Newsweek Asks General Petraeus: Are You Just Lucky?

Photo of Tim Graham.
By Tim Graham (Bio | Archive)
January 8, 2008 - 11:45 ET

Apparently, Gen. David Petraeus wasn’t Time magazine’s man of the year, and Newsweek is much less impressed. They proclaim "It’s far too early to declare Gen. David Petraeus, 55, the general who tamed Baghdad." Their new interview by Larry Kaplow and Bebak Dehghanpisheh (try saying that three times fast) began like this:

NEWSWEEK: How did the Anbar Awakening movement [of Sunni sheiks allying with U.S. troops] start? How much of that was planned, and how much was luck?

The fellows at Newsweek weren’t just being impertinent. They were reflecting some Petreaeus adviser who eagerly said "yes" to that question.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Newsweek continues to show

January 8, 2008 - 11:52 ET by BD

Newsweek continues to show an absolute lack of understanding of the current situation.

There was NO LUCK involved at all.  The Anbar Awakening was a result of solid US policies coupled with faulty policies from AQ.

When groups of people watch their neighbors blown up, beheaded, or lined up from buses for summary execution by turbaned nutjobs from Saudi Arabia and Syria, they tend to look for support from US forces who are actively combating this by moving into the neighborhoods.

Where is the luck NEWSWEEK Speaks of?

There was luck but so what?

January 8, 2008 - 12:29 ET by KC Mulville

Petraeus wrote the manual on counter-insurgency, which is a different form of war than a siege or invasion. Unlike a siege or invasion, counter-insurgency is defensive. You don't start the attack, you respond to it. And since insurgency is as much propaganda as it is violence, you need the flexibility to respond with information as well as bullets. Like any other war, however, you look for your enemy's weaknesses and exploit them.

The luck comes when the enemy makes mistakes. The skill comes when you exploit those mistakes.

Sure, there was luck. You can't plan for mistakes. They happen unintentionally and randomly. But what makes counter-insurgency succeed is your skill in taking advantage of those random, unplanned mistakes. Of course, there was plenty of luck, but that takes nothing away from the skill of the surge.

PS: I'm just repeating what I read in Petraeus' manual. Of course, in a week or so, I'll take full credit for the idea, as if I'd thought of it myself. But I have no shame about it -- wisdom is public domain.

Just dumb luck

January 8, 2008 - 12:33 ET by Cool Arrow

I guess it's just dumb luck the Creator provided a military leader for such a time as this 

I ♣ My Seal

Agreed CA

January 8, 2008 - 12:56 ET by KC Mulville

A lot of people are swooning over Obama, because he's a nice guy and can make a nice speech. But the executive skills of a general, especially in the kind of situation where Petraeus is succeeding, is precisely the skill set that I want in a president.

  • He motivates large numbers of people to achieve a goal. A president has to move a bureaucracy (in fact, many bureaucracies). That's not easy. Each of the bureaucracies are staffed with skilled people who want to serve their country, but without skilled leadership, they'll fall back on institutional habits and CYA attitudes.
  • This has been my biggest criticism of Bush: for all his supposed CEO skills, he has never achieved real command inside the Beltway. He's the chief of the executive branch, but he can't get his bureaucracies to work for him. Think of the CIA. Think of the State Department. Think of FEMA. A president needs to command the bureaucracy, and Bush hasn't. I think a general has a better awareness of how to command a bureaucracy.
  • You want empathy? Never mind semi-fake tears over "caring." For Petraeus to succeed, he's had to understand how al-Qaeda and Iraqis are feeling, as well as his own troops. That's empathy in real life, not just for the cameras.

I'm a news junkie, and a political addict, but I still have no idea who I'm going to vote for. I've always envied those groupies who get so excited over a candidate. But I'll tell you this, if Petraeus keeps going like this, I'll get excited if he ever decides to run. He's the kind of leader I think we need.

Concur with everything but

January 8, 2008 - 12:45 ET by BD

Concur with everything but the notion that the enemy making a mistake based on their faulty doctrine is "luck". 

As an intelligence guy it is our job to inform the commander of these mistakes and assist him in planning to defeat such.

Maybe splitting hairs

January 8, 2008 - 13:01 ET by KC Mulville

You're probably right, BD. But there's a difference between predicting that mistakes will happen because of a faulty doctrine, and responding to specific mistakes as they actually happen. You can broadly predict the first, but the second is random.

Of course, I suppose the real answer is to ask that advisor and Petraeus what they meant by luck. Maybe they're referring to something they're unwilling to discuss openly, I don't know.

}}---> Patreus

January 8, 2008 - 12:14 ET by Cool Arrow

Yeah, it was just dumb luck he took over the reins, said what he was gonna do, said what he expected, and voilla - there it is. 

I ♣ My Seal

Advisor"

January 8, 2008 - 12:17 ET by rmeller

I followed the links back to the original interview. Call me stupid but just because Stephen Biddle is a Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the CFR according to his bio how does that make him an "adviser"? He is the same one who on May 30, 2007 said there is “maybe a one in ten” chance the escalation will succeed.

NEWSWEEK: How did the Anbar

January 8, 2008 - 12:23 ET by drillanwr

NEWSWEEK: How did the Anbar Awakening movement [of Sunni sheiks allying with U.S. troops] start? How much of that was planned, and how much was luck?

 

He'd tell you ... but then, he'd have to kill you.

Typical MSM

January 8, 2008 - 13:21 ET by Bourbeau

Here's a man who took on the most critical task for his country in the last 30 plus years, under the most difficult of circumstances (war), under a never ending barage of defeatism from policiticans to former generals, maintained his composure throughout, picked the right men to serve under him to direct his strategy (again w/constant back room sniping from the military establishment), has been a calming influence to all who serve under him, and last but indeed not the least, oversaw the execution of his strategy which, to date, has been nothing but a substantiated successs.  He's not pounding his chest; he's not bragging; he's not asking for a fifth star; he's just doing his job.  And for that, we have the likes of Newsweek asking if it wasn't luck?  You want luck?  Luck is Newsweek still being in business despite themselves.  And we wonder how our country got to this point?

Only the Arse's at NW...

January 8, 2008 - 15:58 ET by Six String Spiff

Only the 'people' at Newsweek could dream up such nonsense... Talk about disrespectful. WOW

Iraq went from daily news story to non-story

January 8, 2008 - 16:09 ET by timothe

Is that just luck or was that carefully planned by the media?