of a Christian theocracy. That's different. I have no idea HOW, but it is.) How, without getting Bush the Smarter to gin up another Saddam, is this going to be avoided?