Skip to comments.Petraeus Helping Pick New Generals
Posted on 11/17/2007 8:42:51 AM PST by Tennessean4Bush
Petraeus Helping Pick New Generals
Army Says Innovation Will Be Rewarded
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, November 17, 2007; Page A01
The Army has summoned the top U.S. commander in Iraq back to Washington to preside over a board that will pick some of the next generation of Army leaders, an unusual decision that officials say represents a vote of confidence in Gen. David H. Petraeus's conduct of the war, as well as the Army counterinsurgency doctrine he helped rewrite.
The Army has long been criticized for rewarding conventional military thinking and experience in traditional combat operations, and current and former defense officials have pointed to Petraeus's involvement in the promotion board process this month as a sign of the Army's commitment to encouraging innovation and rewarding skills beyond the battlefield.
Some junior and midlevel officers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have been particularly outspoken in their criticisms, saying the Army's current leadership lacks a hands-on understanding of today's conflicts and has not listened to feedback from younger personnel.
"It's unprecedented for the commander of an active theater to be brought back to head something like a brigadier generals board," said retired Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, former head of the Army War College. A senior defense official said Petraeus is "far too high-profile for this to be a subtle thing."
The board, composed of 15 Army generals, will examine a pool of more than 1,000 colonels to select about 40 brigadier generals, expected to lead the service over the next decade or longer. Although each board member has an equal vote on the candidates, Petraeus will be able to guide the discussion.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Sounds like some folks have been reading LTC Yingling’s essay.
Is Petraeus going to follow the footsteps of Eisenhower?
He'd probably get my vote. ;-)
Even when General Petraeus is going to “win” Iraq, I do not see him as having political ambitions. He’ll rather retire to a quiet life on a farm or something.
I have read just the opposite.
He WOULD get my vote. Peter Pace also.
I wonder what the effect would be if at the republican convention the nominee pulls a surprise and chooses Petraeus as his running mate? Hmmm. Can you pull a guy out of active duty, I wonder?
I think Bush has found his Grant.
Don’t have one. I read it sometime over the last 5 months or so on FR. It was an Iraqi who said Petraeus admitted to him that he wanted to run someday for President.
An Army task force is looking into incorporating such reviews, known as "360-degree evaluations," into the "officer efficiency reports" that are now completed only by superiors,
I believe Petraeus's footprints are on this and hopefully it will be implemented, it will take some of the politics out of the system and reward those that can get the job done.
I have the dishonor of having my retirement papers signed by Clinton, a stain that I will never be able to blot out. At the same time, don't believe for a minute that the neocons were any better at this. Wolfowitz and Feith and even Cheney were just as bad at ensuring the promotion of conformist yes-men (just a different sort of conformity), and it took the disasters of the first 3 years of Iraq to get these ideologues out of power and force putting in someone like Petraeus in the first place.
It is Winston Churchill who once said "You can count on the Americans to do the right thing - after they have exhausted every other possibility." Well, we exhausted every other possibility in Iraq.
Do you think he will be a viable candidate in 2012 or 2016? It’s been a long time since we’ve had a General as our President.
I think he might be more viable in 2008 as a VP. He will, by that time, be credited with winning the unwinnable war and be riding a wave of popularity among pubs, regan dems, and independents.
oops, I meant Reagan dems.
Yes you’re right. We can all say Saddam was a bad guy and must be taken out. After the successful invasion in 2003, we f***ed up the occupation. We should never had dismantled the Iraqi Army. Rumsfeld was to blame for this for trying to go to war on the cheap. Gates is now having to fix a whole a lot of things and finally we have the right General to get the job done in Iraq.
He won’t be ready to step down in 2008. Especially since the job won’t be done in Iraq.
The military job is done. Someone else can handle the mopping up phase.
The whole article is a very insightful read of some of the Army’s current leadership problems.
I thought so.
And one can only imagine the careers that are now headed down the toilet with a real soldier at the table picking the new generation of leaders. You can almost here the “oh shit”’s now.
Normally, I get called all sorts of foul names around here for pointing out the faults of leadership. But great strategists are few and far between. After many years of WWII (building on WWI leadership, by the way) we discovered that we only had 1/2 dozen great general and admirals. Why should it be any different today, and I am not being unpatriotic by insisting that our youth going into danger deserve to have the best leadership this country can produce - not a bag of excuses that are as worthless as a bunch of mortgage paper, but leadership. Montebanks need not apply. I think in Petraes we finally found it.
I can see more like in the footsteps of General Marshall. Not political, maybe SecState.
I am a Marine. Having worked for him, seen first hand how he does business, you can count on some of his loyal supporters getting thier star. Any West Point graduates with a good record will be even money. Anyone that has worked for him in the past, good to go...
1. Was general Petreaus' summons to Washington to attend this board deliberately made a public affair to signal to the ranks that Petreaus is the man?
2. Was it done to signal that counterinsurgency will be the emphasis in the Army in the future and, of course, the path to advancement?
3. Is this 360° rating system an unalloyed good; can you foresee situations in which it might lead to indiscipline in the ranks?
4. Would you include former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld as a man who sought only yes men?
5. Do you think that Rumsfeld is privately for or against this new emphasis; in other words do you think that Rumsfeld was for or against an army focused on counterinsurgency?
6. Assuming Petreaus can stamp these new brigadiers with his philosophy, will this have any long-term effect on the normally unalterable momentum of the Pentagon?
7. If changes can be effected in the Pentagon which are really meaningful and lead to an ability successfully to wage the war against terrorism, will they be strong enough to withstand a Clinton presidency?
Source for the claim that Petraus has political ambitions are all found on far Leftist wack job websites like Huffington Post. The accusation is leveled by the Left that Petraus has political ambitions that is why he painted the Surge as a success in his Sept report to Congress.
According to the USA Today Editorial board, he told them he has NO political ambitions.
So on one side you have an accusation leveled by the political Left on the hear say report of a supposed Iraqi source vrs the words Petraus supposedly told USA Today.
and your post:
That is the smartest thing I have heard in a long time. Retire the last of the Clinton mushhead Generals and get some real American fighting men in there.
Way past due. I can - but wont -name a Col right now who, in my estimation, is responsible for an incredible high KIA rate in the most dangerous area of Afghanistan - it seems he's clueless in the face of repeated ambushes by the barbarians that USE THE SAME MO over and over - these troops are sent out into the same exact trap, time and time again - and this gimoko doesn't get it.
I pray Petraeus is successful and I pray this Col. is the first to go, and I pray it will not be to late for these in this area - I'd like to get face to face with this jerk...
On the contrary, you are being very patriotic. Too bad if feelings are hurt. Our best young men and women are going into battle in foreign lands against people who are playing for keeps. We must insist on the best and most innovative leadership so that as few as possible are sacrificed.
A latter day Cincinnattus?
I trust your recollection better than mine. I still hope he can be convinced. I think he would be a shoe-in like Ike was.
A non-political general who turns poop into gold and is fostering the next generation of leadership can’t be anything but good.
I think this could be a good thing.
Now if we could only get him to select a Secretary of the Navy with an ounce of integrity.....
From everything I have read, we were still dragging around dead wood in some command slots on Sept 2, 1945.
NO organization in the world is EVER going to be perfect. The US Military comes a whole lot closer to it then any other organization of the good old US of A.
Go read about the mess that occurred in Bremer’s office, stacked with boys and girls out for a quick tour because they worked on the campaign and you won’t like neocon’s much anymore. In this aspect they were as bad as the Gore/Clintons getting others killed while some rich daddy’s little girl got a job that should have gone to someone who had a clue.
I am a retired O6 and have a high regard for folks who serve. But I feel a strong obligation to point out poor leadership when it is happening. There is no excuse for getting folks killed unnecessarily because you can’t be bothered to put someone in charge who has a clue what he is doing.
My bets, COL McMasters finally gets his star. I also think COL Shields, formerly my commander in the 172 SBCT, gets his first star.
The Army has summoned the top U.S. commander in Iraq back to Washington to preside over a board that will pick some of the next generation of Army leaders, an unusual decision that officials say represents a vote of confidence in Gen. David H. Petraeus's conduct of the war, as well as the Army counterinsurgency doctrine he helped rewrite.I hope they keep some of the old school around, for the early phases of a war, when a legitimate enemy army has to be knocked apart in a hurry.
I’ll bet Weasly Clark was a big advocate of Don’t ask don’t tell. As was his driver.
Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops
Oh me too. I was just reporting what I found in my quick goggle of the topic not my personal opinions. I like Petraus. Don't know that I would like his politics, but he is exactly the right person in exactly the right job at exactly the right moment in history. God has once again blessed the USA far beyond our merits.
Fantastic Churchill quote - never heard that one before!
And thank you for your service to our nation.
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.