Gen. Petraeus: Kiss My ##@*&%$! ASS!

According to this well written piece from David Porter, also carried at HuffPo - US Army General David Petraeus is working to override US President Barack Obama.  

(Cross posted at The National Gadfly)

CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 16 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.

But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn't convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.

Obama's decision to override Petraeus's recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.

A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama's decision.

Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office,</span> according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, "Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama."

Petraeus, Gates and Odierno had hoped to sell Obama on a plan that they formulated in the final months of the Bush administration that aimed at getting around a key provision of the U.S.-Iraqi withdrawal agreement signed envisioned re-categorising large numbers of combat troops as support troops. That subterfuge was by the United States last November while ostensibly allowing Obama to deliver on his campaign promise.

Gates and Mullen had discussed the relabeling scheme with Obama as part of the Petraeus-Odierno plan for withdrawal they had presented to him in mid-December, according to a Dec. 18 New York Times story. </span>

First, let me start out with the basics, in capital letters:




Here is how these "Senior Military Officials" at the Pentagon plan to get their way:

senior active duty officers in the Pentagon, will begin making the argument to journalists covering the Pentagon that Obama's withdrawal policy risks an eventual collapse in Iraq. That would raise the political cost to Obama of sticking to his withdrawal policy.

aka: insubordination, mutiny, dereliction of duty, disobeying a direct order

We've seen this tactic and are seeing it now.  Very serious (usually white) men in uniform going on CNN and telling us in no uncertain terms that Democrats are pussies and all our "cherished American way of life hangs in the balance" if we don't drop our pants right now and give these death-addicts a blank check to kill millions of people and buy trillions of dollars of weapons.

I am sick and tired of being robbed by the Pentagon.  I am sick and tired of our troops being deployed so that the Pentagon can justify billions more taxpayer money for cluster bombs, depleted uranium, nerve agent, drug deals, poisoned water, slaughtered civilians and untold riches for the Defense Industry (with a few tasty morsels for these same obliging military officers after they retire).

I was in the US Army and I served my country with pride.  These thieving murderers - and that is exactly what they are, have fucked our country over for long enough! They are not incompetent, they are lying. 

Spread the word, people.  Fight them.  Call CNN, call your Senators and Representatives.  Go to and make the Iraq Troop Withdrawl a front-burner issue. 

President Obama announced a 10% Defense Spending cut for this year.  I think that every time Petraeus or one of his stooges opens his or her flapper on TV about the troop levels in Iraq, the number goes up - Obama should raise the cuts by 1%.  Let these bloodthirsty thieves know that there is a chain of command.  Hold them to their promise to  uphold and defend The Constitution.  And let them get a job on their own instead of as a reward for funneling taxpayer money into the pockets of their future employers.

If this is diaried elsewhere, I apologize. Goddammit, I'm pissed!

- gadfly

Tags: chain of command, defense spending, insubordination, Iraq, murder, mutiny, obama, pentagon, petraeus (all tags)



mojo, etc. n/t

by the national gadfly 2009-02-02 12:23PM | 0 recs
I just hate it . . .

when somebody hides their feelings and just doesn't come out and say exactly how they feel.

FYI: rec'd

by jsfox 2009-02-02 12:26PM | 0 recs
I know...I know...

my wife tells me to open up - and I just don't know how.

:-) thanks for reading & rec'ing


by the national gadfly 2009-02-02 12:29PM | 0 recs
Petraeus has political ambitions

Clearly, if you read what some of the general brass says about him, he is brilliant but obstinant, and with a very high opinion of himself.

A number have mentioned, he sees politics in his future, including a run as a Republican at POTUS.

Don't be surprised to see him keep fighting this, even forcing the issue to have Obama have to remove him.

Then he heads for Fox News, where he can start polishing his conservative boni fides!

by WashStateBlue 2009-02-02 12:31PM | 0 recs
Now tell us what you really think!



by bobswern 2009-02-02 12:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Petraeus has political ambitions

He won't let Obama remove him. That wouldn't be enough to make him a martyr. No, he'll resign in protest if he goes that route. But whatever. He's a smart guy, but not that hard to humble. I say he gets put in charge of the Afghanistan effort and gets anything he wants there. Let him take the blame if/when it goes to hell.

by vcalzone 2009-02-02 02:46PM | 0 recs
Here's another excellent article on the very

very same subject:


Keane had also prevailed on Gates in April 2008 to make Petraeus the new commander of CENTCOM. Keane argued that keeping Petraeus in the field was the best insurance against a Democratic administration reversing the Bush policy toward Iraq.

Keane had operated on the assumption that a Democratic president would probably not take the political risk of rejecting Petraeus's recommendation on the pace of troop withdrawal from Iraq. Woodward quotes Keane as telling Gates, "Let's assume we have a Democratic administration and they want to pull this thing out quickly, and now they have to deal with General Petraeus and General Odierno. There will be a price to be paid to override them."

Obama told Petraeus in Baghdad last July that, if elected, he would regard the overall health of the U.S. Army and Marine Corps and the situation in Afghanistan as more important than Petraeus's obvious interest in maximising U.S. troop strength in Iraq, according to Time magazine's Joe Klein.

But judging from Petraeus's shock at Obama's Jan. 21 decision, he had not taken Obama's previous rejection of his arguments seriously. That miscalculation suggests that Petraeus had begun to accept Keane's assertion that a newly-elected Democratic president would not dare to override his policy recommendation on troops in Iraq.

by suzieg 2009-02-03 01:05AM | 0 recs
Here is I view it. Gen Petreaus should advise his

Commander-in-Chief President Obama to the best of ability. Once the President have decided on a course of action, the General should follow that course without any question. If he works to undermine his Commander-in-Chief, he is violating his oath and trying to disturb the primacy of civilian rule over military in US democracy. This violation serious enough and entails more than just asking for his resignation.

by louisprandtl 2009-02-02 01:04PM | 0 recs
I have some serious typographical issues....

Need to see a type doctor...revise before posting.....arghhh....

by louisprandtl 2009-02-02 01:06PM | 0 recs

At what point does his contrarian "advise" become "undermining" his boss ?

by Ravi Verma 2009-02-02 01:53PM | 0 recs
Re: But...

When he's trying to build consensus against his president, rather than giving advice to his president.

Sounds to me like he crossed that line already.

by Bush Bites 2009-02-02 02:17PM | 0 recs
Re: But...

When that advice is given to others - like, say, the press - and not to his boss.

by mistersite 2009-02-02 03:10PM | 0 recs
When the Commander-in-Chief has decided

on a course of action and had ordered the General to implement, and the General still pursues a course (here publicly) to undermine the President's order. Then it becomes a serious violation which usually end in dismissal e.g. Douglas MacArthur's dismissal by Truman.

by louisprandtl 2009-02-02 03:22PM | 0 recs
Re: When the Commander-in-Chief has decided

Havent we gone down this road before ?

Remember General Betray-Us ?

by Ravi Verma 2009-02-02 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Gen. Petraeus: Kiss My ##@*&amp;amp;%$! ASS!

Now this is passion I can believe in! REC

by Politicalslave 2009-02-02 02:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Gen. Petraeus: Kiss My ##@*&amp;amp;%$! ASS!

Finally, a diary worthy of being on the rec list.

by bsavage 2009-02-02 02:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Gen. Petraeus: Kiss My ##@*&amp;amp;%$! ASS!

I'm trying to determine what "##@*&%$!" could possibly mean, but I can't think of any eight letter curse words that would fit.

by freedom78 2009-02-02 02:36PM | 0 recs
Kiss My ##@*&amp;amp;amp;%$! ASS!

F***NUTZ, it's a miltary thing, kind of like FUBAR!

by WashStateBlue 2009-02-02 02:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Kiss My ##@*&amp;amp;amp;amp;%$! ASS!

The only two things that occured to me were "bullshit", which really doesn't fit, and "big black/white", which isn't really cursing.  

by freedom78 2009-02-02 03:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Gen. Petraeus: Kiss My ##@*%$! ASS!

It's like German... just take the worst two four-letter words you can think of and combine them into one überword.

by mistersite 2009-02-02 03:14PM | 0 recs
The good general should voice his concerns...

And I would expect that President Obama listened and considered them.  I don't expect our flag officers to reshape their minds precisely to the will of the president - that sort of shit is what got us into so much trouble in Iraq.  The generals and admirals should push back hard if they think the president is making a mistake.  I demand nothing less than a willingness to lose their careers if they think they need to make their case plain.

All that said, they do that within the confines of their jobs the chain of command.  If General Petreaus thinks that President Obama is wrong he should tell the President exactly that, with all the force and certitude he believes the situation requires.  If he fails to convince the president he has to make a choice.  Can he carry out his orders?  If he can, he should.  If he cannot he should resign.

There is no dishonor in that.

Taking this public, however, would be a violation of the most basic tenets of our system of government.  The military is the spear.  Civilian leadership wields that spear.

by Reaper0Bot0 2009-02-02 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: The good general should voice his concerns...

Taking this public, however, would be a violation of the most basic tenets of our system of government.  The military is the spear.  Civilian leadership wields that spear.

Remember, we are talking Republicans here. They would justify it on Patriotic grounds, like they do every other time they blow a fart at the Founding Fathers and call it roses....

by WashStateBlue 2009-02-02 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: The good general should voice his concerns...

Nice to hear from you Reaper0Bot0. I always enjoy hearing your opinion. Cheers

by Politicalslave 2009-02-02 04:08PM | 0 recs

    I didn't realize that General Petraeus was under an obligation to define his expert advice based on election results.

   There is absolutely nothing wrong with him briefing the President and offering his advice and suggestions. He is not under any obligation to like what he hears.

   He is under an obligation to follow the orders of his commander-in-chief. Should he not do that, then this diary would be warranted.

   But it is not Petraeus' obligation to change his advice b/c of the political situation. If he truly believes that withdrawal is a disaster, he has an OBLIGATION to tell his boss that.

   Your diary is ill advised and, in all seriousness, a joke. It's not that Petraeus' disagrees with the President. It's that YOU DISAGREE WITH PETRAEUS. That's fine...but it doesn't warrant a rant like this. Calm down and let the President and his military men do their jobs.

by southernman 2009-02-02 08:13PM | 0 recs
I think you miss the point

If certain flag officers intend an end-run around the President to convince the public to undercut the President, well, that's not cool.

And no, what Shinseki did was NOT the same thing.

by Reaper0Bot0 2009-02-02 08:16PM | 0 recs
There is something wrong

Gen. Petraeus can disagree until he's blue in the face - when he is speaking directly to his boss, President Barack Obama.  

When he and other officers plot to campaign through the Press to specifically pressure President Obama to change his mind, that is wrong.

It is first and foremost completely outside the responsibilities of a General in the United States Army.  His job is to follow orders and not to change them.  More specifically, he is not to undermine the authority of his boss, the President of the United States of America.  Period.  Under no circumstances.  End of story.

I'm sorry that you think my diary is a joke, but tough luck.  Don't read it anymore and go on about your business.


by the national gadfly 2009-02-02 08:22PM | 0 recs
Re: There is something wrong

   I'm sure the President appreciates the fact that you know more than he does about the job of his subordinates and how they conduct themselves.


by southernman 2009-02-02 08:37PM | 0 recs
Re: There is something wrong

I am sure others like myself are interested in reading new developments with respect to the middle east conflicts.

by KLRinLA 2009-02-03 06:10AM | 0 recs
Reminds me of that NASA situation I diaried about

With the Bush head of NASA going around to their vendors telling them what's okay and what's not okay to say to the Obama transition team about their projects.

If Petraeus is actually doing an end-run campaign to undermine Obama's Iraq policy, then he really is in the wrong line of work, no matter how skilled he is at his job.

I ain't gonna say he's "General Betray-Us," but if this is true then he's dancing a little too close to the line.

by Dracomicron 2009-02-03 04:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Gen. Petraeus: See Ya!

President Obama should let Petraeus and the rest of the Bush-holdovers know that either they do their jobs and obey orders or they'll be out on their asses.  I agree many of the posters above that any military officer working against President Obama should be charged with insubordination.

by Marie Smith 2009-02-03 05:22AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads