Does Iraq War Make America Safer?

[Sasquatch]

Sen. Warner to Gen. Petraeus.

LINK

[Crown Royal]

This comment is the one I agree with:

"I'm a huge opponent of the war, but quite honestly I thought his answer was on the money. It really isn't his job to determine if the war makes America 'safer'. It's his job to conduct the war he is ordered to wage."

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

This comment is the one I agree with:

"I'm a huge opponent of the war, but quite honestly I thought his answer was on the money. It really isn't his job to determine if the war makes America 'safer'. It's his job to conduct the war he is ordered to wage."

To a certain extent I agree but then again it is also a cop out.

He has that task(blindly waging war) by being an expert in the area of waging war and in doing so should have an opinion about its effects.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by jterrell

To a certain extent I agree but then again it is also a cop out.

He has that task(blindly waging war) by being an expert in the area of waging war and in doing so should have an opinion about its effects.

Why? He isn't a policy maker. He runs a military. There is absolutely no place for the military leadership to take place in policy making. The end result of that is dangerous. He might have an opinion, like all of us, but that isn't part of his expert testimony - he isn't an expert policy maker.

[trickblue]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

This comment is the one I agree with:

"I'm a huge opponent of the war, but quite honestly I thought his answer was on the money. It really isn't his job to determine if the war makes America 'safer'. It's his job to conduct the war he is ordered to wage."

Exactly... soldier are supposed to complete orders...

It wasn't a question he could honestly answer as he's been overseas for four years now...

[Crown Royal]

PS - For the most part I detest congressional hearings.

[Sasquatch]

But the administration claims that we are in Iraq to protect the United States, so isn't it reasonable to ask the man in charge of that operation whether or not the mission is succeeding in that respect? If not him, who? The Iraq Study Group?

[trickblue]

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

But the administration claims that we are in Iraq to protect the United States, so isn't it reasonable to ask the man in charge of that operation whether or not the mission is succeeding in that respect? If not him, who? The Iraq Study Group?

No... it's reasonable to ask the man if his objective is being accomplished...

It's like asking a district manager if his company's mission statement is being met company wide... He doesn't know. He manages his district and reports to his superiors on his progress...

He's not a politician. He's not a bureaucrat. He's not a CEO. He's a manager...

[Sasquatch]

Originally Posted by trickblue

No... it's reasonable to ask the man if his objective is being accomplished...

It's like asking a district manager if his company's mission statement is being met company wide... He doesn't know. He manages his district and reports to his superiors on his progress...

He's not a politician. He's not a bureaucrat. He's not a CEO. He's a manager...

So who is qualified to give this assessment if not the military commander in charge of the largest theater, both in terms of manpower and expenditure, in the GWOT?

I don't think your analogy is a good one. He overseas all coalition forces in Iraq which supposedly is the MAIN front in the GWOT. I'm not sure that's the equivalent of a mere district manager.

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by trickblue

He's not a politician. He's not a bureaucrat. He's not a CEO. He's a manager...

So, you're saying it takes a politician or a bureaucrat to tell us if we're safer from terrorism as a result of the war in Iraq??

Excuse me if I'd rather listen to the men in the field than that pack of liars...

Methinks your argument is rooted in being a little afraid to hear what our military leaders have to say on this subject...

[jterrell]

To answer the initial question I'd say no.

The fact is the money we are spending at home on terror prevention details that.

If we were gonna be safe merely by fighting in Iraq we could all juts hopa plane without the hour wait for pat down.

Build up the intelligence community and have them work in steps with other gov't organizations not back bite each other(nsa.cia.fbi.homeland security et al)

We'll be safer when we are more effective and ferreting out the little scum that wants to enter and do harm here.

Insuring they can't just walk across the border unchecked would be a great first step.