Monday, September 10, 2007

Antiwar Forces Paint Petraeus as Lying Traitor

The antiwar attack machine is gearing up in full force to discredit this week's testimony of General David Petraeus. Over the weekend congressional Democrats and hardline lefty bloggers sought to dampen the credibility of Petraeus and his highly anticipated report by callling him a liar and a traitor.

Angevin13 over at The Oxford Medievalist reported yesterday that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid questioned General Petraeus' honesty. This quote is from ABC News:

This week General David Petraeus will deliver his long-awaited progress report on the surge in Iraq. Faced with mounting reports of the improving security situation in places such as Anbar province, Democrats -who have a vested political interest in seeing a U.S. defeat in Iraq - are trying to attack General Petraeus' honesty.
Angevin notes that a number of previously skeptical war commentators have now reported success on the ground, and adds:

In light of this evidence, questioning Petraeus' credibility, when their own party members' are returning from Iraq and reporting the surge's success, indicates that the Democrats' strategy is bankrupt.
The "Petraeus-as-liar" meme got some steam over at FireDogLake yesterday as well. In a post by "looseheadprop," FDL attacks alleged Republican deceitfulness (with G.W. Bush as the biggest "lying" villain), and warns General Petraeus that he could face charges if his testimony is untruthful:

Lying in this report to Congress would be a very significant thing.

I really hope that the General is spending some time this weekend seriously considering the consequences that could befall him (Oh, and the American people? Oh, and our kids under his command?) if he lies in his report to Congress.

Does he think he is somehow immune from indictment? Does he think his chest full of ribbons entitles him to attempt to perpetrate a fraud upon the Congress and people of the United States?
Not to be outdone, as Pete Hegseth notes, is calling Petraeus a traitor for his reporting of substantial military gains in Iraq. The Hegesth piece appeared last night, and notes:

Tomorrow--as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress--the antiwar group is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Let's be clear: is suggesting that General Petraeus has 'betrayed' his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his 'on the ground' experience does not align with's political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America's military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.
As I've noted many times on this page, the hard left has become desperate in its attempts to discredit the administration, the military, and any other pro-victory contingents in American politics determined to see our efforts through. Markos Moulitsas at Daily Kos has even put up a post telling Petraeus to f--- off.

Isn't that great? Leading antiwar forces have nothing remotely substantive to add to this debate, so they resort to name-calling, allegations of treason, and vulgar profanity. Remember though, we're not talking about fringe groups. Moulitsas himself has proclaimed many times that his movement is the future of the Democratic Party, and has become one of the party's biggest sources of unofficial "issue advertising" attacks.

We need to hear what General Petraeus has to say. There should be no doubts about his honesty, integrity, and determination to do what's best for our nation.

No comments: