One Key Question in General Petraeus' and Ambassador Crocker's Testimony

Senator Russ Feingold asked Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General Petraeus a key question during their testimony before the Senate.  Feingold asked, "which should have the higher priority in the war against al-Qaeda, Iraq or the rebuilt al-Qaeda and terrorist camps festering on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border?"  Petraeus declined to answer the question, correctly claiming that he did not have the knowledge or authority to answer that question.  Crocker, however, was once Ambassador to Pakistan and definitely has the knowledge and authority to offer an answer.  Crocker, following the Bush Administration's policy,  gave a vague and ambigeous answer and unfortunately Feingold let him off the hook, as he moved on to another question. 

I wondered what President Bush would answer to that question.  Would it be in the best interest of the U.S. to focus on maintaining the gains we have achieved in Afghanistan and catching Osama bin Laden or should be continue to the uncertain fight in Iraq, while allowing the Talaban in  Afghanistan to grow stronger and give bin Laden the respite he needs to plan more attacks on us?

[I know, for students of argument, the question presents a faulty dilemma.  There might be more than two options.  It was Feingold's question not mine.  Nevertheless, If the question does not represent good argument, it does raise an important issue: Which fight should receive the highest priority?]

My personal view is that we should redeploy in Iraq, beef up our forces in Afghanistan and do everything we can to put bin Laden where he belongs, in an American jail.  Chime in if you have a thought.

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan al-Qaeda General Petraeus Iraq Osama bin Laden Pakistan Politics Russ Feingold Ryan Crocker