Gen. Petraeus is warning against the planned burning of Korans on Sept. 11 by a Florida church. He says that is precisely the kind of inflammatory action that puts troops in danger and damages the war effort.

Gen. David Petraeus said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes, drumming up anger toward the U.S. and making it harder for allied troops to carry out their mission of protecting Afghan civilians.

"It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort," Gen. Petraeus said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. "It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community."

I get what that church in Florida is trying to do. I also love the idea of tweaking radical Muslims who can’t stand that we have freedom of speech in this country. However, if Gen. Petraeus believes it will harm the war effort and put lives at risk I think we have to take that seriously. I think the church should reconsider their plans for Sept. 11 for the good of the country.

General David Petraeus briefly collapsed during his testimony today in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Under questioning from Sen. John McCain, Petraeus slumped over in his chair as military aides rushed to his side. He was only out for about 30 seconds and was able to walk from the hearings on his own. He returned after about 15 minutes to a room full of applause and joked that it was not McCain’s questions, but dehydration that caused him to pass out. The hearing was then postponed until tomorrow and Petraeus promised to eat breakfast next time.

A comment left about this story on The Hill’s Blog from someone named MANBEARPIG had me laughing out loud:

…What probably happened is that as he sat looking up at all the traitorcrats looking down their noses at him he succumbed to a moment of grief for this nation.

That sounds about right. Seriously though, we should all pray that our general is in good health. The tremendous responsibilities he shoulders coupled with a brutal schedule are bound to take their toll.

From The NY Times:

Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of American military forces in the Middle East, received a diagnosis of early-stage prostate cancer in February but has undergone “successful” radiation treatment to deal with the illness, according to a statement issued late Monday.

General Petraeus, 56, who as head of the United States Central Command oversees operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, underwent two months of radiation treatment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, which had “minimal impact on his work schedule,” according to the statement.

Fortunately, they caught it early. It sounds like he’s going to be alright. Thank God for that.

Via AFP:

General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, was tapped Wednesday to lead US forces in the Middle East in a major shift in the military command at a time of growing tensions with Iran.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Petraeus would be replaced in Iraq by his former number two, General Raymond Odierno, who commanded day-to-day operations during a “surge” of US troops that sharply reduced violence there.

“With the concurrence of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I have recommended and the president has accepted and will nominate General David Petraeus as the new commander of the Central Command,” he said.

The position opened last month when Admiral William Fallon abruptly stepped down saying reports of differences with the White House on how to deal with Iran had become “a distraction.”

Petraeus is an excellent pick by Secretary Gates. He’s one of the brightest minds the United States military has ever produced, and exactly the kind of man we need overseeing the Middle East.

Click HERE to read his full bio

In a speech today President Bush ordered an indefinite halt in U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq after July, embracing the key recommendations of his top war commander. Bush said Gen. David Petraeus will “have all the time he needs” to consider when more American forces could return home.

The president also announced he will try and relieve the heavy strain on the Army by reducing the length of combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan to 12 months, down from the current level of 15 months.

-Samantha Giles

General David Petraeus enduring his second day of grilling by Congress said today that he’s not willing to commit any further troops to Iraq even if the security situation were to deteriorate.

He also repeated his plans to continue reducing the number of U.S. forces in Iraq to pre-surge levels, or about 140,000 troops. That level should be reached by this summer at which point there will be a pause in troop reductions to allow for adjustments on the ground and a hard look at the security situation across the country.

The fact that Petraeus is unwilling to even leave open the possibility for troop increases speaks to just how close to tapped out our troop rotation situation is. With more troops needed in Afghanistan, there simply isn’t anymore troops available to rotate through Iraq again even if we wanted to.

President Bush is also supposed to announce plans to cut the combat tours of active-duty soldiers from 15 months to 12 months. The reduced deployments will not apply—at least initially—to any soldiers currently serving in Iraq, unless conditions improve to the point that commanders believe some could go home early.

-Chris Jones

The much anticipated appearance of Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker kicked off today, with the first of 2 scheduled hearings today having just concluded.

It was fairly predictable, with Republicans listening to what Petraeus/Crocker had to say about the current state of things in Iraq. No sane person can at this point deny the very significant progress that’s been made since the surge began, unless of course your a liberal Democrat.

Democrats on the panel of course tried to get Petraeus to say the mission wasn’t worth it and to say the the current policy in Iraq is a failure. He was of course unable to say those things given the fact that neither of them are true.

Gen. Petraeus went on to lay out his plan going forward, which included recommending a 45-day “period of consolidation and evaluation” once the extra combat forces that President Bush ordered to Iraq last year have completed their pullout in July. He did not commit to a timetable for resuming troop reductions after the 45-day pause.

“At the end of that period, we will commence a process of assessment to examine the conditions on the ground and, over time, determine when we can make recommendations for further reductions,” Petraeus said.

“This process will be continuous, with recommendations for further reductions made as conditions permit,” he added. “This approach does not allow establishment of a set withdrawal timetable. However, it does provide the flexibility those of us on the ground need to preserve the still fragile security gains our troopers have fought so hard a sacrificed so much to achieve.”

President Bush has said he intended to accept Petraeus’ recommendation. On Thursday, the president will make a speech about the war and give further details.

-Chris Jones

Time magazine got it wrong, but London’s Sunday Telegraph gets it right. The Telegraph has made General David Petraeus its “Person Of The Year” and wrote a great piece about the man called General Petraeus: man with a message of hope.

He has been the man behind the US troop surge over the past 10 months, the last-ditch effort to end Iraq’s escalating civil war by putting an extra 28,000 American troops on the ground.

So far, it has achieved what many feared was impossible. Sectarian killings are down. Al-Qaeda is on the run. And the two million Iraqis who fled the country are slowly returning. Progress in Iraq is relative – 538 civilians died last month. But compared with the 3,000 peak of December last year, it offers at least a glimmer of hope.

Nonetheless, why should we choose to nominate Petraeus?

…the reason for picking Petraeus is simple. Iraq, whatever the current crises in Afghanistan and Pakistan, remains the West’s biggest foreign policy challenge of this decade, and if he can halt its slide into all-out anarchy, Gen Petraeus may save more than Iraqi lives.

A failed Iraq would not just be a second Vietnam, nor would it just be America’s problem.

It would be a symbolic victory for al-Qaeda, a safe haven for jihadists to plot future September 11s and July 7s, and a battleground for a Shia-Sunni struggle that could draw in the entire Middle East. Our future peace and prosperity depend, in part, on fixing this mess. And, a year ago, few had much hope.

It appears that not only are U.S. troops awed by Petraeus, but the British, Irish, Australians, and others are as well.

…it should be pointed out that British commanders hold Gen Petraeus in similarly high regard.

Several Northern Ireland veterans who worked with him in Baghdad this year came away with the opinion that it is now America, not Britain, that is the world leader in counter-insurgency.

I think it says a lot that our British friends recognize the positive turn of events in Iraq and the man responsible for that turnaround. In America on the other hand we have despicable groups like MoveOn.org who traffic in garbage like the now infamous “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” advertisement.

-Chris Jones