Posted on 02/07/2008 9:54:59 PM PST by george76
The U.S. just dodged a bullet in Iraq.
Recently it was reported that Pentagon leaders were considering Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the Multi-National Force Iraq since February 2007, for a prestigious redeployment to Europe. It is good news for Americans and Iraqis alike that Gen. Petraeus decided to stay in Baghdad through the fall.
What's depressing is that top political and military leaders in Washington asked him to consider the move in the first place. The proposal to shift Gen. Petraeus out of Iraq reflects the unwillingness of the military as a whole to make the larger cultural changes required to succeed in tough counterinsurgency missions.
Gen. Petraeus has repeatedly pointed out that a key reason behind the improvements in Iraq revolved around the fact that Americans were walking the streets, living alongside Iraqis, forging close relationships with Iraqi soldiers and police, and demonstrating to the population a commitment to achieving enduring security.
Indeed, a key requirement for success in war is consistency of effort over time. Only experience on the ground permits the acquisition of enough knowledge of the political landscape and personalities necessary to shape events and achieve political stability.
In short, removing such a successful leader from a mission in progress is senseless. It is also inconsistent with much of the America's wartime history.
George Washington served as commander of the American revolutionary forces for eight years, from 1775-1783. Without his resolute leadership and political instincts, it is likely that the Continental Army would have disintegrated.
In the Mexican War, Gen. Winfield Scott ...
During World War II, Gens. Dwight D. Eisenhower and George C. Marshall ...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
A champion of the old Big Army culture is none other than "boots on the ground" John McCain.
McCain. Of all candidate to run this year we get McCain.
Boy that is going to work. A 25 year member of the Old Boy’s club is really going to be able to sell himself as “an agent of change”.
I listened to Leon Panetta today on Fox. He said that Hillary will ultimately win the nomination because of her image as a strong CIC.
ROTFLMAO.
the military’s own counterinsurgency (COIN) manual emphasizes the need to cultivate effective leaders in the host country. Younger officers deploying to and from Iraq have reinforced these themes, writing consistently about the importance of maintaining a stable presence and getting to know the political, social and cultural terrain.
Yet the turnover of top commanders in Iraq directly contradicts much of the COIN manual’s observation that crafting a political solution over time is the only proven means by which insurgencies are defeated.
My son is serving and has been twice to Afghanistan and once to Iraq..now elsewhere in front lines. My best friends son is also special forces and is in an out on regular rotation.
Every day I pray for them and our other service people.
In the end we can’t have Hillary or Obama running them.
I don’t know what us conservatives can do..but we can’t have them in the end.
Thanks to you and your son.
We must keep Hillary or Obama out.
Why the hell would anyone recommend he take another position? He’s doing very well.
Yet the turnover of top commanders in Iraq directly contradicts much of the COIN manual’s observation that crafting a political solution over time is the only proven means by which insurgencies are defeated.
This cuts both ways. Yes, stability so long as there is a consistent policy enforced consistently by a string of leaders.
Swapping out leaders also builds a strong cadre of upper management with shared experience. You can’t buy that. Plus some can see things the others miss which can contribute to a process of continual improvement.
Plus, if this is to be a long term solution, we need to develop a “community” of Old Iraq-Hands, rather than just relying on a couple leaders.
“....In the end we can’t have Hillary or Obama running them.
I don’t know what us conservatives can do..but we can’t have them in the end.”
Agreed.
This is so critical I cannot stress it enough.
I will never forget, or forgive what the democrats have done to our troops while in battle.
There is no victory in losing.
We MUST keep them out of the white house.
The war on terror and the supreme court are reason enough.
Thank God for people like your son.
You raised a hero.
And I hope more Freepers will listen to you.
“....In the end we can’t have Hillary or Obama running them.
I don’t know what us conservatives can do..but we can’t have them in the end.”
Agreed.
This is so critical I cannot stress it enough.
I will never forget, or forgive what the democrats have done to our troops while in battle.
There is no victory in losing.
We MUST keep them out of the white house.
The war on terror and the supreme court are reason enough.
Thank God for people like your son.
You raised a hero.
And I hope more Freepers will listen to you.
For the DUmmies , that is the problem...He’s doing very well.
Thanks :
we need to develop a “community” of Old Iraq-Hands, rather than just relying on a couple leaders.
And my tank mechanic daughter will probably be joining her Guard unit in Iraq again this fall, Oldex. It might just be tough talk, but she says she’s looking forward to the break from college (again). She signed up because several of her friends had already joined, and for the free schooling, and it turns out that she likes the Guard. I did two hitches in Reagan’s Army, the one the Commies feared, and have few qualms about her serving. Truthfully, I worry just as much about the potential negative consequences of her wild college life as I do about any possible combat over there.
Something stinks. Like Thompson getting out before Super Tuesday, and Romney getting out before all the states had a chance to vote in the primaries. Something stinks.
Wael, do you really think that's entirely a bad thing?
From a January 2007 NPR story, hopefully to point to what I'm getting at:
So as the soon-to-be top ground commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, met Senators Tuesday, he told them the situation in Iraq is "dire."
. . .
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), used his time to make some of his points in a round-about fashion.
"Suppose we send you over to your new job, general, only we tell you you can't have additional troops," said McCain. "Can you get your job done?"
"No sir," Petraeus said.
"Suppose that we send you additional troops and we tell those troops that we support you, but we are convinced you cannot accomplish your mission. What effect would that have on your troops?" asked McCain.
"Well, it would not be a beneficial one, sir," Petraeus said.
Are you thinking that as Commander-in-Chief, McCain would pressure Petraeus to do something different?
Amen to that. All it will take is a high-profile car-bomb or a negative New York Times poll and Hillary or Obama will pull our troops out. The Democratic party is deeply committed to defeat in Iraq.
I pray for them (and thank God for them!!!) every day, too. And for our President.
That’s the way the military operates, that’s why.
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.