No victory in Iraq, says Petraeus
The outgoing commander of US troops in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, has said that he will never declare victory there.
In a BBC interview, Gen Petraeus said that recent security gains were "not irreversible" and that the US still faced a "long struggle".
When asked if US troops could withdraw from Iraqi cities by the middle of next year, he said that would be "doable".
In his next job leading the US Central Command, Gen Petraeus will also oversee operations in Afghanistan.
He said "the trends in Afghanistan have not gone in the right direction... and that has to be addressed".
Afghanistan remained a "hugely important endeavour", he said.
Earlier this week, President George W Bush announced a cut of 8,000 US troops in Iraq by February - with some 4,500 being sent to Afghanistan.
'Hard but hopeful'
Gen Petraeus took up his role in Iraq in February 2007, as President Bush announced his "surge" plan.
He has overseen its implementation, including the deployment of nearly 30,000 additional troops to trouble spots in Iraq.
In an interview with the BBC's Newsnight programme, Gen Petraeus said that when he took charge in Iraq "the violence was horrific and the fabric of society was being torn apart".
Leaving his post, he said there were "many storm clouds on the horizon which could develop into real problems".
Overall he summed up the situation as "still hard but hopeful", saying that progress in Iraq was "a bit more durable" but that the situation there remained fragile.
He said he did not know that he would ever use the word "victory": "This is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home to a victory parade... it's not war with a simple slogan."
He said al-Qaeda's efforts to portray its jihad in Iraq as going well were "disingenuous". It was, in fact "going poorly", he said.
Of his strategy of establishing joint security stations in key locations, Gen Petraeus said that "you can't secure the people if you don't live with them".
He said it was now fair to say that the Iraqis were standing up as US forces stood down. The confidence and capability of Iraqi forces had increased substantially, he said.
Gen Petraeus did not confirm reports in the media that the US was preparing to withdraw all troops from Baghdad by next summer, but he did say that consideration was being given to removing US forces from a number of cities, including the capital.
Watch the interview in full on the BBC's Newsnight programme, BBC2, Thursday 11 September at 2230 BST.




















Why does the General keep
Why does the General keep referring to a victory, or non victory for us . It should be victory, at the definition of IRAQIES. NATO & the U.S. are only supposed to (support) a country not claim our own definition of VICTORY. IT is time for IRAQ to claim weather victory has been accomplised. STAND up for themselves for a: CHANGE LET us leave with some dignity & respect, for getting rid of (one) key weapon of mass destruction. PLEASE I am NOt trolling.
says
And withdrawing 8000 troops from
Iraq doesn't mean much as they will deploy 8000 in Afghanistan
http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN0848629620080908
I used the word insane earlier today, they are criminally insane.
Every time I hear them say
Every time I hear them say Petraeus' name on the news, it sounds like they are saying "general betray us". Which may be the correct pronunciation.
Thank you Dr. Paul for making my act on what I already knew was right.
*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*
So why is he NOW
saying what he REALLY thinks?
Remind me why I should care
Remind me why I should care what Petraeus has to say.
----------
Liberty for Dummies
----------
Democrats want to be your mommy.
Republicans want to be your daddy.
Libertarians want to treat you like an adult.
At least in this case he speaks truth
"He said he did not know that he would ever use the word "victory": "This is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home to a victory parade... it's not war with a simple slogan."
Everytime I hear one of the Republicrats talk about 'winning' the war I am compelled to say 'Define 'win''. Never seems to be answer forthcoming, which is understandable. There can't be. There isn't one.
The more we persist in this war, the more justification we give to the so-called terrorists. It is a downward spiral which the major parties have yet to ackowledge. I am with Ron Paul on this: let's take away their justification for 'terrorism' and for waging jihad: let's leave their countries, and stop meddling in their affairs. We're better than that.
The old guard says 'we didn't start this war' however that is only partly true. We did not initiate the use of force - (if you consider 9/11 such, it is true) but we have meddled in their affairs - and that can easily be misconstrued as initiation of hostitilities. The 9/11 Commission Report is clear, much as many hate to admit.
are anyone freaking surpriced
When did ever a nation conquer and occupy a nation successfully with force ?
Korea ?
Vietnam ?
Afghanistan ? twice
Iraq ?
When does the fantasy stop ?
(yes I am a bit annoyed today)
/Mike
/Mike
Front Fell Off
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcU4t6zRAKg
It is only ever succesful for a short time.
The Romans wereperhaps the best at it, but that is morebecause ofthe ancient times.
The Ottoman Turks occupied countries for a fairly long time.
Probably the best modern times was the British empire pre WWII. With its long occupations of India, The middle east and Zululand. But it was bloody.
They prolonged it by not only using force....
but in the end it all bankrupted their empires and they did fall...
now do something else for America....
as a non American I still need America to be there and not some has been
/Mike
/Mike
Front Fell Off
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcU4t6zRAKg
Perpetual war
"Evil flourishes when good men do nothing."
—Edmund Burke
A Republic, If You Can Keep It
"you can't win an
"you can't win an occupation"..so what if the "troops" come out of IRAN..what about the base we put there bigger than the vatican? This so sucks.