I don’t agree. I want the so-called senators who believe in handcuffing our troops to say so, on the record.
A little naive, aren't we? If Petreaus aims to win this war, while Obama and the Dems want to leave as soon as they get done with the next elections (which they do), they will not want to confirm Petreaus. They will then come up with smears against him to keep him from getting confirmed, the same way they smeared him before on Iraq, and the same way they got rid of McChrystal without any real cause.
Dem Senators will never say why they are doing what they are doing, and they will have the MSM parroting their pretend reasons until the illiterate masses believe it is the truth.
If Petreaus wants to further American interests, he needs to take advantage of this opportunity, which was handed to him by Obama's desire to make an example of McChrystal. He needs to get confirmed first, and he needs to treat it just like a Supreme Court nomination, being as vague as possible, so that he can get confirmed. For example, when asked about tactics, he should say that he needs to get there first, and study the situation and ask the people on the ground, and then he will decide what to do.
Once he gets there, if he wants to win the war (and I think he does), then he needs to implement a strategy aimed at gaining victory. He has done it in Iraq; he can do it in Afghanistan. The Obama administration will resist; they do not want to win. But once Petreaus is there, and is succeeding, they will have a difficult time preventing him from doing what he wants, up to a point. Petreaus will have a window of opportunity to regain the initiative, and save the military from having to withdraw in what would be portrayed as a defeat. He is a patriot, and he will do all he can to prevent that.
And for him to get a chance to serve, he has to get past those idiot Senators. So, he needs to save his intentions for those who matter, the Taliban.