Posted on 10/04/2009 7:25:58 PM PDT by Steelfish
Clear Voice of Bush’s Pentagon Becomes Harder to Hear
ELISABETH BUMILLER
October 4, 2009.
WASHINGTON — Gen. David H. Petraeus, the face of the Iraq troop surge and a favorite of former President George W. Bush, spoke up or was called upon by President Obama “several times” during the big Afghanistan strategy session in the Situation Room last week, one participant says, and will be back for two more meetings this week.
But the general’s closest associates say that underneath the surface of good relations, the celebrity commander faces a new reality in Mr. Obama’s White House: He is still at the table, but in a very different seat.
No longer does the man who oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have one of the biggest voices at National Security Council meetings, as he did when Mr. Bush gave him 20 minutes during hourlong weekly sessions to present his views in live video feeds from Baghdad.
No longer is the general, with the Capitol Hill contacts and web of e-mail relationships throughout Washington’s journalism establishment, testifying in media explosions before Congress, as he did in September 2007, when he gave 34 interviews in three days.
The change has fueled speculation in Washington about whether General Petraeus might seek the presidency in 2012. His advisers say that it is absurd — but in immediate policy terms, it means there is one less visible advocate for the military in the administration’s debate over whether to send up to 40,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.
General Petraeus’s aides now privately call him “Dave the Dull,” and say he has largely muzzled himself from the fierce public debate about the war to avoid antagonizing the White House, which does not want pressure from military superstars and is wary of the general’s ambitions in particular
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The trashing of the military commanders by the media sycophants for Obama commences.
David Petraeus/Sarah Palin 2012 (Unbeatable Combination)
The more the days pass by the more I am convinced that Bush was a President of extraordinary vision and character.
I increasingly despise his nasayers— both on the right and the left.
What was done to this awesome leader was despicable.
Even Reagan tucked tail and ran from Lebanon.
Together the three [Petraeus, McChrystal, Mullen] are likely to be aligned against Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., as well as other administration officials who want to scale back the effort.
Because Biden knows so much about war and that kind of stuff. I feel sorry for our military. I know it's what they sign up for and you don't get to be a general without also being a very good politician. But really, can you imagine these guys having to sit in a room with Biden and listen to him spout off his theories on military strategy? God bless America. We're going to need it.
Thank you
“Together the three [Petraeus, McChrystal, Mullen] are likely to be aligned against Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., as well as other administration officials who want to scale back the effort. “
You can add General Anthony Zinni a lefty hero to that list
(CBS) The former U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General Anthony Zinni, warned that the deliberations over whether to send additional troops to Afghanistan - as many as 40,000, as suggested by General Stanley McChrystal - should not go on too much longer, lest the debate be viewed as indecision or weakness.
On CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, Zinni said it was positive to have a strategic debate and to take all opinions into account. “But I think we have to be careful how long this goes on,” he told CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer. “It could be seen not only out there in the region but our allies, even [by] the enemy, as being indecisive, unable to make a decision.”
He questioned why the White House is questioning the advice of their commander in Afghanistan, General McChrystal who made the request for additional troops.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2354898/posts
I have been thinking along the same lines, but with Palin leading the ticket.
You would have the appeal Sarah, with the military experience of Patraeus. Besides, a Patraeus vs. Biden debate would be something to watch and TIVO.
It took guts for Bush to support the Surge. And it was so successful that everyone is trying to ignore how successful it was and that show great judgment. Obama is busily trying tyo undo all this, what with his too rapid withdrawals from Iraq and his half-hearted efforts in Afghanistan.
Biden is brilliant. He'll tell you so, himself.
Never mind that, before he was named Vice-President, the media referred to him as "The Dumbest Man In the Senate".
But, now, he's the Vice-President for "The Smartest Man Ever To Be President", so you wonder "How Smart Is The Media"?
Obama walks on anti-MoveOn.org Senate vote
Obama finally denounced the MoveOn ad only TENS MONTHS LATER, just before the 2008 July 4th celebration, in a speech crafted to prove his patriotism. (Probably the last and only time he gave a REMOTELY patriotic speech. And dontcha know he resented the hell out of it.)
A Palin vs. Odumbo debate would also be priceless PROVIDED he was denied use of his teleprompter (and other stealth electronic prompter devices). It would be quickly revealed who the real ‘dumb’ one is.
The RNC should be ashamed of itself for not mounting a no-holes barred ad campaign against 0. They should have run an ad highlighting this omission by 0 day and night especially since the surge had worked in late 2008.
Your post is post of the day, imo.
REALLY, no I mean, REALLY. C’mon. This article only proves that there is some serious stench eminating from the New York Times. I dealt with Company level ops in Iraq. Bush was a true Commander in Chief. Of course you would hold briefs with your Field Commanders once a week. Our current tool in chief spoke to his guy, once in three months. Let’s not kid ourselves New York Times. You are truly running cover for a man who cares not about the deaths of Soldiers, nor their well being for that matter. In fact, I would hazard a guess, that he harbors great contempt towards the afformentioned individuals. Only the one knows best. Why would a current Commander choose to lend credence to your hypothesis. Sooo, you point out he has an ego. OK. This means what. Let’s just say, us Veterans, have noticed that you have failed to put, the tragic loss of eight Soldiers lives, on two seperate occasions, in the last two weeks. On the Front page. If it happened on Bush’ watch, front page baby. You are NOTHING. You mean NOTHING. Just please take that final leap off the literary cliff. You would be doing us soldiers, and America, a favor.
Well said Sir, and we salute you for your gallant service.
You expect something like that from these losers .... reality is a biotch. Spineless gutless wonders to busy wetting on themselve int he corner.
get rid of em all. They are all spineless rinos
On domestic policy, iffy; on foreign policy, much better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.