Community | October 02, 2009 | 55 comments

Gen. Odierno: May not be possible to declare victory in Iraq

Image
bansheewail
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- It isn't clear whether the United States will ever be able to declare victory in Iraq, the top U.S. commander there said Thursday.


Army Gen. Ray Odierno speaks to reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday.

"I'm not sure we will ever see anyone declare victory in Iraq, because first off, I'm not sure we'll know for 10 years or five years," Army Gen. Ray Odierno told reporters at the Pentagon.

About 123,000 U.S. troops are in Iraq now, and President Obama says all combat forces will be gone by the end of August 2010, leaving as many as 50,000 noncombat troops to advise and train Iraqi forces before leaving by the end of 2011.

Odierno has said he wants to draw down the U.S. forces at a faster rate than planned if the security situation allows it. On Thursday, he said he expected the number of U.S. troops to drop to 120,000 by the end of October, and to as few as 110,000 by the end of 2009.
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Current Tonight,   US Politics
  2. tags:
    News News and Politics Iraq US Politics 4 more
  3.     
    |

55 comments // Gen. Odierno: May not be possible to declare victory in Iraq

  • mothowl
  • SamuraiDave
    • 0
      SamuraiDave  
    • Militarily the victory occured when Saddam was captured but since the war was supposedly over WMDs which were never discovered the original main objective got lost in the haze.

      With Afghanistan the objective has always been clearer - destroy Al Queda facilities and capture Osama Bin Laden. Since the Taliban chose to aid him they became his allies and thus our enemies. Now since those objectives had not been completely met in 2003, why on earth did we rush into another war over some possible scud missiles in the desert?

      The objectives kept changing in Iraq to the point people who still supported the war were citing different reasons for being over there from establishing democracy to getting the terrorists who did 911.

      As to the apparent failure of nation building in Iraq, there is too much ignorance coming from both sides of the political fence in America.

      Those who pass the problem off as simply as religious or tribal really don't understand the situation. When the area was under the Ottomans you didn't have this kind of in-fighting. There were regions of semi-autonomy under the umbrella of the Ottoman Empire.

      Suddenly in 1919 those regions were forced to contend for the limited resources of one created nation - regions that had little national identity with each other to create any sense of unity.

      The best example of what has been happening is former Yugoslavia - once the iron curtain fell, the various regions did not feel a sense of Yugoslavian nationality to want to stay together.

    • 2 years ago
  • franksalot
  • SamuraiDave
  • PirateSauce
  • Nephwrack
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • The victory came when we got to Saddam. The rest of the nation building stuff is the failure of the State Department, not the Department of Defense.

      Pull out now.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ragan
  • pakazak
  • Manatee_man
  • Ragan
    • 0
      Ragan  
    • To those of you who do not remember, We did not win in Korea. That is the reason there is a north and south Korea. We didnt win in Viet Nam, as a matter of fact we left Viet Nam with our heads between our legs. There hasn't been an honorable win since the republic was formed. WWII. We took the credit but Field Marshall Montgomery wanted to take all of Europe but Our Brillliant Eisenhauer had other ideas and thus again we had an east and west Europe or some called it Eastern Europe. And now we will have no win in Iraq. Sooner Iraq will be back to square one and there may very well be another Islamic Theocracy. In Afghanistan, that too will be a loss. The Crusades tried to win in the middle east and lost. The British tried to win in the middle east from 1839 to 1947 and countless young men on both sides were slaughtered and still no win, finally the big Americans came to Afghanistan and they are not winning but our young men are still dieing. After the US Constitution was signed in 1785, the Lords of Finance had already started dreaming of a world empire and to complete the united states part by something called Ethnic Cleansing or slaughtering the entire indian nations. They also know by now that the only way to win in any middle east country is to totally wipe out Islam one nation at a time, then they can win the world. As it now stands, the Bushies have slaughtered millions of Iraqi's and thousands of young American Kids.How does a nation like America the greatest country in the world justify these vital statistics in Iraq and Afghanistan and the same goes for Israel. Its nothing but a worldwide blood bath and if America were half as intelligent as they should be we would have peace, but never with the criminals we have running the country, banks and and holding the Americans hostage to every move the government has made. This was meant to be rule by the majority but it is not a nation of majority rule. Finally it all comes down to this; Bush and the Neocons took over the USA for eight years they committed every crime in the books and resulted in the deaths of millions and how is the USA and Obama going too justify the needless deaths of the 5000 young kids who died in Iraq and the millions of innocent Iraqi kids and men and women not to mention the thousands of American kids who have only body parts left and will be handicapped for life. Will the USA lie to these mothers and fathers and wives sons and daughters and tell them that it was worth the cost of every single life? Will Bush,Cheney and Rumsfeld and all of the Neo Cons continue to live in their luxury and fade away into obscurity with out a bit of accountability? Tony Blair is to be appointed as first President to the European Union while in fact he is just a murdering accomplice of Bush and the Neo Cons. Where are the scales of Justice??????? Would Obama and his wife and family visit the VA hospitals where large numbers of American kids will spend their lives as vegetables and nothing more. Is there a power in the universe that can bring the wrath of decency to reap vengeance on these politicians who have shirked their dutry for too long now. May the American people hold Obama and the entire Washington establishment accountable and hold them accountable as well, for these boys are still dieing. And it dooes not stop there. the USA has implored other nations to get involved and their sons are also dieing next to our American kids. People of this world rise up and be heard.

    • 2 years ago
  • Nephwrack
  • Reaper26
    • 0
      Reaper26  
    • Ragan:

      clay read your comments in turn the korean war was a stalemate we did what we set out to do which was push the NK back but they in turn pushed us back. so in easier terms it was a draw.

    • 2 years ago
  • usmcpoole
    • 0
      usmcpoole  
    • Well I always thought we won the war since my brother came back from Iraq. After they found Saddam the military told my brother and others to go back to the states and this was were he finished his 2nd term.

    • 2 years ago
  • sk8bs55
    • 0
      sk8bs55  
    • i am beginning to believe that this war was never meant to be ended. it seems isreal and palestine have been fighting ever since beginning of time. in much the same way, so to are the sunnis and the shites, or what have you.

      the mission accomplished charade was just that, and it was as unsuccessful as the operations are now today. people will always rebel, so long as there is something to be discontent about. and believe me there is always contention when it comes to that.

    • 2 years ago
  • Varex_Sythe
    • 0
      Varex_Sythe  
    • sk8bs55:

      The problem is that we, as well as other western nations, have been encouraging these "tribal" conflicts for about a century because it is/was easier to control these people when they are fighting amongst themselves rather than united and fighting against us. The reason why we had wanted to control them, oil. Cheap, high quality oil.

      So now the question is, how do we put out in a few years, flames that we have been fanning for more than a few decades?

    • 2 years ago
  • SamuraiDave
    • 0
      SamuraiDave  
    • sk8bs55:

      actually isreal and palestine have only been fighting since the 20th century. The shite and sunni split goes far back to the beginning of Islam but in the case of Iraq it was a powerful minority (sunni) who dominated the rest of the country - a country created in the 20th century by the Allied powers following WWI.

    • 2 years ago
  • artemis6
  • nodonjuan
  • rippley
    • 0
      rippley  
    • As long as the right people are making money, there's no reason to end the war. An un-winnable, never ending war IS the accomplished mission of those who are pulling the strings and making a profit off of the American and Iraqi body count.

    • 2 years ago
  • artemis6
    • 0
      artemis6  
    • rippley:

      Just like 1984 . The book . I do think it that was in the plans somewhere . Impossible to maintain such a wast of resources . Also the human race is a wild card and difficult to control .

    • 2 years ago
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  
    • Troops will be withdrawn as the security situation allows.

      Okay, now define what is an acceptable security situation?

      How many muggings, rapes and murders are “permissible” in Detroit and LA so that a military presence is not required?

      Will Iraqi metropolitan areas be held to that same level or are we going to demand an even higher standard?

      The big problem (imho) seems to be that any idiot with a gun (even a crappy gun) is lumped into the category of “enemy” and we will not withdraw troops is ALL the enemies are defeated.

      Is finding and disarming EVERY person with a handgun in Iraq a seriously obtainable goal?

      We need to clearly, clearly outline what we want to happen in Iraq in order for “victory” to be declared.

      The real question should be: what is the acceptable level of militant Islamic assholes we’re willing to tolerate in Iraq before we can exit? If the answer is zero then we will never, ever leave.

    • 2 years ago
  • Chheang
  • Ares
  • PajamaDan
    • 0
      PajamaDan  
    • Victory??? What is a victory in either of these wars? That always gets me. What is victory in war itself?

      Since our attack, invasion and occupation of Iraq,... what would make us victors? Iraq becoming the country that some of us want? Less people dying? More people dying? Iraq becoming completely and perfectly stable after a forced transition?

      And with Afghanistan,... victory seems like some phantom goal that is unattainable. Are we to expect that we can solve all terrorism problems? Can terrorism be forcefully removed and cured? Can we exact our patriotic revenge and bring our fallen back?

      What is our definition of victory - for either?!

      But my biggest gripe,... is that, even nowadays, the USA will only accept "victory"! Are you telling me that we can never put our patriotic, tunnel-vision pride aside,... and think of a bigger picture, that includes ENDING WAR???!!!??? We can't even look at these past 6 years, the piles of dead, the expenses or the worldview and stop fighting???!!!??? After all these years, if we haven't even reached our specious goals, it's time to stop and bring troops home.

    • 2 years ago
  • masterzip
    • 0
      masterzip  
    • but wait!!!!,..McBushie already declared victory in 2003,..so we must have won something....like......"the hearts and minds?"...or was it those massive oil contracts to extract every last bit of wealth from the country and keep the Iraqis in an economic occupation and perpetual poverty.

    • 2 years ago
  • Minus5scenePoints
    • 0
      Minus5scenePoints  
    • masterzip:

      "but wait!!!!,..McBushie already declared victory in 2003,..so we must have won something....like......"the hearts and minds?"...or was it those massive oil contracts to extract every last bit of wealth from the country and keep the Iraqis in an economic occupation and perpetual poverty."

      HAH! good point!
      when there's a war, there's people to gain from it. on many, many sides. bring our boys and girls home for fucks sake! i dont for see that happening when there's money to be made!

    • 2 years ago
  • hunzedog
  • GavinTheMother
    • 0
      GavinTheMother  
    • hunzedog:

      No doubt. The drug war is the single greatest threat to Americans in the entire world and it's right here on our doorstep. And yet again, many Americans think it's about some principal. Pathetic.

    • 2 years ago
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  
    • The real problem with the GOP/conservative idea of victory is that they are still thinking of war in World War II terms.

      They envision some sort of summit wherein the "bad guys" lay down their weapons and formally sign a peace treaty.

      Sen. McCain himself has this delusional idea as do many other Republican politicans.

      We're not fighting an organized government army.

      These are street gangs.

      The idea that all 27 of the 50-100 member Islamic "militas" running around Iraq blowing shit up will simulanteously lay down their arms, embrace the government and sign a peace treaty before CNN news cameras (the GOP fantasy of victory) is idiotic.

      We can't 100 percent eliminate gang violence in the US.....yet the GOP demands that is the criteria for "success" in Iraq?

    • 2 years ago
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  
    • The problem with the Bush definition of "victory" was that we could neve rleave until 100 percent of all Iraqis accepted the government/paraliment we set up for them.

      That's like trying to get 100 percent of the US to ALL be card carrying Green Party members!

      Or trying to reduce the rate of violence in inner city LA to zero percent!

      You're NEVER going to get a 100 percent cease fire between the Crips and the Bloods. Never. And you're NEVER going to get a 100 percent cease fire between the dozen or so Islamic militant groups running around Iraq and shooting at each other and US troops.

      At some point certain hardliners in the military (and the GOP) are going to have to give up their utopian fantasies of turning Iraq into the 51st state of America and join the reality-based community in declaring "good enough" and getting us the hell out of there.

      We've already sunk 2 trillion into Bush's War and countless soliders.

      Time to declare victory and go home.

    • 2 years ago
  • sangel217
    • 0
      sangel217  
    • crob80227:

      i do agree that it is difficult to get 100% of people to agree on anything but i don't think thats the problem. i think it is possible to see a peace fire between inner city LA gangs and no way does that translate to the war in Iraq. gangs can be combated with a strong goal of urban renewal and education. force is a temporary solution to a more complex problem that needs long term commitment and goals.

      Iraq on the other hand is a nation of ideologies completely different than the US. we forget in all the misery the Iraqi people have faced that we really started this war to secure investment in oil and to show the extreme Islamic militants that militarily we are not to be messed with. for good or bad i see those goals have been accomplished so why prolong a war that is clearly not helping our deficit?

    • 2 years ago
  • electricbrave
    • 0
      electricbrave  
    • Wow do you think our troops are not wanting to come back till we settle this financial crisis? I feel for our peeps over there in some way they are deep into a long list of political contracts. War is only a step away from our truth in global domination. Can we find a easier way to make energy commission change our need for fuel?

    • 2 years ago
  • ras003
  • My_America
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  
    • My_America:

      Right on, man. Where does the government get off thinking they can send troops to war? Like it's their job or something. I don't know what they were thinking, everyone knows that Posse Comitatus was a joke and the troops are supposed to sweep our streets and wipe our asses.

      /SARCASM

    • 2 years ago
  • nodonjuan
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  
    • My_America:

      Bush used bad intel about WMD's. That doesn't change the fact that Hussein needed to be deposed.

      Clinton lied about getting his cock sucked in the oval office.

      JFK lied about Cuba.

      LBJ lied about Vietnam.

      Do you also hold grudges against all of those presidents? Move. The. Fuck. On.

    • 2 years ago
  • Varex_Sythe
    • 0
      Varex_Sythe  
    • My_America:

      I don't hold a grudge against Clinton because him having an affair really doesn't effect how the country is run. And no "sane" man is going to readily admit to having an affair to the entire nation. His wife maybe, but the entire nation, no.

      I don't hold a grudge against JFK either in the bay of pigs incident, because he was fed very bad information by his military chiefs, or in the cuban missile crisis, because lying to the public and keeping the threat of nuclear arms of that nature a secret kept the infrastructure of this nation from collapsing in on itself in a frenzied panic.

      I kinda blame LBJ, we could have won vietnam if we hadn't of gotten greedy and pissed of the Chinese, therefor getting them involved. It also would have helped if we had actually educated our troops on how to differentiate between the friendly Southern Vietnamese and the hostile Northern Vietnamese.

      I blame Bush, if he was seriously ignorant, for continuously lying rather than attempting to find out the truth. First it was because the Taliban was in Iraq, which they weren't until after we went there. Then it was WMD's, but any WMD's that Saddam had were chemical based and had become chemically inert decades ago; however, he could still produce WMD's, accept that he wasn't and the evidence we had was not evidence of anything but buildings. Then it was to liberate Iraq from an evil dictator, one that we put in place by overthrowing the previous one...

    • 2 years ago
  • My_America
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  
    • My_America:

      Varex:

      You said you don't blame JFK because "he was fed very bad information by his military chiefs."

      Do you listen to yourself when you talk? How the hell can you NOT draw the connection between that statement and Gulf War 2?

    • 2 years ago
  • Nephwrack
  • Ares
  • Nephwrack
  • Ares
  • My_America
    • 0
      My_America  
    • My_America:

      Ares sometimes its easier to deal with a 2 y/o than deal with some of these people who post.

      Don't you love the bumper stickers responses people use "Clinton Lied No One Died" instead of using a brain and understanding history.

      My whole point is if we are not there to win then get out. There is no reason to keep our troops in harms way.

    • 2 years ago
  • Varex_Sythe
    • 0
      Varex_Sythe  
    • My_America:

      To My America. Our previous administration went in with every intention of winning the war? We pulled our main forces from the country a hostile enemy force was readily occupying in order to remove an old dictator who was no threat nor did he pose one. We then proceeded to overthrow what government, and the security that went along with it, as we hunted this old dictator we put into power who was no immediate or legitimate threat to us. Then, before we start securing power grids and water supplies for the people of the nation we just liberated, as well as the nation that we just opened up for terrorist attacks that it did not have prior to our involvement, we secured the oil fields and developed the oil fields that did not have anything to do with the well being and security of the people of Iraq.

      To Ares, I assume you mean our occupation of Iraq when you refer to Gulf War 2. The problem was not that Bush was fed bad information by his military chiefs. The problem was that he had selective hearing when it came to his military chiefs, and he had a strong filter about what information he received in the form of Dick Cheney. The previous white house asked generals their opinions about occupying Iraq, and every time they got an answer of, "It shouldn't be done," for whatever reason, they ignored that general and moved onto another one until they found a general that supported going in and told them that it would be an easy and quick operation/war. As far as Bush's filter, Dick Cheney, goes, Bush was fed false information and bad intel continuously. The difference between JFK being fed bad information by his military chiefs and GWB is that JFK learned after one incident that he needed to check up on information and not to just repeatedly trust people who had let him down. Bush was either stupid, lazy or both because he repeatedly trusted intel from people who continuously fed him bad intelligence.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ragan
    • 0
      Ragan  
    • Laniard: Our enemies are where ever we desire to make them. We have always had enemies because we can never build an Empire with out creating enemies first. Our beligerence over The last sixty years have only brought our homemade enemies out in the open. Every nation we overthrew and placed our own homegrown dictators in power. Americans never seem to mind that a wrong is a blot on our record and when our government has wronged a person or a nation the American accept is as OK. Anything our government doews right or wrong is OK with the American people. This is insanity.Iraq was an insane war and the perpetrators should be prosecuted but again the American people will let is just pass into obscurity even though over 5000 young men and over a million innocent Iraqi's died to further this wrong agenda. What is a human life worth in Ameriica? What is a foreigners life worth in America?

    • 2 years ago
  • pakazak
  • HowdyDo
    • 0
      HowdyDo  
    • What's to win in Iraq? We got rid of Sadam and they are running their own government, now, and handling their own problems, for the most part. The "war" isn't limited to a geographic location - it's wherever our "enemies" are, which are spread out all over the world, including in Iraq and some in our own country.

    • 2 years ago
  • iamwilliamhello
  • slarabee
  • artemis6
  • artemis6
  • bansheewail
    • 0
      bansheewail  
    • Finally, a voice of reason. A year and a half ago, the Republicans would have called him a "deafeatist", "unpatriotic", "unamerican". Now, it just sounds like a reality deeply rooted in facts.

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:

top videos