PETER WEHNER VS BOB WOODWARD ON
Posted by PrestoPundit on 09/09/2008
BUSH AND THE SURGE. Wehner is a wise and learned Washington insider, well read in American foreign policy, known on both sides of the aisle for his honest, integrity and for playing it straight. Bob Woodward? Not so much. No, Bob Woodward is something different, an ink stained shill for his sources, a shallow celebrity journalist well known for making things up. I’ll go with Wehner on this one.
Worth thinking about:
in settling on a surge of five brigades to Baghdad and 4,000 Marines
to Anbar Province, the President bucked the views of most members of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General
George W. Casey, Jr., then the commander of U.S. Forces in Iraq, John
P. Abizaid, the commander of U.S. Central Command, military analysts,
the entire Democratic Party, much of the Republican Party, most of the
foreign policy establishment, the Iraq Study Group, and many within his
The prevailing view was that of General Casey, whom [in Woodward’s version told] the President in June 2006, “To win, we have to draw down.”
General Casey was exactly wrong, as was the much-heralded
Baker-Hamilton Report, which in its 96 pages dismissed the idea of a
surge in a single paragraph ..
The only real support for the surge was found within the White House
and the National Security Council; from General David Petraeus, who
succeeded General Casey and said, “I want all the force you can give
me” .. ; from Lt. General Ray
Odierno, who had the courage to request the forces he knew were
required despite the opposition from those he reported to; from retired
General Jack Keane, the former Army vice chief of staff .. and, of
course, the early, forceful support of Senator McCain .. At the time the surge was announced, it seemed as if its
supporters could fit in a large phone booth ..