9.11.2007

Rebuff? Say what?

The American commander was not only rebuffing the demand for a firm timeline for withdrawing the bulk of American forces, but also putting critics on notice that even when reductions come he has a different vision of the manner in which many of the remaining troops would be used.

(General Proposes Bigger Role in Protecting Iraqis - NYTimes)

Maybe that's just a little bit of verbal overindulgence by the Times. Rebuff indeed.

I haven't read Petraeus's testimony yet and I'm not motivated to do it any time real soon, but David Axe at Wired's Danger Room takes issue with a couple of his salient points:

General David Petraeus is in Washington, D.C., this week trumping the supposed successes of the "surge" plan, but one thing he's not touting is the steady increase in the average number of U.S. troops dying per week.

(U.S. Troop Deaths On the Rise)

And:

True, deaths in Iraq are apparently down since December, based on very sketchy data. But the overall trend since the beginning of the occupation is still up, up, up.

(Petraeus Wrong About Iraq Dead)
"Liar, liar, pants on fire," comments Axe.

Which leads me to believe the general's performance so far (let's not forget we're only at intermission here) has not drawn universal applause.

No comments: