Submitted by usernamehere on Tue, 08/17/2010 - 7:45am.
One of the few reasons I can get excited about voting for federal races this year.
The question then becomes: which candidates will once again get the generals off TV?
I must ask why David Price, Brad Miller, Walter Jones, Butterfield, McIntyre, etc. have been so ineffective at that.
Use the power of Congress to control military spending. By doing so you not only regain control of the military and our foreign policy, but you can tame the deficit.
I guess I'm feeling hopeful this morning to even type this out. Fear not, reality will set in again soon I'm sure.
McChrystal was a loose cannon, whose indiscretion was not about policy or strategy, but about personalities. There is no evidence that Petraeus is stepping out of line in the manner McChrystal did.
Many of us applauded Shinseki's TV appearances as Army Chief of Staff prior to the catastrophic invasion of Iraq. Similarly we hailed Zinni as a wise, experienced combat veteran as he made the TV talk show rounds (of course, Zinni had retired by then).
We need to remember that general and flag officers in our military are, and always have been, more politician in the public eye than combat leader, from Andrew Jackson to George McClellan to George Custer to Douglas MacArthur to Curtis LeMay to Hyman Rickover.
were way out of line, regardless of whether they reflected Obama's position or not. In either case, he's delusional if he thinks there's any "grace" to be found in our continuing destruction of Afghanistan.
One issue -- whether Petraeus (or any other uniformed military officer) should be making the talk show rounds. If the CINC and SECDEF don't have a problem with that, I certainly don't.
Second issue -- the strategy itself. I have a real problem with the strategy.
I honestly don't see that as a problem. These general and flag officers are the face of the military. It is important to me at least to be able to hear what they say.
When he was head of Naval Reactors, ADM Rickover wasn't a "TV spokesbot" only because hearings of Congressional committees were not televised widely prior to the Watergate hearings and the advent of C-SPAN a few years later.
I'll admit to bias on this point as an Annpolis grad with classmates who are current (and retired) flag officers.
My problem is that it's impossible to understand what they actually think.
The prospect that a flag officer would be saying something, anything, that wasn't completely cleared by and aligned with the Commander in Chief is just plain wrong. Therefore, the only interpretation I can have is that the comments are part of an orchestrated propaganda effort. If that's the case, I believe it undermines integrity all around.
I know of at least one '72 classmate who got pretty vocal as a flag officer. Remembering him from plebe year, he was just about the last guy on earth I'd want speaking to the public about such political matters.
The linked article suggests that there is a big push to get us out of Afghanistan, and that Congress should "take over" strategy for the war effort.
Let us not be deceived here. The Republicans who are making noise about Afghanistan as "Obama's War" have absolutely no intention of pulling out of Afghanistan or cutting off funding for the war effort. Theirs is a purely political calculation, using this as another wedge issue in the mid-term campaign.
BlueNC is dedicated to making North Carolina a more progressive and prosperous state. If your intention is to disrupt this effort, please find somewhere else to express your opinions.
Comments
The Military and Congress
One of the few reasons I can get excited about voting for federal races this year.
The question then becomes: which candidates will once again get the generals off TV?
I must ask why David Price, Brad Miller, Walter Jones, Butterfield, McIntyre, etc. have been so ineffective at that.
Use the power of Congress to control military spending. By doing so you not only regain control of the military and our foreign policy, but you can tame the deficit.
I guess I'm feeling hopeful this morning to even type this out. Fear not, reality will set in again soon I'm sure.
Get the generals off TV?
McChrystal was a loose cannon, whose indiscretion was not about policy or strategy, but about personalities. There is no evidence that Petraeus is stepping out of line in the manner McChrystal did.
Many of us applauded Shinseki's TV appearances as Army Chief of Staff prior to the catastrophic invasion of Iraq. Similarly we hailed Zinni as a wise, experienced combat veteran as he made the TV talk show rounds (of course, Zinni had retired by then).
We need to remember that general and flag officers in our military are, and always have been, more politician in the public eye than combat leader, from Andrew Jackson to George McClellan to George Custer to Douglas MacArthur to Curtis LeMay to Hyman Rickover.
______________________________________________________________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. -- sign on Einstein's office wall.
Generals as TV spokesbots is a fairly new phenomena
...and it needs to be walked back.
You are correct about Zinni being retired when he was a talking head, and that's how it needs to be.
No disagreement here, and that's the problem.
I thought Petraeus' comments
were way out of line, regardless of whether they reflected Obama's position or not. In either case, he's delusional if he thinks there's any "grace" to be found in our continuing destruction of Afghanistan.
A different issue, IMHO
One issue -- whether Petraeus (or any other uniformed military officer) should be making the talk show rounds. If the CINC and SECDEF don't have a problem with that, I certainly don't.
Second issue -- the strategy itself. I have a real problem with the strategy.
______________________________________________________________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. -- sign on Einstein's office wall.
Good point
See my comment below ... we seem to be roughly in the same chapter, if not on the same page.
Go Navy!
What's the problem?
I honestly don't see that as a problem. These general and flag officers are the face of the military. It is important to me at least to be able to hear what they say.
When he was head of Naval Reactors, ADM Rickover wasn't a "TV spokesbot" only because hearings of Congressional committees were not televised widely prior to the Watergate hearings and the advent of C-SPAN a few years later.
I'll admit to bias on this point as an Annpolis grad with classmates who are current (and retired) flag officers.
______________________________________________________________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. -- sign on Einstein's office wall.
Credibility
My problem is that it's impossible to understand what they actually think.
The prospect that a flag officer would be saying something, anything, that wasn't completely cleared by and aligned with the Commander in Chief is just plain wrong. Therefore, the only interpretation I can have is that the comments are part of an orchestrated propaganda effort. If that's the case, I believe it undermines integrity all around.
I know of at least one '72 classmate who got pretty vocal as a flag officer. Remembering him from plebe year, he was just about the last guy on earth I'd want speaking to the public about such political matters.
As my linked article intimates
...there's nothing wrong with any flag officer going before Congress.
In fact, that's the point of my whole post. Well, that and to spark discussion.
Congress should reassert itself because the civilian command (President) sure hasn't.
The linked article
The linked article suggests that there is a big push to get us out of Afghanistan, and that Congress should "take over" strategy for the war effort.
Let us not be deceived here. The Republicans who are making noise about Afghanistan as "Obama's War" have absolutely no intention of pulling out of Afghanistan or cutting off funding for the war effort. Theirs is a purely political calculation, using this as another wedge issue in the mid-term campaign.
______________________________________________________________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. -- sign on Einstein's office wall.
meanwhile in Texas
I thought this video might be of interest:
Apologists for BP like TX Gov. Rick Perry don't have the facts on their side.
- - - - -
http://twitter.com/Jerimee