# Petraeus-Crocker hearings: Tell 'em, Senator Feingold! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 9, 2008, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624 "2008-04-09T15:56:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/21 "2008-04-09T19:33:36Z")
[QUOTE=bannerrefugee] I think Iran, Turkey, Syria actually all the Middle Eastern countries have an interest in seeing a stable Iraq. Unfortunately I think being seen as helping the US would probably be rather unpopular with these countries populations. [/QUOTE] I like the idea of a halfway point between simply pulling out and letting the chips fall where they will and **Shayna** ’s ideal. Tell the neighboring countries when the last US troops will be withdrawn from Iraq. Tell them that they have until then to put a plan together for the region. If they want the US’s involvement in the process, great, but it’s their concern. It’s a form of strong-arming, but would probably get better results than sitting around waiting indefinitely for the Iraqis to stand up. Shoot, any sort of timetable would get better results. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/22 "2008-04-09T19:41:14Z")
We could frame it as: “We’re leaving, whether you help us make it an orderly withdrawal, or whether you don’t. We would prefer that you do, and the end result if you do is probably more closely aligned with your own best interests. Let’s talk turkey. I mean, let’s start serious negotiations.” ETA: Errr, what **Bosstone** said. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/23 "2008-04-09T19:46:09Z")
[Obama calls for talks with Iran over Iraq](http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080408220807.ud9xv11e&show_article=1) > [@](#): > > Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Tuesday called for a “diplomatic surge” including talks with US foe Iran, to help stabilize the situation in Iraq. > > The Illinois Senator battling Hillary Clinton for his party’s nomination called for more pressure on the Iraqi government to embrace political reconciliation and a regional “diplomatic surge that includes Iran.” > > “We should be talking to them as well,” Obama told the top US General in Iraq David Petraeus and US ambassador to Baghdad Ryan Crocker. > > “I do not believe we are going to be able to stabilize the situation without that” said Obama, adding that a plan for US troop withdrawals was needed to force Iraqi factions to work together. > > “I think that increased pressure in a measured way, in my mind, and this is where we disagree, includes a timetable for withdrawal. Nobody is asking for a precipitous withdrawal.” > > . . . I think he’s right, and we need to do the same with Turkey, Syria, etc. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/24 "2008-04-09T20:10:34Z")
More than that, a tremendous opportunity is being squandered with Iran. If we dropped out aggressive posture towards Iran, publicly and with fanfare, we would undercut the power of the hostile _mullahs_ enormously, we are the boogeyman that keeps them in power. A moderate, more secular state could arise in Iran without just about zero investment on our part. We couldn’t ask for a better ally against AlQ, they hate each other’s guts to a spectacular degree. Outside of the value of peace, it makes excellent sense in a cold-eyed _realpolitik_ way. As a picture can be worth a thousand words, a single olive branch could be worth a thousand rounds of ammunition. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/25 "2008-04-09T20:12:44Z")
[QUOTE=Mosier] But plenty of people would love to see a stablized Iraq, most importantly all of its neighbors. They might not care about helping clean up our mess, but they sure don’t want a collapsed hotbed of violence and chaos in their back yard. [/QUOTE] Perhaps they do, perhaps they don’t. The Iraq disaster has been a [boon for opponents of democracy](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102501893.html) and enemies of America. They may not want to give up that bad example. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/26 "2008-04-09T20:15:44Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] Bush: “Please help.” Turkey, Syria, et al: “Go fuck yourself.” Obama: “Please help.” Turkey, Syria, et al: “What do you need?” That’s just my humble opinion. [/QUOTE] And it’s wrong; specifically, it’s the sort of wrong answer you’d expect from someone working on Obama’s campaign. I don’t mean that to be mean, but it’s true; your opinion seems a little insular. Bush may be internationally unpopular, but I’ve got a little secret for you; out here outside the United States, when it gets right down to brass tacks, we don’t really care who the President is. (For that matter, you can apply the same standard to any country; here in Canada we don’t really give a hoot who the President of France is, and I’m sure they feel the same way about us.) What matters is what we’re gonna get out of it. If Obama’s Presidency would help Canada, I want him elected. If Obama were actually likely to get rid of NAFTA (which apaprently he won’t, contrary to what he told the folks in Ohio, har har, but this is hypothetical) then I’d pray every night for him to lose to McCain, even though I think McCain is a dirtbag. If the U.S. wants substantial help, the U.S. has to pay. There’s no free lunch. We like your movies and everything, but we’re all going to do whatever is in our national interests, whether or not it helps you. If helping the USA out of Iraq would help Canada we’ll mostly be all for it, and if it won’t, well, tough noogies. They’ll say the same thing in Turkey, Syria and list as many countries as you care to name. That’s how you treat the rest of the world and that’s how EVERY country treats the rest of the world; even foreign aid usually has strings attached, and is heavy on the PR. Nobody’s gonna give Obama a break just because he seems like a nice guy. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/27 "2008-04-09T20:21:47Z")
You’re certainly entitled to that viewpoint, **RickJay** , but I simply don’t agree with it. I also take issue with your use of the word “we” throughout. You’re free to speak for yourself, but I don’t think you can legitimately speak for Iran, Turkey, Syria, or any other nation. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/28 "2008-04-09T20:35:35Z")
I’m not sure he can speak for anyone else in Canada, for that matter, **Shayna** , but what he’s saying about the interests of nations does have the ring of, plausibility, if not truth. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2008, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/29 "2008-04-09T21:06:54Z")
[QUOTE=kaylasdad99] I’m not sure he can speak for anyone else in Canada, for that matter, **Shayna** , but what he’s saying about the interests of nations does have the ring of, plausibility, if not truth. [/QUOTE] Well part of it elicits a shrug of the shoulders and ‘so what?’ from me. Give and take is what negotiation and cooperation is all about. That still doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t do it, and it still doesn’t mean that no one would be any more willing to work with Obama than they were willing to work with Bush. Here’s what I like about Obama’s approach, which appears to differ with Feingold’s ‘leave now and abandon the problem in everyone else’s lap’ philosophy, not to mention Bush’s “I’m the Decider” policy. . . > [@](#): > > [Renewing American Leadership](http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070701faessay86401/barack-obama/renewing-american-leadership.html?mode=print) > > . . . > > After thousands of lives lost and billions of dollars spent, many Americans may be tempted to turn inward and cede our leadership in world affairs. But this is a mistake we must not make. America cannot meet the threats of this century alone, and the world cannot meet them without America. We can neither retreat from the world nor try to bully it into submission. We must lead the world, by deed and by example. > > Such leadership demands that we retrieve a fundamental insight of Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy – one that is truer now than ever before: the security and well-being of each and every American depend on the security and well-being of those who live beyond our borders. The mission of the United States is to provide global leadership grounded in the understanding that the world shares a common security and a common humanity. > > . . . > > At the same time [we are making a phased withdrawal of troops], we must launch a comprehensive regional and international diplomatic initiative to help broker an end to the civil war in Iraq, prevent its spread, and limit the suffering of the Iraqi people. To gain credibility in this effort, we must make clear that we seek no permanent bases in Iraq. We should leave behind only a minimal over-the-horizon military force in the region to protect American personnel and facilities, continue training Iraqi security forces, and root out al Qaeda. > > . . . > > Throughout the Middle East, we must harness American power to reinvigorate American diplomacy. Tough-minded diplomacy, backed by the whole range of instruments of American power – political, economic, and military – could bring success even when dealing with long-standing adversaries such as Iran and Syria. Our policy of issuing threats and relying on intermediaries to curb Iran’s nuclear program, sponsorship of terrorism, and regional aggression is failing. Although we must not rule out using military force, we should not hesitate to talk directly to Iran. Our diplomacy should aim to raise the cost for Iran of continuing its nuclear program by applying tougher sanctions and increasing pressure from its key trading partners. The world must work to stop Iran’s uranium-enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. At the same time, we must show Iran – and especially the Iranian people – what could be gained from fundamental change: economic engagement, security assurances, and diplomatic relations. Diplomacy combined with pressure could also reorient Syria away from its radical agenda to a more moderate stance – which could, in turn, help stabilize Iraq, isolate Iran, free Lebanon from Damascus’ grip, and better secure Israel. > > . . . > > We must refocus our efforts on Afghanistan and Pakistan – the central front in our war against al Qaeda – so that we are confronting terrorists where their roots run deepest. Success in Afghanistan is still possible, but only if we act quickly, judiciously, and decisively. We should pursue an integrated strategy that reinforces our troops in Afghanistan and works to remove the limitations placed by some NATO allies on their forces. Our strategy must also include sustained diplomacy to isolate the Taliban and more effective development programs that target aid to areas where the Taliban are making inroads. > > I will join with our allies in insisting – not simply requesting – that Pakistan crack down on the Taliban, pursue Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, and end its relationship with all terrorist groups. At the same time, I will encourage dialogue between Pakistan and India to work toward resolving their dispute over Kashmir and between Afghanistan and Pakistan to resolve their historic differences and develop the Pashtun border region. If Pakistan can look toward the east with greater confidence, it will be less likely to believe that its interests are best advanced through cooperation with the Taliban. > > Although vigorous action in South Asia and Central Asia should be a starting point, our efforts must be broader. There must be no safe haven for those who plot to kill Americans. To defeat al Qaeda, I will build a twenty-first-century military and twenty-first-century partnerships as strong as the anticommunist alliance that won the Cold War to stay on the offense everywhere from Djibouti to Kandahar. > > . . . > > REBUILDING OUR PARTNERSHIPS > > To renew American leadership in the world, I intend to rebuild the alliances, partnerships, and institutions necessary to confront common threats and enhance common security. Needed reform of these alliances and institutions will not come by bullying other countries to ratify changes we hatch in isolation. It will come when we convince other governments and peoples that they, too, have a stake in effective partnerships. > > Too often we have sent the opposite signal to our international partners. In the case of Europe, we dismissed European reservations about the wisdom and necessity of the Iraq war. In Asia, we belittled South Korean efforts to improve relations with the North. In Latin America, from Mexico to Argentina, we failed to adequately address concerns about immigration and equity and economic growth. In Africa, we have allowed genocide to persist for over four years in Darfur and have not done nearly enough to answer the African Union’s call for more support to stop the killing. I will rebuild our ties to our allies in Europe and Asia and strengthen our partnerships throughout the Americas and Africa. > > Our alliances require constant cooperation and revision if they are to remain effective and relevant. NATO has made tremendous strides over the last 15 years, transforming itself from a Cold War security structure into a partnership for peace. But today, NATO’s challenge in Afghanistan has exposed, as Senator Lugar has put it, “the growing discrepancy between NATO’s expanding missions and its lagging capabilities.” To close this gap, I will rally our NATO allies to contribute more troops to collective security operations and to invest more in reconstruction and stabilization capabilities. > > . . . I think that to say that these policies and practices will engender no more cooperation and conciliation that those of George W. Bush, is wrong. I think world leaders will be much more inclined to work with President Obama, who wants to work _together_ to solve some of the global problems we face, than with George W. Bush who says, “It’s my way or the highway.” ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/30 "2008-04-10T16:19:37Z")
[Antiwar.com Blog - Antiwar blog](http://www.antiwar.com/blog/) Ron Paul also had some serious questions that will now and forever go unanswered by the administration. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/31 "2008-04-10T16:21:24Z")
[QUOTE=Onomatopoeia] …and oh yeah, **Obama/Feingold '08!** Yeah, that’s right. I said it 🙂 [/QUOTE] :dubious: There’s gonna be an uphill battle as it is, and you wanna put a **Jew** on the ticket **too?!** 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/32 "2008-04-10T16:28:36Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] :dubious: There’s gonna be an uphill battle as it is, and you wanna put a **Jew** on the ticket **too?!** [/quote] In an ideal world …sigh ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/33 "2008-04-10T16:42:01Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] More than that, a tremendous opportunity is being squandered with Iran. If we dropped out aggressive posture towards Iran, publicly and with fanfare, we would undercut the power of the hostile _mullahs_ enormously, we are the boogeyman that keeps them in power. A moderate, more secular state could arise in Iran without just about zero investment on our part. We couldn’t ask for a better ally against AlQ, they hate each other’s guts to a spectacular degree. Outside of the value of peace, it makes excellent sense in a cold-eyed _realpolitik_ way. As a picture can be worth a thousand words, a single olive branch could be worth a thousand rounds of ammunition. [/QUOTE] I agree wholeheartedly with this. We need to set aside our differences with them as much as we can and just sit down and talk with them. This approach would really put the ball in their court, so to speak. They’re so used to an aggressive USA stance since the Shah was deposed and the hostages taken that they might not know how the shoe feels on the other foot! But it is certainly worth trying, as the whole war thing isn’t going over so hot right now. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2008, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/34 "2008-04-11T05:57:17Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] I think that to say that these policies and practices will engender no more cooperation and conciliation that those of George W. Bush, is wrong. [/quote] IMHO, to attribute that characterization to **RickJay** ’s post somewhat overstates his position. > [@Shayna](#): > > I think world leaders will be much more inclined to work with President Obama, who wants to work _together_ to solve some of the global problems we face, than with George W. Bush who says, “It’s my way or the highway.” I quite agree. But even granting the less arrogant mien that we anticipate in an Obama presidency, the other nations of the world will surely consider his initiatives through the lenses of their own interests. In my view, your post above seemed to be neglecting to take that into consideration. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2008, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/35 "2008-04-11T16:52:09Z")
[QUOTE=kaylasdad99] IMHO, to attribute that characterization to **RickJay** ’s post somewhat overstates his position. [/quote] Well then perhaps he should clarify it, because that’s exactly what I got out of it. > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > I quite agree. But even granting the less arrogant mien that we anticipate in an Obama presidency, the other nations of the world will surely consider his initiatives through the lenses of their own interests. In my view, your post above seemed to be neglecting to take that into consideration. I don’t believe I suggested or implied anywhere that other nations don’t have their own interests at heart, in fact, just the opposite. What I’m saying is that what differs about Obama over Bush is that, in my opinion, Obama actually gets that, where Bush doesn’t. Here’s an example of what I mean, taken from one of the blogs on the Obama site (bolding mine): > [@hollywaz](#): > > [saving face: middle east pysche](http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/jessicaslider/gGBWc9/commentary) > > i was having a conversation with a colleague of mine who works for the foreign office in Damascus Syria. we met at diplomats/HM treasury office bi annual strategy meet in London. anyway we got round to discussing US foreign policy and how that would drastically change with the election of Barack Obama. he then went on to indicate that **the present administration failed to understand the psyche of the Arab and middle eastern culture.** he indicated that on numerous ocassions the Syrians sent out feelers on how to resolve the crisis in Lebanon and there involvement in Iraq. they were looking for a way out without losing face. they indicated that a meeting with the US president would give them that way out even though it would not go down well with public opinion in the middle east. you see it is important in Arab culture not to lose face. however it is also important to give the image that one has made the effort to negotiate or talk to they other party. this is the essence of their maljis. its the same philosophy that Patraues used to get the Sunni to turn against al-Qaeda. he met with their tribal leaders and gave them the respect they craved. in return they softened there positions and agreed with the help of funding to fight AQ. so what does this mean in the scheme of things? > > **well Barrack is the only person willing to talk to all leaders be they friend or foe. in essence he is sending a message to world leaders that America will have a different outlook. this is why my colleague says the Arab world is buzzing.** In Syria you will be surprised that underneath the surface there are huge numbers of people who still love what America has always stood for. I don’t believe for a moment that Barack Obama won’t take the interests of other nations into consideration when reaching out to them for their cooperation. Isn’t that the whole point of getting them involved – helping secure their own interests in the region? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2008, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/36 "2008-04-11T16:54:24Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] I don’t believe for a moment that Barack Obama won’t take the interests of other nations into consideration when reaching out to them for their cooperation. [/QUOTE] You realize, of course, that many Americans, if they did not believe that either, would hold it against him in November. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2008, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624/37 "2008-04-11T21:33:24Z")
Perhaps a better way of spinning that would be to assert that President Obama would not forget that his most effective tool for motivating other nations to assist with his initiatives is going to be an appeal to those nations’ own self interests. **Shayna** , I really believe you and I are on the same page on this point, or at least singing from the same hymnal. Have a good time at the caucus! 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/petraeus-crocker-hearings-tell-em-senator-feingold/444624.md?page=1)