Petraeus Briefings Chance for Presidential Hopefuls to Strut Iraq Plans
Hillary Clinton, shown here talking with Gen. David Petraeus in January 2007, will have a chance to shine along with the other presidential hopefuls when Iraq briefings get underway next week. (AP Photo)
By Trish Turner
Call it the commander in chief dress rehearsal.
That’s the expectation, at least, when the three remaining presidential candidates take turns Tuesday questioning the nation’s top commander and top diplomat in Iraq during two Senate committees’ briefings on the war.
And presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain could be at a distinct advantage over his potential Democratic rivals, with a plum spot at the front of the questioning line. Democratic Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who have been sharply critical of the war, likely won’t get their inquiries in until much later in the presentations.
McCain’s top surrogate and pal, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said he sees it as a winning day for his colleague from Arizona.
Both men sit on the Armed Services Committee, first stop for Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker Tuesday morning. McCain, as top Republican on that committee, not only gets to make an opening statement but also gets the first crack, after his chairman, at questioning the witnesses. McCain will have the opportunity to defend last year’s troop buildup, something he advocated.
“This is sort of a dress rehearsal of who is best prepared to be commander in chief, who has the best understanding of what has happened, what was wrong in Iraq, and how to fix it,” Graham said. “I think it’s a chance to showcase his commander-in-chief credentials.”
Clinton won’t be quite as lucky. She’ll have to wait for eight of her Democratic colleagues to have their five-minute questioning period before getting her own moment in the spotlight. And since Republicans and Democrats alternate in their questioning, she could end up 17th in the queue, behind Graham, if all of her colleagues show (and they are expected to).
Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said he’s not inclined to let the testimony slide into campaign fanfare and has no intention of giving the candidates preferential treatment.
“We can’t allow a political campaign to impact our operations here,” Levin said emphatically. “The American people want a discussion of policy. … They do not want to partisanize this issue. These are matters of life and death.”
The chairman acknowledged the candidate are likely to steal the spotlight, though.
“I think naturally there’s going to be a lot of focus on them. … The media will look at the candidates, scrutinize them and probably read all kinds of things into their answers, into their body language, into their greetings, into their hugs, into their coughs, into their sneezes,” he said.
As for Obama, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and a junior member at that, he’ll have to wait until late in the day to get his chance to grill the general and ambassador.
His chairman, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., himself a former presidential candidate, said Obama won’t get any special treatment either.
“The American people are sick of this crap,” Biden said, though he wasn’t able to resist a dig at McCain.
“I love the idea of McCain having to explain what’s going on here and why it’s (the situation in Iraq) working so well. That’s just fine,” he said. “But the last thing we should be doing is viewing this through a political prism. This is life and death stuff that we get into. … A whole lot more guys and women are going to die there.”
Graham predicted McCain will focus on what he sees as a successful call for more troops very early on.
“I think John will try to highlight the fact that better security was the key to changing Iraq, and that with a better security footprint, with a new military footprint, more troops employed in a different fashion, we see things we did not see before and all the fundamentals are moving in the right direction,” he said.
Graham said he saw too big themes for McCain: Did his theory about sending more combat troops as a path to better security result in a more stable Iraq? Second, what would the consequences be of shifting strategy and adopting the Clinton-Obama plans for troop withdrawal?
Graham, with a grin, reminded reporters, “She (Clinton) said last time you’d have to suspend belief to believe the surge is working. I think that might come up a couple times.”
But the briefings are also an opportunity for Clinton and Obama to press hard on why the military is still mired in the conflict more than five years after it began. Both candidates advocate a swift withdrawal from the region upon taking the oath of office, though they have left open the door for some residual forces to stay in Iraq.
The tables will likely turn on McCain for a comment he made in January at a town hall meeting, where a participant asked the senator about a statement President Bush made that troops could stay in Iraq for 50 years.
“Maybe 100,” McCain replied. “As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it’s fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting, equipping and motivating people every single day.”
Both of his Democratic opponents have taken him to task for these comments, saying McCain wants to continue the war indefinitely.
McCain charges he’s being misquoted and says he’s only talking about a long-term troop presence, but Obama stood by his remarks Friday.
“I know that lately conservative commentators have suggested that somehow I’ve been unfair to simply quote back what John McCain has suggested, which is that we should maintain an occupation for as long as it takes, up to 100 years or — ya know I had been leaving out the quote of 10,000 years — I have not misquoted him,” he said.
Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and a Clinton supporter, said he thinks this will be a time for Clinton to shine.
Clinton and Obama each will be able to voice their views on the war, Menendez said. He expects Clinton to display her “depth of knowledge on the issue … about the broader aspects of diplomacy and political reconciliation in many parts of the world.”
Apparently my previous submission was too strong even for Fox News which supposedly prints the truth from Commentary. Let me try this again. Obama is a looser who should not be allowed to interview General Petralus. Enough said, he has no idea of Foreign Policy for the United States.
I agree that Obama going late is an advantage for him, because he will be listening to the others so he can play Me, Too like he does in the debates. He’ll have his large campaign staff looking stuff up for him.
He’s been called to task by the media (finally!) for repeating the 100 years comment, but he does whatever he wants, and his supporters excuse everything he does. There is a totally different standard. I really am afraid this man is going to win the election. I know the Republicans think they can beat him, but I don’t think anyone really has any idea how blindly his supporters follow him. Nothing the Republicans come up with will stick, either.
You know what makes my day??. All the far lefties monitoring FOX news….making useless, meaningless comments. Tells you something..doesn’t it!!!!. Welcome lefties, hand around long enough and you will know…fair and balanced!.
I want everyone to pay close attention when obama and hillery question General Patraeus. You will see two people in awe of pure honor and character, watch their mannerisms for the truth, and you will realize that McCain is the one to lead this nation…the only one.
How could any subversive like clinton or Obama, who has continually undermined the troops and their mission shine? Neither of these two lightweights is remotely qualified to be commander in chief of our valiant military services. They are sleazy appeasing liberals who cannot control their own family members, much less our nation.
God forbid that either of these wusses is elected by an ignorant electorate.
G.L.Gunderman
U.S. Army Retired
Obama should ask him what does he meen by a 12 deployment and 12 months in the state side that is a dumb idea, we all no you train before you go to war so cleary you would spend about 7 months being at home and 5 months going back and forth too training wich means you will be deploye away from your family in the states.
Personally I would have thought that McCain and Clinton would have demanded that Obama had first seat in addressing Petraeus. Would have shown within the first few minutes of his opening his mouth that he had not a clue of what he was talking about or what realistically can be done to draw this war to a close. Instead let’s give him a pillow and interject lots of breaks so that he can be comfortable and have his council of advisors behind him to tell him what to say and do. We all know that without them he is in a world of hurt in this forum.
It would be an interesting concept to be able to only read words and opinions of our expert candidates without knowing who said what, or without knowing who asked the opinions. My guess is that the leading and possibly the most important statements could be from the mouth of the candidate that follows the actual opinion of “the leader”, as 1st response answer is usually fed upon by the next candidate being questioned. This always seems to give Obama the chance to take a deep breath and use his little gift of gab to make more intelligent responses seem less truth or of less importance. In grade school I was subjected to being called upon after the President of the student body, the prom queen, the most likely to succeed etc., and I was always RIGHT THERE WITH A GREAT RESPONSE, EVEN IF I KNEW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER. I also had that wonderful gift of gab and a good ear. My point is simple. lend an honest ear to the subject matter and then research the factual information available to make your own determination about who is actually experienced emough to be your next Commander and Chief! You had better be looking and listening to Hillary Clinton. Don’t let someone who appears to be using others to obtain his gains on the campaign trail. Take the actual time needed to review and study the health plans of each candidate Take the time to find out why different measures created different responses for the Iraq war issues. Did Obama walk the streets of 911 with Bush, Clinton and, of course, the Mayor of New York City. Did Obama do anything right away about the possible health dangers involving the aftermath of 911? Does Obama even really have a clue? The problem is, when he speaks, it sounds like he does. McCain has been there and done that….he needs to get over it because he’s not the only one who has suffered from the irony of war. Hillary did not fight in any war, except the war of poverty, the war of the economy, and the constant battle of politics in her race for the White House. When that battle is won, America will shine again in the eyes of our world neighbors, as well as, in our own yards and neighborhoods. I don’t care if she is purple, she is the right candidate to bring home to the White House. By the way, she don’t care if your are purple either, her eyes see you through her heart and she has you in mind at 3AM through 3PM to…3AM. Count on Hillary Clinton!
It would be an interesting concept to be able to only read words and opinions of our expert candidates without knowing who said what, or without knowing who asked the opinions. My guess is that the leading and possibly the most important statements could be from the mouth of the candidate that follows the actual opinion of “the leader”, as 1st response answer is usually fed upon by the next candidate being questioned. This always seems to give Obama the chance to take a deep breath and use his little gift of gab to make more inteligent responses seem less truth or of less importance. In grade school I was subjected to being called upon after the President of the student body, the prom queen, the most likely to succeed etc., and I was always RIGHT THERE WITH A GREAT RESPONSE
A much needed reality check for the “junior senator” to go behind Hillary. When are people going to see him for what he is, less than an empty suit. A charming camillion who will do and say anything knowing his inconsistancies wont get carefully examined due to the melting hot racial climate in MSM and the greater American society.