A discussion about the Petraeus/Crocker testimony

with Gary Anderson, Thomas E. Ricks, Joe Klein and David Sanger

on Monday, September 10, 2007 * * * * *

play

E-mail this video:

Distribute this video:

Share on:

Close
Description

A discussion about the Petraeus/Crocker testimony with retired General Gary Anderson, Joe Klein of Newsweek, David Sanger White House Correspondent for The New York Times & Tom Ricks senior Pentagon correspondent to The Washington Post.

Video Share Options
Share
Buy Amazon DVD
Keywords:
Petraeus
Iraq
testimony
troop surge
Bush
Crocker

In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:

itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/8689

Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.

Close
  • Comments 5
    Post new comment
    1. Mike Logan  09/12/2007 11:53 PM Report

      What was Dracula doing on the united states congressional armed services?

    2. Christopher  09/12/2007 12:11 PM Report

      Basically, the US plans to be there until the "conditions on the ground" allow them to leave. That means indefinite. It is the same position as 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007....

      It is not the goal of Petraeus to criticize the Iraqi occupation; it is the role of Congress. The Congress is still being hampered by the Republican question "What happens if we leave?" They are playing the Iranian bogeyman, that is Iran will step in "and take over" or fill the "power vacuum". Based on the resistance that Iraq is giving the US, Iran can try to take over, good luck.

      By the way, Gary Anderson's contribution was weak, he could have not been there, and he did not contribute in the critical analysis.

    3. anambrose  09/11/2007 10:46 PM Report

      Biden's analysis on News Hour tonight is right:that the sum total of all the words mean Bush & Co will leave it to the next president to figure out what where and when to get out. It's a politically cynical criminally insane waste of our armed forces. If Petraeus was willing to stand up for his troops he would have to say: "My buddy Shinsecki told you we would need 300,00 to 400,00 troops to secure Iraq properly and barring that we should never have gone in in the first place." So to claim that he'll do a 30,000 troop drawdown in the spring of '08 that we've known about since last year as a sign the surge has worked is the same political misdirection. The longer we wait for benchmarks never really seriously considered by BushCo to materialize the more we bleed in troops and treasure, and moral standing in a world we are becoming more alienated from and less

      involved in.

    4. KA  09/11/2007 10:10 PM Report

      Uh, because he wants to keep his job as well as stay out of prison? Seriously, that's a policy statement and completely not his job.

    5. Ferdinand Gajewski, PhD  09/11/2007 02:49 AM Report

      I wonder why General Petraeus didn't begin his

      report by saying the US should not have invaded Iraq in the first place. A mea culpa from American officials is rare as hen's teeth, alas.