Ever since President Bush announced his escalation policy, war supporters have relied on the credibility of Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, to deflect criticism. Earlier this month, President Bush mentioned Petraeus by name no less than 12 times in a speech arguing for his strategy in Iraq, at one point saying, “the best messenger, by the way, for us is David Petraeus.”

But the manner in which the administration has rolled out Petraeus to help sell its war policy at home is threatening that credibility. In a fact sheet released to reporters yesterday about Bush’s new war czar, both Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are quoted in a manner more suited for use on a book jacket:

Gen. David Petraeus: “Doug Lute knows Iraq, the region, and Washington, and he’ll be a great addition to the team that is striving to achieve success in Iraq. He is also a doer.” (General David Petraeus, 5/15/07)

Amb. Ryan Crocker: “I look forward to working closely with LTG Doug Lute in the coming months. His knowledge and experience will make him a valuable partner to our efforts in Iraq.” (Iraq Ambassador Ryan Crocker, 5/15/07)

Yesterday, ABC’s Martha Raddatz asked White House spokesman Tony Snow if his press office had solicited quotes from a uniformed military officer, and if so, whether that was appropriate. Snow dodged both questions, instead offering a sarcastic remark. “[I]t’s clearly a burning issue so we’ll look into it for you.” Watch it:

The Lute press release is another example of Rep. John Murtha’s contention that the White House has been using Gen. Petraeus as a political prop.

Digg It!

Transcript: Read more

The Bush administration today threatened to a veto a House defense spending bill over a 3.5 percent pay raise for U.S. soldiers and a $40/month increase in benefits for military widows, among other provisions. The legislation passed the House today 397-27.

ThinkProgress noted last night that the White House opposed the pay raise for troops:

Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization bill. [...]

The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.

Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling extra pay increases “unnecessary.”

The White House says it also opposes:

– a $40/month allowance for military survivors, saying the current benefits are “sufficient”

– additional benefits for surviving family members of civilian employees

– price controls for prescription drugs under TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for military personnel and their dependents

House Minority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) said today he was “shocked and disappointed in the President’s threat,” noting that Bush’s problems with the bill are over measures that benefit “the very people who sacrifice the most in the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and who serve at home and overseas.”

UPDATE: VoteVets chairman and Iraq veteran Jon Soltz adds:

Believe me, even with the current benefits that get paid out by the Department of Defense and insurance that many troops buy into, those who lose spouses in Iraq aren’t sleeping in mounds of cash. The increase proposed by Democrats will mean a hell of a lot. At VoteVets.org, we’ve heard absolute horror stories on the type of cutbacks that widows and widowers have had to make because the government doesn’t provide enough to those who lose a loved one in war.

Digg It!

Offering another sign that the administration plans to continue its escalation of the war in Iraq into 2008, U.S. commander Gen. David Petraeus now says that he will not have “anything definitive” to say about the war in his September review.

On April 26, Petraeus told reporters that “in early September” he “would provide an assessment of the situation in Iraq with respect to our mission and offer recommendations on the way ahead.” But in an interview with CNN reporter Jane Arraf for IraqSlogger, Petraeus says, “Come September, I don’t think we’ll have anything definitive in September (although) certainly we’ll have some indicators on the political side in Iraq.”

Other recent signs that Bush is planning a long-term escalation:

– Last week, the Pentagon “notified more than 35,000 soldiers and Marines to be prepared to deploy to Iraq beginning this fall, a move that would allow commanders to maintain the ongoing buildup of troops through the end of the year if needed.” [Link]

– The New York Times reported in late April, “The timelines [that Bush officials] are now discussing suggest that the White House may maintain the increased numbers of American troops in Iraq well into next year.” [Link]

– In early March, the Times reported that Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the day-to-day commander of American forces in Iraq, had recommended in a private memo that Bush’s increased troop levels “be maintained through February 2008.” Odierno also said in January that “even with the additional American troops,” it might take another ‘two or three years’ for American and Iraqi forces to gain the upper hand in the war.” [Link; Link]

In recent weeks, senior conservatives have said that President Bush had until September “to prove that the Iraq war effort has turned a corner.” Petraeus’ announcement throws a major wrench in that plan.

Digg It!