Petraeus has personal political interests at stake in the struggle over Iraq policy. He has been widely regarded as a possible Republican Presidential candidate in 2012.

And Tom Ricks is auditioning to be his spokesman.

Well then, the Dems had better bash Move On again dontcha know…

a slow-rolling coup.

people might find this paper interesting. and amazingly prophetic. it’s all about how the people — having lost all faith in government turn to the military for leadership:

The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012
CHARLES J. DUNLAP, JR.

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/u…..dunlap.htm

Yeah, I thinking the same thing. If he is a neo-con mole bent on promoting Cheney’s dark world vision and undermining the commander-in-chief for personal or ideological goals then he is a Gen’l Betrayus.

Wow.

He could run with Palin and fill out the “Pee Pee” ticket!

Maybe it is a smart thing to stay in Iraq during a World Wide Depression.
We know more than many how bad the financial situation is and what is in store ahead for the next year and decade. So maybe it is a smart thing to protect the oil? The protests have started and you know there will be many more.

Monday, a group of 350 to 400 at-risk homeowners, organized by the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, staged a series of protests outside the mansions of wealthy bankers in a moneyed Connecticut neighborhood.

“Called the ‘Predators Tour’ these actions were the start of NACA’s ‘accountability campaign,’ an aggressive, confrontational protest aimed at several top executives of companies that refuse to allow NACA to renegotiate the terms of loans on behalf of members, according to NACA CEO Bruce Marks,” reported the Stamford

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/….._0209.html

On swecond thought, maybe the general shouldn’t run with Palin. I think she is taller than he is and what would American say about that!

Do the military muckalucks realize how ridiculous they look with all those inflated-medals litter scattered all over their chests? That picture is worth a millions words.

Where’s Smedley Butler when you need him?

I haven’t read your post yet but does anyone here know what the story was behind the religious right saying there would be a 3rd World War and the end of the world was coming in 2012? I do not believe this but am curious what it is/was that make them believe this?

they remind me of soviet generals with chests full of medals … but, of course, most of them actually earned those medals during wwII

So General Betrayus has a political agenda…. how surprising.

Ahh so hard, but then Betrayus is a noble man…

just watch out for the knives on the Ides….

lol – you’ve described it perfectly.

Just one step away from this.

some of that end of the world in 2012 stuff comes from aztec calendar apparently predicting the end of the world…

the paper i referenced is something i first read around 2002; and it’s a superbly written account of a possible/likely future.

Make sure you click on my link in 15 for your morning smile.

It is pretty obvious that both Petraeus and Odierno are going to have to go. This can be done in different ways. Odierno should be retired or fired. He isn’t up to the job of overseeing a withdrawal. Obama could work with Odierno’s replacement and essentially freeze Petraeus out of the process much as he froze Fallon out when he Petraeus was the top general in Iraq.

perfect…

:lol:

It’s hard to see but above the rack of ribbons is a blue rifle with a wreath. That’s a CIB “Combat Infantry Badge”. If James Jones last book “Whistle” about wounded grunts in the VA Hospital in Memphis after Guadalcanal, they won’t wear anything but that when they go out. In a weak defense of the lifers, they are required to wear that stuff. The former Navy CNO, Mike Boodra, killed himself after an investigation into him wearing an unauthorized “V” device signifying valor in combat. It’s dicey stuff.

Maybe, MoveOn.org was on to something…

Do the military muckalucks realize how ridiculous they look with all those inflated-medals litter scattered all over their chests? That picture is worth a millions words.

So did the Pentagon pick that up from NASCAR or did NASCAR pick it up from them?

Do you think there has been medals-inflation?

A to that is above my pay grade. *g*

fyi – after geithner’s dog and pony this morning, both bernanke and geithner will separately be testifying before congress this afternoon (at house financial services committee and the senate banking committee respectively)

Always.

Kind of look like Boy Scouts on Steroids, eh?
Same color uniforms too, IIRC

I think most of those generals were executed shortly during the Iranian Revolution. It was one of the reasons that Saddam Hussein thought he could win a war and seize Iran’s Arabic-speaking oil region of Khuzistan.

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

Notice how he showed up at the frickin’ Super Bowl last month?!

I guess it depends on level of combat. Probably medals awarded today with 2 hot wars are much more merited than those awarded during the long period of only low grade & distant (combat.

A-yep.

Ooops got posted before I finished. Was explaining I meant bombing by “distant” combat.

“Do these medals make me look fat?”

There has been only one Medal of Honor earned in Iraq.

hussein, our military geniuses, or both?

Reminds me of something Truman said about MacArthur: “…Fire the sonofabitch!…”

Digg it!

http://digg.com/politics/Gener…..ngs_A_Leak

In her hearing, Kagan brings up Youngstown. She says that even in the presence of Congressional action, the Executive may have authority but that such cases are quite rare. Still that’s a window that you could drive a lot of exceptions through. I don’t think she needed to say it that way. Invoking Youngstown should be about asserting limits on Presidential power but Kagan actually made the opposite argument but in a qualified way.

That seems sparce. Is it?

Dang, I was all set to hope this would be the chance to get Glennzilla’s pen-pal Steve Boylan finally thrown into the brig. Unfortunately, it looks like he didn’t follow Petraeus to Tampa. His new spokesman, and most likely the leaker for this story is Erik Gunhus.

“Do these medals make me look fat?”

LOL

Yup. Truman had to rein in MacArthur, and JFK had all he could handle to keep Curtis “Bombs Away” LeMay from nuking Cuba (he backed the making of the film Seven Days in May to send a message to LeMay et al to back the frick off). And of course there was the attempted coup against FDR, which Smedley Butler nipped in the bud.

This is still a bit too inside baseball for me. I haven’t been keeping up. I’m confuse about something. I thought that we signed an agreement with the Iraqi’s about getting out in two years. Do we get to abrogate that agreement all on our lonesomes?

As to the politics, I imagine that as in other areas, Obama is trying to get the facts straight before he makes his move. I doubt very much that the Generals can pull anything over on him. The public want out of Iraq, and though they don’t want defeat, they also do not want the draft that would be required to prevent it.

My guess is that the military magical thinking will come to an end before May.

One wonders if Petraeus is looking to be the new MacArthur — either he gets his way or he gets fired and is free to spend the next four years running around talking about how great things would be if he had gotten his way. I think he could easily become top dog in the GOP, but I suspect he has McCain’s problem — he mistakes worship by the Villagers for actual popular support.

Actually, it occurs to me that those two options are the two ways he remains the story. If he spends the next four years implementing a competent president’s policies (as opposed to the past several he spent rescuing an incompetent president’s), he’ll be little more than “that guy who did some good stuff in Iraq a few years ago.”

As soon as they are out of the military they will be free to say what they will and start running for office.

Failure to display medals earned or not is a violation of the UCMJ and could result in a courts martial

Morning Siun, you opened your story with “‘More news is coming out” and then started talking abut a Garath Porter story.
Where’s the news?
Porter is again discussing a meeting held on Jan 21 and again offering only speculation and anonymous quotation.

Petraeus and his ilk want to declare most of the troops in Iraq “support troops” and leave them there. I’m sure that would fool the Iraqis, right?

under article 3510

Geithner is supposed to give his speech at 11 AM Eastern Time and will be carried on MSNBC per the NYT.

I recall, without links to back me up, that Odierno was quite dismissive of the SOFA, indicating he thought there were easy ways to get around it. Also, iirc, Porter’s original reporting on this subject likened what Odierno said as reason for his dismissal, as being contrary to civilian control of the military. Therein being the conflict.

and CSPAN 1
plus I do believe CHS will liveblog it for us.

Petraeus and his ilk want to declare most of the troops in Iraq “support troops” and leave them there. I’m sure that would fool the Iraqis, right?

I think the idea is to fool us.

Thanks, Hugh. Was also trying to recall a line from Firesign Theater that begins with “These medals…” and ends with “…Barbara Bobo.” ;)

Being a military member can be like living under a totalitarian regime,all major decisions are made for you, from what you do for work to where you live and what you wear. Dissent could land you in jail .

Normally a funny press leak happens I look for Rahm. I’m glad the leak is being exposed this makes it easier to fire the General.

Odierno – as the SOFA was being signed – suggested that we could just relabel our combat troops as support troops and keep them in place. They have been looking for ways to undermine the SOFA from the beginning.

Wow, exact same thoughts crossed my mind. Here we are in 21st century and these important people still go around in clown outfits, self-appointed generalissimos of banana republics come to mind. A sash across his chest would go well with the rest of the decoration, don’t you think :)
I wonder if people are still awed by multi-colored chips on chest.

What I find newsworthy is that Porter has been able to show that it was the Petraeus off the record source who pushed the account of the Jan 21 meeting which hit the press – while the Obama White House says it is an inaccurate account.

YMMV

Having grown up as an army brat, I now give that august institution the military all the respect it deserves. Which is none, zero, zilch, nada. ;)

The generals in Iraq want to keep tearing up that military equipment,it keeps the defense contractors happy and ensures lucrative employment upon retiring from the military !!

Petraeus is John McCain’s hero. If He had won the election he would be taking his marching orders from Petraeus.

like the turkeys that they are in full display !

Hugh — did you get my link i left on last night’s piece on the stimulus? thought you might find this person’s thoughts inspiring. Here it is in case you missed it. Keep reading as it’s odd but well informed at times.

http://Patriceayme.wordpress.com/

I’m still pissed at Obama for being rude to Helen Thomas. Lady had cajones with her followup questions he refused to answer. Should have called on her first, to show he wasn’t gonna diss her like Bush did. shameful.

I’m pretty sure that we’re going to have to vary.
Your posts keep linking Odierno and Petraeus in both having the inclination to leave our combat troops in Iraq.
I understand Odierno to be so inclined. That’s his beat.
However, Petraeus has been moved. His primary responsibility is and will be Afghanistan/Pakistan.
The troops that are now in Iraq are the ones that he’s going to need to secure that area and burnish his reputation.
What I know about Generals isn’t much, but I’m pretty sure that they invariably seek to grab all the soldiers they can get.
If Petraeus is as self-interested as you suggest you’ve got a contradiction.

Allan nails it. This is the roll-out of the Petraeus packaging. So where are we going with this? Worst case, perhaps una guerra sucia as in Argentina in the late ’70s or something along the lines of modern-day Myanmar. Petraeus will likely be positioned as a new Eisenhower, but the parallels are a bit shaky. Eisenhower was unsure of his political leanings even when he was supreme commander and wrestled with his familial pacifism throughout his life.

There is plenty to complain about and bitching about the rack that they wear is just silly.

It isn’t going to matter what Petraeus wants.
**************

” Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said on Tuesday that the era of US dominance was over, in a broadside to Washington almost six years after the invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein.

The Shiite premier, boosted by the strong showing by his allies in provincial elections, said Iraq was now taking charge of its own destiny and was making good progress toward rebuilding the war-torn country.

His remarks were a pointed rebuke to US Vice President Joe Biden, who last week said Washington would have to be “more aggressive” in pushing Baghdad toward faster political reform. “

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/Di…..middleeast

Linda, My understanding is that calendar resets and starts over.

Officers are never “Out of the Military,” unless booted out. The can be reactivated instantly.

Do we get to abrogate that agreement all on our lonesomes?

Apparently, we can do what ever we want to. Invade, etc./sn

Ah, but Petraeus is not out of Iraq – as CentComm commander, he is responsible for Iraq as well as the rest.

I actually think that Redshift’s comment @44 is very astute.

” There is informal discussion among some in the military set — and increasingly among some pols — that General David Petraeus could be an interesting presidential prospect on the Republican side of the line a few years from now.

Petraeus would be the Republican’s version of a Wesley Clark — a new Eisenhower. . .perhaps (though one senior retired military friend of mine nearly tossed it up when the comparison to Eisenhower whom he admires came up). “

http://www.thewashingtonnote.c…..002317.php

” The US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, expressed long-term interest in running for the US presidency when he was stationed in Baghdad, according to a senior Iraqi official who knew him at that time.

Sabah Khadim, then a senior adviser at Iraq’s Interior Ministry, says General Petraeus discussed with him his ambition when the general was head of training and recruitment of the Iraqi army in 2004-05.

“I asked him if he was planning to run in 2008 and he said, ‘No, that would be too soon’,” Mr Khadim, who now lives in London, said. “

http://www.independent.co.uk/n…..02195.html

” Then, last week, word came from the Associated Press that “three senior Pentagon officials tapped by the Bush administration to oversee detainee policy at Guantanamo Bay remain on the job despite President Barack Obama’s order to reverse course.”

“The problem is they have their hands on information and can cause a problem as a result. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some sources from inside the Pentagon that released that information.” “

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..65570.html

First point is that he really is out of Iraq. He’s responsible at a remove.
His brief is to improve Afghan/Pak. Redshift and you both note that he wants attention, and that is the best way to get it
Success in the Afghani area is what he needs to cement his COIN theories in Army doctrine.
It’s in the Army that he’s spent his career. It would be highly unusual behavior for him to spend decades in the Army, achieve growing influence and power and suddenly sacrifice all for tangential interest in politics.
It would certainly be a poor strategic move.

FWIW, Petraeus does not wear the Combat Infantry Badge; he never commanded a small enough unit in actual combat. He wears the Combat Action Badge, which is a new award since 2005 intended for all the troops who are not Infantry but are still involved in direct combat situations.

Time for these two to face away.

Or to be court-martialed for insubordination.

fade

Maybe Moveon got it spot on with that ad on Petraeus. Somebody should ask Petraeus about the number of suicide increases in the armed forces as reported by CNN.

the point is not that General Patraeus is undermining Obama but that he is sneaking around about it, which apears par for the course with this guy.

Petraeus’s superior, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM), derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad and told Petraeus that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickenshit.”

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39235

More stuff from Gareth Porter?

Does anyone read where he gets the “quotations” that he uses? In this piece it was….

according to sources familiar with reports of the meeting.