Comments on: McCain Moment: Confusion Over Petraeus’ Role

By: SFC B

SFC B — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:47:08 +0000

Honestly, if a personnel sergeant in the Army Reserve is aware of the scuttlebutt regarding Petraeus’ next assignment a member of the Armed Services Committee would probably have a good idea as well.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:58:03 +0000

Did McNovocain know something we didn’t when he said that?
Hmmmm. Conspiring minds wanna know.

By: sfcb

sfcb — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:35:25 +0000

Pending confirmation from the Senate, General Petraeus has been named to replace Admiral Fallon as the commander of CENTCOM, which is repsonsible for US operations in Afghanistan as well as the rest of the region. So John McCain was about two weeks premature in suggesting that GEN Petraeus should be consulted regarding redeploying troops from Iraq to Afghanistan. I suppose that whether you think McCain was having a “senior moment” or was being insightful during Petraeus’ report is a matter of your party affiliation.

By: Sean D. Martin

Sean D. Martin — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:23:40 +0000

Gotta agree with CSS. That seems far too subtle and forward-looking an interpretation to ever get credited to McCain.

By: C.S.Strowbridge

C.S.Strowbridge — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 07:03:43 +0000

“Or it could have something to do with the fact that the speculation is Petraeus’ next command will be that of US Forces in Europe, which is also responsible for NATO. If Petraeus were to become the NATO commander then he would be responsible for US operations in Afghanistan.”

Given McCain’s ‘confusion’ lately, this seems a stretch. It is much more likely that he simply doesn’t know what he is talking about.

By: SFC B

SFC B — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:17:21 +0000

Or it could have something to do with the fact that the speculation is Petraeus’ next command will be that of US Forces in Europe, which is also responsible for NATO. If Petraeus were to become the NATO commander then he would be responsible for US operations in Afghanistan.

By: Sean D. Martin

Sean D. Martin — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:37:26 +0000

Was this another example of McCain not actually knowing something basic about the area he claims to be most expert at? Or was it just a badly phrased statement that he wouldn’t take resources away from Petraeus without confirming Petraeus could do without them?

Given his track record I’d think it was the former, but I’m getting rather tired of both sides parsing out every specific phrasing anyone uses. This focusing on particular word choices is a result of both political campaigns becoming nit-picky rather than issue-oriented and politicians not being questioned on what their positions actually are.

Couldn’t whether McCain was being clueless or misspoke be resolved easily with a really simple follow up question?