What should we learn from the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? Leave your thoughts in the comments. Watch a debate on whether BRICS poses a threat to Western hegemony at iai.tv/video/redrawing-the-global-order?RU-vid&
I am extremely happy to have come across this interview as it allowed me to much better know about general Petraeus. He and general Bel Hodges make a great team that really understand everything about war and know how to express it. General Petraeus is extremely smart and talented.
His position on Israel is not hopeful. Either your talented general is stupid or a liar. Why doesn't he compare the trauma of people in Gazza to that of October 7th? Israel's long-term plan has always been to get rid of the Palestinians population one way or another. Hamas is irrelevant. Hamas was always the excuse they needed. Why is such an obvious point never recognised? Creation of the Gazza by Sharon was part of the same log-tem plan. They had hoped that when the push came to shove Egypt would let Palestinians escape to Egypt. Everyone denies the obvious and until that stops the Palestinians will die and then Lebanese and Israel will annex the land just as they have done with Golan hights. Just talk to Israelis who have adopted their long-term plan like I have. They will tell you that they are in no rush for peace. In their inward-looking culture, they have been fighting for thousands of years. It is part of their spiritual doctrine of wrestling with God where the rest are irrelevant in comparison, including lies. These are the modernised Pharisees of the first century now in the 21st century This is a Philosophical struggle for these people. If they are moving forward, they are never going to stop. This is why 75AD happened. It is just as religious as Taliban and the Wahhabism sect in Saudi Arabia. The only difference is that their marketing people wear suits and are far more experienced in arm struggle than Taliban. Imagine Talibans with nuclear weapons and then you get the idea of the threat they pose. How about you? Are you talented?
I can attest to the fact that he is spot on about Hamas. There is no alternative to completely degrading their ability to fight and disrupt governance and this is something that will take years.
The interviewer was too unexperienced for this interview. He looked timid, avoided eye contact when speaking, and sending Morse codes by blinking his eyes during questions. He could have and should have asked better questions.
It was not his decision to go to war. I think president Clinton had more than one opportunity to kill bin Laden, but failed to do so. The invasion of Afghanistan would have been unnecessary. Iraq seems to me to have been totally unjustified and an unbelievable tragedy for everyone involved.
Unlike many of the others who’ve made comments, I appreciate that IAI put this individual on, who has an undeniably important legacy and a unique voice. If you disagree with his thoughts… alright, great. Let us know why you believe his arguments are bad instead of squawking ad hominems. If we aren’t mature enough to critically consider the opinions of people we disagree with or find difficult for whatever reason, we shouldn’t be listening material from an institute of art and ideas.
A legacy of murder and carnage on an unimaginable scale. Nothing unique about it. Your comment is astonishingly immature. Your squeaking is nauseating.
If not the US, you would live now either in a nazi or North Korea style dictatorship. But instead you live in a free country, use a US invented smartphone, navigating US invented internet with American Google browser.
He didnt fail in Afghanistan. Biden did. In Iraq he had to implement the policy of the administration. he actually was very effective in the Iraq surge.
Have so much respect for the General. So experienced and so enlightened about how Middle East works. These Liberal so called Think Tanks have never stepped in Middle East and act like they know better than the general.
Interviewer is obviously taking a side against Israel and is clueless without understanding everything. Should Israel or the United States abide by internationals courts - when they are largely appointess by the UN and other leftist entities? Petraeus is totally on to this. He IS drawing a moral equivalence (with Ukraine too). Patraeus doesn't get through to him. He says that "he fought for the right" for him to have a different opinion. Does this guy look like he would fight for any ethical or moral issues? How pitiful.
I pity Petraeus. The interviewer, half his age, and with zero military experience, keeps cutting him. He doesn't care about the audience, he doesn't want to hear anything. His only aim is to impose his personal, shallow opinion. Last time I watch anything with this guy.
There’s always a thin line between the pacifist and the naive, similarly between the warmonger and the idiot. Fanatics are taking advantage of the information breakdown all over the world, while imbeciles are trying to take advantage of conflicts to make a dollar… it’s a complex landscape and navigating it’s not easy. Now looking at a conflict as black or white and ignoring the multitude of grey scales won’t give you an insight. So, listen even if you don’t agree… there is no way to have an understanding without being exposed to both sides. PS: he could make better questions though… better than just arguing with your guest.
It is really concerning that this guy, with his ideas, was a senior official in the US Army and CIA. That's why the US lost two wars, on top of having bad politicians.
The U.S. military fared disastrously in terms of casualties per capita in WW I under the failed cavalry officer Pershing. WW II was a mixed affair and too lengthy a subject to comment upon here (except to draw attention to Admiral King’s disastrous handling of the North Pacific theater). However, since WW II it has been a consistent shambles. And now we have “the icing 🧁 on the cake”… Faced with threats throughout the Levant, the South China Sea, and the Ukraine - the U. S. military cannot and will not be able to cope for several glaring reasons. Ever since they could not cope with the Somali pirates interfering with the key trade route through the Suez Canal a few years ago, “the writing was on the wall.”
@@lecaprice2572 They will just deny everything and claim you're using Putin's talking points, whatever that means. People like Petraeus have a mindset impervious to facts on the ground. Just re-listen to this interview, (audio-only) and you'll see how he's twisting plain facts to suit his warped ideology. Cultists have a similar way of thinking.
Petraeus was one of the best military leaders the US has had in recent years. I say put your money where your mouth is if you are going to call Petraeus a failure. Go ahead and solve all the world's problems today since you are so smart.
@@moonmunster put your money where your mouth is?😂 He was one of the main people overseeing OIF for years that served as a massive failure and just listen to what he saying here all of the same overall talking points that were the reasons we failed. Does t even address what were the main failures and how we could have done it differently.
Correct. Marine General Smedley Butler also was in the forefront of being an enforcer for corporate America in Central America and elsewhere. However, he “saw the light” and refused to lead a coup d’etat against Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Trained to lead failed war and killing innocent people. He knows what Israel is doing in Palestine for decades but pretends that it started on 07 Oct. The world is led by greedy politicians who are corrupted like this guy.
@@Jack-xc2ys Corruption is best handled thru freedom of the press. The fact that they countries that are causing the most problems do not have freedom of the press is the issue. Also here, the press has chose to be biased instead of even handed and dealing with truth.
@@Eagle1836 Our leadership in the US is blatantly corrupt on many levels. They are in and out of court. They are also role models for many people, is this deterrent?
It's funny how he talks about "improving life in Gaza" but never mentioned that the people of Gaza have the right to be free in their land and not live in an open air prison.
The "people" in Gaza have been occupied by Hamas, not by Israel. The Palestinians have consistently squandered tens of millions of dollars and scores of opportunities to be free in their own land.
Well, no one could really stand up to David Petras intellect it does seem the interviewer spends more time thinking about fashion magazines than international subjects
I disagree with his assessment on Israel but I understand why he has that view. He’s a military guy so everything has a military solution to him. Thing is….he was wrong in Afghanistan/Iraq and is applying that flawed logic to Israel.
@@JohnnyComelately-eb5zv I mean, at this point pretty much anybody who engages in war eventually will be called a war criminal it really means nothing anymore to call people that but cool bro you do you
@@loucaribou7765 'engages in war' - nice Orwellian phrase. I think you meant to say 'attack a defenceless population killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people to increase profits for giant corporations.' That's a bit more accurate.
As a former Marine, intelligence analyst, (85-89) I learned what really led me to join the military was all the imagery and rhetoric, the prestige and ceremony and the cult of manliness. I served honorably but had an awakening and renounced my service to warlords. A have since joined the ranks of peacemakers.
@@Dreadnought16 Hi Dreadnought16. The peacemakers are those that see with a civilian reality rather than a military reality. Renouncing violence and military prestige is a start. I was a low level analyst and I am a low level citizen. Jeffrey Sachs, comes to mind as one I can relate to.
Petreus was known by those who served with him as an opportunist and ruthless careerist. He treated subordinates terribly and karma caught up with him having to resign in disgrace.
1965 till now all the leader hv in the table record kahit pa mga babai ninyo nandoon din ilan babai mga binabayaran o hotel na inyong pinag lalagakan all ditail monarchy or minister is same also
Good interview, however maybe the interviewer should "stick to your guns" a bit more next time. Continuing .. General Petraeus is a fine military officer and (most of) his thought process is absolutely necessary for the prevention of a global war. However, Petraeus made at least three points that require careful management to avoid catastrophe : #1) If his metric is "are we creating more baddies than we eliminate" Why isn't negotiation ever an option to him? Instead his goals seem to be always maximalist war objectives - or is that just posturing to prevent the enemy from probing our resolve? At any rate I believe that consideration of #1) leads to #2) Why doesn't Ukraine use the billions to establish a *defensive* posture and a DMZ / No Fly Zone asap? Also 2024 "Ai" makes *significant* errors so #3) Unmanned Ai algorithmically driven attack drones self-authorized to take lethal actions without a responsible human in the loop is (present day) certainly a horrible, irresponsible idea; so whoever is advising him to say that is violating at least ethics and common sense, if not also law.
Autonomous drones are the future game changing tech on future battlefields. Because they are immune to jamming they are a league above current drone technology. They will likely only be used in actual wars with military targets when they are separate and distinguishable as valid targets by AI. I do not say this is morally acceptable I'm just saying it is inevitable. It is a foreseeable capability for very few countries, none of which are in the "global south."
It was not a military failure, but an economic disaster. Trillions dollars were spent there and in the moment US had retreated, the country went to dark ages tribal society again. It was not ready enough for democracy.
Patreus is an example of a military system with too much money and very little sophistication. It's driven by profit (never ending wars) than solutions.
What a brilliant note to end that interview on. I was getting more and more depressed as the conversation pgrogressed, hearing the same jaded perspective of the adversarial mindset that we get from the american mainstream. To finish with the parameters needed for a different paradigm, and that coming from a military man, bizarrely gives me hope!
Oh look what I found. The AH who became a major general without seeing a single battle and then he had an affair and the dumbest scandal in cia history! Rofl
The lack of sophistication, education, and insight reflected by the preponderance of comments here is disturbing. Petraeus is obviously quite the opposite. He's highly intelligent, educated, experienced, and articulate way beyond myself or any other commentors. Also keep in mind that he has vastly more access to information on which to form educated assessments than any but a very select few do. I seriously doubt if he is motivated by nefarious goals or acting callously without carefully considering alternatives to achieve optimal goals consistent with liberal democracy.
Well, while he was making rational assessments of what Israel should do in their treatment of Palestinians he failed to mention that there is no chance in Hell that they'll start treating Gazans and West Bank denizens as human beings, worthy of life, liberty, and property. So his suggestions are hollow in the sense that he might as well have given Hannibal Lecter the advice of going on a diet.
The lack of sophistication, education and insight reflected in your comment is disturbing. Brainwashing, sycophancy and a very submissive thought process are responsible for these defects.
The lack of sophistication education and insight reflected by the above comment is disturbing. The level of grovelling sycophancy is astonishing. This is often the case with propaganda designed to achieve optimal goals consistent with the U.S establishment.
The interviewer made misleading statements about ICJ rulings. In case of Russian invasion to Ukraine the ruling was to UNCONDITIONALY and IMMEDIATELY stop the fighting. In case of Israel the ruling was conditioned by some defined requirement . Israel is allowed to continue the fight if it meets that ICJ requirement . So Israel does not violates the order of the court, and Russia does. There are no double standards. Also, in the case of Russia, Ukraine had declared that it will immediately stop fighting if Russia fulfills the ruling. HAMAS had declared quite opposite - willing to continue fighting, throwing the rocets an butchering.
It's kinda funny you use the word 'restraint' in relation to Petraeus, a general who failed in every war he ever prosecuted and whose only tactic was to kill more and more people. He's a classic example of a war criminal. But not a very competent one.😂
So the guy who shares classified info with his mistress walks the streets, while Assange was imprisoned for over a decade for informing us about our Government's Activities. Banana Republic.
The interviewer did a good job here of holding Petraeus's feet to the fire. Getting at the meat of the rationale and teasing out inconsistencies are what discussing ideas and engaging in critical thinking are all about.
Petraeus seems here more a party line politician than any sort of intellectual analyst, not least in his decided habit of asserting as fact what instead needs to be either argued for, or at least acknowledged as uncertain, contested, etc.
Who is the guy picking these people? Alistair Campbell and now this horror? Sack the person responsible immediately. I don't want to listen to war criminals on this channel.
This guy could be the most disliked American general in Turkey because of his humiliating actions against Turkish soldiers. Turkey recognized Petraeus with the "sack incident" on July 4, 2003. A group of US soldiers under the command of Colonel Mayville, who is affiliated to Petraeus, raided the Turkish team serving in Suleymaniyah, and Turkish soldiers with sacks on their heads were taken to Baghdad and interrogated. We will never forgive and forget this piece of s…
@@hakikitosunpasabenim3088 people from Islamic, countries only care about war crimes from the west they have amnesia about the war crimes from their own religious states
A classic buerocratic rebuttal display without much care about truth or accuracy. He is just saying things verbatim without applying any sense at all. I feel like he is reading one of those nostalgic files which are usually full of useless details and jargons. Very disappointed to see such a "high" positioned official has such a "little" brain to offer any substantial knowledge.
@@mohammedroshankhan7912 Nope. You can see that Russia has no rules, Hamas has no rules, Taliban has no rules. North Korea has no rules. Iran has no rules. Hezbollah has no rules. Or should I say that they do not go by the Geneva convention and western rules.
@@Eagle1836 This guy Eagle doesn't understand that the US has invaded or orchestrated coups in over 60 countries in half a century and that it props up and supports totalitarian regimes all over the world. He likes to blame the victims of imperial aggression and violence.
The USA did not lose the war in Iraq. The was designed to creat chaos and it did; civil war and it did; ethnic cleansing and it did; Mullah rule and it did; expansion of the Shiite influence to destroy the balance that existed for hundreds of years and it did. The obstacle in Afghanistan was the mountainous nature of the country. You simply cannot succeed in Afghanistan until you raise the mountains, so it could qualify as a loss even though the USA a temporary fix.
I think president Clinton had more than one opportunity to kill bin Laden but failed to do so. Perhaps both invasions could have been avoided along with countless casualties.
It is interesting and I wonder if it is unprecedented that someone from Pentagon becomes head of CIA. He also sounds like an idealogue that should not be part of a deal for a civil servant. He is clearly very intelligent but they way he is menspolising the interview shows an unacceptable level of arogance.
When the General was extrpolating the number of people killed and kidnaped on 10/7 compared to 9/11 (i.e., a considerably very large number) it would had been interesting if the interviewer had compared and extrapolated the number of people killed in Ghana to, say, our invasion of Iraq -- not that Iraq had anything to do with it. If we say the population of Iraq is 44M; and to round the numbers, let's say 40,000 (out of 2M) have been killed in Ghaza so far, it would be a 22 times magnitude. In other words, the extrapolatiom for our retaliation for 9/11 then would had been as if we killed about 880,000 poeple (about half million of which would had been women and children) in 6 months, which comparing the two areas population density would had required nuclear bombs, vs. the 2000 kg dumb bombs used in Ghaza. Extrapolation goes both ways.Just a though...
This was not the first attack by Hamas. For Hamas it is equivalent to a religious war. It isn't war as an extension of politics in the western sense. The key idea for Israel is to deliver ever larger penalty per crime. Proportional response is about forgetting history.
Nobody dies in Gaza for existing. It's a war. Asymmetrical war. Oct 7th was MURDER. Leftists hand-wave murder in America but obsess over....war? In a battlespace? Socialists have murdered more in USA since Oct 7th than Israelis in Gaza (0 murders) This is what happens when Marxists take over. Of course the millions slaughtered by Socialists is never a problem. Israel has a right to defend itself. Leftists think they have a right to to persecute Jews all over the US like Hitler.
I’m pretty sure from my reading of the history books that Palestinians were killing Jews long before the state of Israel existed. While they’re excuse now is that they don’t have a state. The truth is that when they were in power, they were thugs and they are thugs now.
Put your drink down,sit, and think about this: How would you like to have China,Russia,Iran or North Korea tell you: THIS IS HOW you are going to live your life from now on,or else.... That is America's s approach since WWII,and saying :" We are the good guys" when you basically replace laws by RULES( Do as I say, not as I do) does not look really convincing when you basically do everything that benefits you and you only.
