American Senate Almost Makes Bold Statement About General Betrayus

"Another War-on-Terror Blog" isn't intended to be political. However, sometimes efforts to stop religious fanatics from killing people have to wade through politics.

Over a week ago, I posted "General Petraeus, General Betrayus, and Tolerance," about Senators making speeches at one of America's generals, and how a political action groups was making fun of the General.

It's arguable that it's the general's fault. He has a funny-sounding name. If he had a nice, American, name, like Aikin, or Carter, or Johnson, or Wilson, he wouldn't have been called "General Betrayus."

I'm inclined to see such mocking of a major military leader as one of the unpleasant side-effects of having a nation which allows free speech.

At any rate, someone in the Senate had the odd idea that the Senate should put some distance between itself and petulant outbursts like the "Betrayus" remarks.

That made sense to me. It's one thing for an advocacy group to sling mud at someone who is trying to preserve their right to insult him, and their lives, for that matter. It's another thing for one of the august legislative bodies to, by their silence, tacitly approve of such lack of respect.

The ruling party in the Senate didn't want to defend General Betrayus's integrity at first. Sorry, that's General Petraeus. See how a crack like that can squirm into everyday speech? Finally, though, after the Senate ruminated on the idea for a while, and let the legislative process work.

What came out was an amendment on the defense authorization bill.

Here's the Statement of Purpose for S.Amdt. 2934 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008): "To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces."

I really am impressed. They went on record with a strong condemnation of "personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces."

The measure passed 75-25. None of the ruling party's presidential candidates voted for the measure. Some ducked out, others voted against it.

I'll say this for the United States Senate: They let people know who the membership voted. The Senate's website posted U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session, where you can read how each Senator voted.

MoveOn.org, the political fund raiser and advocacy group that started the "Betrayus" thing with an ad in the New York Times, wasn't mentioned in the amendment, but it's still a remarkably blunt and clear statement.

How Dare General Petraeus Bring Facts to Congress?

General David Petraeus "is widely regarded as one of the brightest soldiers of his generation." As well as a remarkable knowledge of military history, he as the stamina to go on regular 10-mile runs with his troops. General Petraeus is "brilliant," according to Barry McCaffrey, a retired four-star general.

Aside from his mental and physical strengths, Petraeus has accepted the duty to defend America from its enemies.

He also must play along with the United States Congress.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joe Biden asked Petraeus if Iraq was closer than before the surge to getting its political parties to work together, and whether continuing the surge would stop killing between Sunnis, Shias and Kurds?

Perhaps becaue he was afraid that General Petraeus would give the wrong answer, Biden said, "the answer to both those questions is no."

Senator Christopher Dodd showed greater efficiency by putting an implied answer into his question. "What makes you possibly think that anything further like this is going to produce the results that anybody else has failed to do?"

That's tellin' 'im!

Senator Chuck Hagel seemed affronted that Petraeus and Bush administration official Crocker had something other than bad news about Iraq. "Where is this going to go?" Hagel asked. Being an astute politician, Hagel continued, "are we going to continue to invest American blood and treasure at the same rate as we are now? For what?"

Petraeus replied: "my responsibility as I see it is not to give a good picture, it is to give an accurate picture."

Shocking! Presuming to bring facts to Senators who obviously know all the answers already!