Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 8 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! 1 Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 26 (35 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   27 comments

    OpEdNews Op Eds

Good Riddance Petraeus

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 9   Well Said 5   Interesting 5  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H1 11/10/12

Become a Fan
  (144 fans)

This piece was reprinted by OpEdNews with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.

- Advertisement -
Cross-posted from Consortium News

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. (Photo credit: Aude)

A day after the surprise announcement that CIA Director David Petraeus was resigning because of marital infidelity, the pundits continue to miss the supreme irony. None other than the head of the CIA (and former bemedaled four-star general) has become the first really big fish netted by the intrusive monitoring of the communications of American citizens implemented after 9/11.

It is unclear whether it is true that, according to initial reports, Petraeus's alleged mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell, was caught trying to hack into his e-mail. What does seem clear is that the FBI discovered that she had "unusual access" (to borrow the delicate wording of this morning's New York Times) to Petraeus during his time as commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan from July 2010 to July 2011. The potential for compromise of sensitive information is equally clear.

Among those lionizing/eulogizing Petraeus on the morning after his resignation was Washington Post columnist (and longtime CIA apologist) David Ignatius, who argued that Petraeus "achieved genuinely great things." Ignatius lamented Petraeus's admission of the extramarital affair with the poignancy you might find in a novel by Leo Tolstoy or Victor Hugo about an admirable but ill-fated hero. Not surprisingly, Establishment pundits are disconsolate that their beloved David Petraeus has been brought down in such a tawdry way. They are already at work trying to salvage his legacy as the implementer of George W. Bush's much-heralded "successful surge" in Iraq (even though the sacrifice of nearly 1,000 more dead U.S. soldiers did little more than provide a "decent interval" between Bush's departure from office in 2009 and the final U.S. withdrawal/defeat at the end of 2011).

Ignatius, too, was a writer who was embedded with Petraeus and was dazzled by his charm. Ignatius wrote that he "spent nearly three weeks traveling with [Petraeus] during his CENTOM assignment, and saw how he fused the political and military aspects of command, as he met with sheiks and presidents and intelligence chiefs, in a way that should have been captured in a textbook for future commanders."

But Ignatius inadvertently acknowledged the futility of Petraeus's approach to Bush's wars. The Post columnist wrote:

"For all Petraeus's counter-insurgency doctrine, his Afghanistan command often appeared to be the equivalent of building on quicksand. No sooner were the Afghan forces 'stood up' than they would begin to slip away, back into the culture that was deeply, stubbornly resistant to outside pressure. In his last month in Kabul, Petraeus had all the tools of victory in hand except one -- the Afghan people and institutions."

So much for Petraeus's "brilliant" counter-insurgency doctrine. He had all the tools except the Afghan people and institutions, the two requisites for winning a counter-insurgency war!

- Advertisement -

So What's the Big Idea?

Ignatius adoringly adduces the following quote from Petraeus as proof of the ex-general's acute vision:

"As I see it, strategic leadership is fundamentally about big ideas, and, in particular, about four tasks connected with big ideas. First, of course, you have to get the big ideas right -- you have to determine the right overarching concepts and intellectual underpinnings to accomplish your organization's mission.

"Second, you have to communicate the big ideas effectively through the breadth and depth of the organization. Third, you have to oversee the implementation of the big ideas. And fourth, and finally, you have to capture lessons from the implementation of the big ideas, so that you can refine the overarching concepts and repeat the overall process."

Got that? That's probably right out of Petraeus's PhD dissertation at Princeton, or from a how-to book that might be called "Management Rhetoric for Dummies."

If only Petraeus and his colleague generals remembered the smaller -- but far more relevant -- ideas inculcated in all of us Army officers in Infantry School at Fort Benning in the early Sixties. This is what I recall from memory regarding what an infantry officer needed to do before launching an operation -- big or small -- division or squad size.

Corny (and gratuitous) as it may sound, we were taught that the absolute requirement was to do an "Estimate of the Situation" that included the following key factors: Enemy strength, numbers and weapons; Enemy disposition, where are they?; Terrain; Weather; and Lines of communication and supply (LOCS). In other words, we were trained to take into account those "little ideas," like facts and feasibility that, if ignored, could turn the "big ideas" into a March of Folly that would get a lot of people killed for no good reason.

Could it be that they stopped teaching these fundamentals as Petraeus went through West Point and Benning several years later? Did military history no longer include the futile efforts of imperial armies to avoid falling into the "graveyard of empires" in Afghanistan?

What about those LOCS?  When you can't get there from here, is it really a good idea to send troops and armaments the length of Pakistan and then over the Hindu Kush? And does anyone know how much that kind of adventure might end up costing?

To Army officers schooled in the basics, it was VERY hard to understand why the top Army leadership persuaded President Barack Obama to double down, twice, in reinforcing troops for a fool's errand. And let's face it, unless you posit that the generals and the neoconservative strategic "experts" at Brookings and AEI were clueless, the doubling down was not only dumb but unconscionable.

Small wonder all the talk about "long war" and Petraeus's glib prediction that our grandchildren will still be fighting the kind of wars in which he impressed the likes of David Ignatius.

Next Page  1  |  2


Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army infantry/intelligence officer and then a CIA analyst for 27 years, and is now on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). His (more...)

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

What's Hayden Hidin'?

Asylum for Julian Assange -- Former Awardee for Integrity

Petraeus Cons Obama on Afghan War

Obama Stands Up to Israel, Tamps Down Iran War Threats

Mullen Wary of Israeli Attack on Iran

Note to Nancy Pelosi: Colin Powell Got Snookered at CIA, too


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
19 people are discussing this page, with 27 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

How do we get directly to the President with this ... by x_Warrior on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 2:05:26 PM
I find him resigning disturbing. Why? Having an af... by Bill Johnson on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:07:01 PM
First of all, Betrayus is a dumbass.  I just ... by Lester Shepherd on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 5:58:54 PM
I agree the affair is a trivial detail.Petraeus wa... by Richard Pietrasz on Monday, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:43:11 AM
It's a bit ironic that the CIA finds it quite acce... by Jonathan Allen on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:07:25 PM
has no morals. It's just window dressing to market... by intotheabyss on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:19:10 PM
 2000 to 2010 will probably be known as the "... by Carol Jackson on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:21:07 PM
Adm. Mike Mullen said Gen. Petraeus is nothing mor... by steveswimmer on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:29:54 PM
When faced down by Medea Benjamin (Code Pink), at ... by Lester Shepherd on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:04:48 PM
1.  Delusions2.  Cognitive dissonance3.&... by Sister Begonia on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:08:18 PM
greed; lust for power... by abacus on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 12:16:54 AM
That numb the conscience and sense of connection w... by Kim Cassidy on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 5:54:43 PM
Are the same as Obama's tears.  They can all ... by Sister Begonia on Saturday, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:06:02 PM
Can;t seem to find any tears. You should have gott... by Timothy Gatto on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:50:57 AM
By whatever the means, the important thing is that... by Sister Begonia on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:56:15 AM
I agree, good riddance to Petraeus...except that I... by B York on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:52:53 AM
He's getting free to take his experience to the sk... by Kim Cassidy on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 6:01:25 PM
Men of power and wealth have extra girl friends. &... by Patricia Gray on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 12:19:00 PM
Petraeus should have been sacked when he partic... by Spider53 on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 4:12:27 PM
Did I read Ray, correctly, to say Pakistan is now ... by Gentry L Rowsey on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 4:40:55 PM
... by intotheabyss on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 6:06:57 PM
It's almost sad that one of Obama's few Republican... by Robert S. Becker on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 5:08:33 PM
Petraeus, and ALL like him, are, at the least, hig... by Kim Cassidy on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 5:43:42 PM
VERY well said!... by intotheabyss on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 6:09:07 PM
Our current administration needs a fall guy.I beli... by Matthew Peters on Sunday, Nov 11, 2012 at 8:34:56 PM
I am unimpressed with McGovern's "good guys" list.... by Richard Pietrasz on Monday, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:48:40 AM
Petraeus was quoted in the Wall Street Journal in ... by Bill Distler on Monday, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:54:49 PM