• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

W A Flick of Grand Junction writes:

General David Petraeus used misleading statistics and cherry-picked intelligence to make the case for Bush’s Iraq strategy.
The general said we’re making major progress—and we have to stay the course. Sadly, independent assessments show that things in Iraq have gone from bad to worse. General Petraeus says the report was his and his alone—but his outfit has been doing daily calls with the White House political team to coordinate message strategy.
Consider the following facts: Petraeus is using “funny math.” According to the Washington Post, Petraeus and the Pentagon are using a bizarre formula for measuring violence in the country. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count and assasinations count only if you’re shot in the back of the head—not in the front.
Iraqis believe the surge has failed. According to a massive new ABC/BBC poll, every single Iraqi polled in Baghdad, the primary target of the “surge,” said it had made security worse. Iraqis themselves overwhelmingly think the situation in Iraq is deteriorating, in terms of security, political cooperation, and the economy. Overall, 70% think the escalation worsened rather than improved security conditions.
The independent GAO report found that violence is up. A comprehensive GAO report ordered by Congress found that “average number of daily attacks against civilians have remained unchanged from February to July 2007.” In August, things got worse, with civilian casualties rising according to the Associated Press and the Los Angeles Times.
For our troops, it’s the bloodiest summer yet. More U.S. troops died every month this year compared to the same month last year.

This letter has not been edited.

READER COMMENTS

W A Flick of Grand Junction, you are a liar.

You wrote: “Consider the following facts: Petraeus is using “funny math.” According to the Washington Post, Petraeus and the Pentagon are using a bizarre formula for measuring violence in the country. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count and assasinations count only if you’re shot in the back of the head—not in the front.

First of all, you want people to consider “the following facts” and go on to insert your personal, biased opinion. Secondly, General Petreaus was asked directly about that “fact” and he flatly denied it to be a fact. He said under no uncertain terms that assertion is totally false. So, you are a liar.

I must wonder what other lies you wrote in your defeatist screed.

Good call Mountain Cat. I remember the General saying that while he testified. He called the Senator on it in front of the nation.

The reason the Washinton rag and others say it is funny and fuzzy math is because it does not reflect what they want us to believe.

When faced with reality and the truth the left tries real hard to spin. If spin doesnt work deny and lie.

Even the reports people claim contradict the Generals assessment were not as up to date as Patraeus. I've seen where at least two of the reports people cite had to end their analysis 6-8 weeks prior to the Patraeus report so they could meet deadlines.

I can't understand how all these Bush haters can say they think Patraeus is playing footloose with soldiers lives for political gain.

This is a man who has served his country with honor for nearly all of his life.

The Mountain Cat got out of his cage again. He is, typically for him, quite wrong to call the letter writer a liar. The letter writer clearly refers to what the Washington Post printed and to what independent assessments show. They may or may not be true but that the Washington Post and individual assessments printed them is a fact, not a lie.

KW posts "I can't understand how all these Bush haters can say they think Patraeus is playing footloose with soldiers lives for political gain."

Who is he talking about? Is he talking about the letter writer, in which case he is out of his gourd since the letter writer did not come close to what KW claims "all those Bush haters" are saying?

KW doesn't say. It is so much easier to use vague terms such as "all those Bush haters" and "playing footloose" without identifying who or what language he is talking about.

Does he consider that all the people who disagree with Bush are "Bush haters"?

Does he consider that all the people who disagree with General Petraeus' assessment claiming he is playing footloose with soldier's lives?

Does he somehow think it is simply wrong to criticize Bush or Petraeus? You can't tell from a post couched in vague propaganda language.

Marine,theonlytitleyouwilleverearn and KW,

These have got to be the weirdest times I have ever witnessed. Most on the left have such a visceral hatred for Bush that is born out of elementary emotions that they would sacrifice our future strength in favor of a short-sighted defeat in Iraq just to spite the Bush administration. They see an American victory as humiliation for them. And it’s purely out of their disapproval over the current president.

Paul Campos and W A Flick are just two examples of those who openly root against a victorious outcome for our military. Many of them say things that Tokyo Rose would be proud to say. Yet out of the other side of their mouth they will tell us that they support our troops. Evidently the only way they can think of to show their support for our troops is by bringing them home in defeat.

On a slightly different note, although I would fight to the death against censorship of letters to the editor, I cannot understand how the editors of the Rocky Mountain News can feel comfortable with publishing this letter written by W A Flick of Grand Junction. It’s one thing to allow personal opinions to be published. But I think it is an entirely different thing to allow total falsehoods that are presented as facts by a nutty letter writer who obviously and flatly lies about General Patreaus. It just further solidifies my mistrust over the integrity of the media.

I wanted to see if Mountain Cat mistated any facts. He didn't because he didn't state any facts, only his opinion as though they are facts. And he thinks the media lacks integrity. Talk about visceral hatred. Mountain Cat has enough to go around. Not enough mother-love, an overbearing father, or just plain stupidity?

Here we go again - wasn't this posted last week on tuesday by another writer or are you rehashing your old letters WA Flick? More Bush and now Military hating, just a different day.

How in the hell would you know that he cherry picked any "facts" when you yourself are not in a position to judge how things are going on the ground in Iraq. Is it by watching NBC nightly news, CNN or FOX?
Instead you preach to all how you know how bad things are while siting on the toilet with laptop in hand. It is just more partisan "I know the truth better than you" crap that seems to be alive and well in the op-eds.

And of course you "know" that he was reading from a script prepared by the President and his advisors. Right....
Do you think a General with his credentials would do something to jeopardize his fine name and many years of honorable service of which you probably cannot claim for yourself, just to make the current commander in chief happy? I highly doubt this.

You know the funny thing is all of the high praise those in the Democratic and Republican parties had for this man on his confirmation, yet now only a few short months later alor of them are essentially calling him a liar as you did in your letter.

This is what tears this country apart when we have partisan vitriol spewing not only from letter writers but our own representatives within "our" government.
Shameful.

Truth,

Nice try, but I’m not stooping to your level.

September 20, 2007 01:12 PM

Good points.

The left doesn’t seem to have much in the way of a solid direction other than to contradict anything and everything that might be viewed as positive regarding the war in Iraq. I think they often forget what it was they had previously complained about.

They accurately complained that President Bush didn’t listen to his generals about critical aspects in the lead up to the war in Iraq, particularly regarding the need for more troops. By forgetting what they had previously complained about, they now want a reduction of force there if not a complete pull out. Voting 81-0 in January 2007, the Senate approved Lt. General David Petraeus to command U.S. forces in Iraq. Now Democrats who voted him in don’t want to listen to General Petraeus when he explains some factual points of successes in Iraq, insisting that the surge is not working. Harry Reid said that General Petraeus didn’t know what was happening on the ground in Iraq. That’s very funny considering Reid has not been to Iraq for about two years while General Petraeus actually lives there and it is his job to actively study everything happening on the ground in Iraq. General Petraeus was given until September to present a progress report upon which determinations would be made concerning our course in Iraq. But as early as June, before the surge really began, the Democrats in the Senate and in Congress were already demanding an immediate end to the war rather than waiting the critical time given to Petraeus.

Mountain Cat,
How can you possibly let facts get in the way of fiction? You realize that everything you just said is wrong in WA Flicks opnion and that of his talking point and opinion blogs he lives on.
The democrats are hell bent on additional failure and retreat in Iraq to gain more seats in the house and senate and the white house in 2008. They deny this but it is a fact that this is their agenda as Harry reid has even proclaimed himself.

Mountain Cat,truth always refuses to except facts,you are wasting your time.

Keith,

The trouble is Truth probably thinks he cornered me and he probably sees my refusal to play his mind-twist game as a victory. I just was not in the mood to bend my mind enough to try answering his distorted claims.

September 20, 2007 04:32 PM

Yes, I know. I forgot that black is white and down is really up and that north has become south. What the heck was I thinking?

And your point about the Democrats hoping to gain solid footing by means of our failure in Iraq is very accurate. Unfortunately, I did not committed to memory the name of a certain Democrat that said that success in Iraq could be a big problem for his party. That speaks volumes about what their intentions are. I don’t know where the line is drawn before such actions and political speak become treasonous, but it seems that the Democrats are really pushing the envelope.

W A Flick, Paul Campos and other similar thinkers probably love what the New York Times and moveon.org did. I’d bet that the fact that Hillary Clinton voted against condemning moneon.org makes them brim with pride to have her as their front-runner for president.

POST A COMMENT

• DPS teachers doing more for less
• Surfing porn sites at library is troubling
• Psychiatry’s dangers
• Unkind jabs
• Valiant warriors
• MoveOn.org’s ad
• Thanks Colorado
• Iraq war