Having Gates in place for a period of time gives Pres-elect O some breathing space to get his nat’l security council established and start setting objectives. The rest of the NSC will be new administration appointees, so there is little doubt that the President will have a wide range of voices/views to help his decision making. Having a known quantity on board at Defense also allows Obama to focus on his domestic agenda, which is first and foremost on the minds of most Americans at this point, no?

Someone wrote that Gates “kept the Iraq War going another two years”; come on! What authority does the SECDEF have to start/stop wars? The President opted to continue the war, and, perhaps more importantly, the Congress has continuously voted to fund the war in Iraq.

Gates DID support the change in strategy in the war, however, and it is hard to argue against the fact that conditions have improved there. This very post talks about the continued drawdown of forces in Iraq.

A few random notes:

In the comments, a few people brought up problems with military health care; I am glad people shine a light on anyone getting slighted in terms of military Medical treatment, that has always been an area of weakness for the military, and the more it is out in the open, the better chance Soldiers have of getting taken care of. It would be interesting to compare/contrast the care received by Soldiers/families now and that of 4 decades ago. I am an active duty Soldier with 17 years experience/family/kids, and I am pretty happy with the care we receive, fyi. I have taken time to visit friends at Walter Reed who have been wounded in combat, and have been happy to see the care they are receiving. I know that walter reed was pretty jacked up awhile back, but it seems that the quality of care has improved there.

I agree with some of the commenters that the “killers” moniker denotes sociopaths and as a Soldier I find it demeaning.

I hope that Obama and his intended SECSTATE do take actions to reform the DOS and make it more effective. The reason that the Combatant Commanders (like Petraeus at CENTCOM) assume so much responsibility in much of the world (especially the underdeveloped parts of the world) is because there is a vacuum of U.S. influence there. This isn’t a Bush administration issue, the problem existed during the Clinton Administration as well. Back then, Zinni was the Petraeus! DOS needs more Foreign Service Officers, and they need to be in places where the U.S. is most engaged and trying to make an impact (ie not in Brussels or Paris!Will Hillary Clinton focus on reforming the department itself to adapt it to the 21st century? Jury’s out. . .

Cheers!

Bob W
http://www.acreofindependence.com

Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said the Pentagon’s “more conservative definition” limited benefits for some veterans. “That was not our intent,” Levin said in a statement.

But, Bushco has to screw the troops one way or another… I was incredulous with Shrub’s appearance at Ft. Campbell this morn…

But veterans like Dixon and Meshell said their disabilities were a direct result of wounds suffered in combat.

Dixon said he was denied at least $16,000 in benefits before he fought the Pentagon and won a reversal of his noncombat-related designation.

“I was blown up twice in Iraq, and my injuries weren’t combat-related?” Dixon said. “It’s the most imbecile thing I’ve ever seen.”

Meshell, who is appealing her status, estimates she is losing at least $1,200 a month in benefits. Despite being injured in a combat zone during an enemy mortar attack, she said, her wounds would be considered combat-related only if she had been struck by shrapnel.