Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Saturday, Nov. 17, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
“The graveyards are full of indispensable men,” it’s often said, meaning that few are genuinely indispensable. David H. Petraeus was one of the few, which is why his loss for the U.S. government, after his admission of adultery, is so tragic.
This is not to imply that there are not other capable generals or intelligence leaders. But Petraeus was highly unusual, perhaps unique, for the grasp he displayed of modern warfare in all of its bewildering complexity.
This was a task for which he had been preparing since his days as a West Point cadet in the 1970s, when he showed an early fascination with the Vietnam War, which was just then ending.
He avidly read the classic works of Bernard Fall, Jean Larteguy, David Halberstam and other experts on the subject. He wrote his doctorate dissertation on the war, a decidedly unfashionable focus in the 1980s, when the U.S. military was eager to get out of the counterinsurgency business altogether.
Petraeus knew, however, that warfare had changed: Conventional engagements against mirror-image adversaries would not be the post-Vietnam norm. He got the chance to show that he could put his academic understanding into practice when he entered Iraq as the commander of the 101st Airborne Division in the spring of 2003, his first combat experience.
He did fine on the “march up” to Baghdad, but he truly excelled when called upon to garrison northern Iraq. He did not limit himself to purely military concerns because he understood that generating electricity and electing mayors would be as important as firing bullets and missiles, if not more so.
More-hidebound officers looked askance at a dynamic young division commander who seemed to be getting out of his “lane.” But Petraeus’ understanding of what it took to prevail would be amply vindicated when he was called upon to rescue a failing war effort as the top commander in Iraq in 2007.
His success in reducing violence more than 90 percent was made possible by the extra 30,000 U.S. troops dispatched by President George W. Bush, but as Petraeus often pointed out, if those troops had been used as before, the surge would have failed. Petraeus adopted a new concept of operations, one that focused on pushing troops to live in small combat outposts in the middle of population centers where they could provide 24/7 security from insurgent intimidation. At the same time, he orchestrated many other lines of operation, including encouraging the Sunni Awakening movement, increasing electricity production and pressuring Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to crack down on corrupt officials.
Petraeus was particularly adept at information operations. He did not engage in crude propaganda. I served as an informal adviser to him in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I not only interviewed him but also watched as others interviewed him.
He was frank, but he avoided indiscretion. Amazingly, despite the countless interviews he gave, he never got into hot water over unauthorized leaks, yet he still won the trust and admiration of journalists. This is no small skill to master for a general serving a democratic republic, and it is one that few, if any, of his peers can match.
The U.S. Army, like all armies, is suspicious of outsiders, especially intellectuals and journalists. Petraeus, once a graduate student at Princeton, had a comfort level with scholars and reporters that enabled him to draw them into his efforts, whether to help write a field manual on counterinsurgency or to help provide independent feedback on the success or failure of his campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Critics claimed that he created Potemkin village tours for outsiders, but this was far from the truth. In 2007-08, he sent me and others not only to counterinsurgency success stories such as Ramadi but also to still-dangerous areas such as Mosul where al-Qaida remained strong. Petraeus was confident that presenting a warts-and-all picture would ultimately aid his efforts by increasing public understanding, and he was right.
Petraeus also urged young officers to get outside their intellectual comfort zone by going to civilian graduate schools and reading widely. Quite a few of his proteges followed his advice — including, it must be said, Paula Broadwell — but few of them could hope to match his success, in no small part because the Army, sadly, still regards excessive intellectualism as a debilitating defect.
Perhaps Petraeus could have remade the military if he had been appointed chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — a post he had earned — but President Barack Obama preferred to shunt him off to the CIA, where he would play a less public role. Now he is gone from the CIA, too, and it is doubtful that the military will see his like for a long time to come.
Max Boot is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He wrote this for the Los Angeles Times.
PETRAEUS WAS NOT A GREAT LEADER; HE IS EASILY DISPENSABLE
Petraeus was just another male leader who could not control his "sniffer" and lost sight of what his priorities for the country were.
A complete investigation needs to be conducted to find out whether or not any of his "harem" activities were played while he was on active duty in the Army.
If so, court-martial Petraeus and throw him in the brig with no retirement while awarding him a dishonorable discharge. Rules are rules. They apply to all that serve in our armed forces, even Commanding Generals.
Anyway, I'm sure the other prisoners would have some very fond feelings for Petraeus.
Petraeus betrayed us. He is just a man with a military gift. But still just a man and subject to all the foibles and fumbles of his gender. My heart goes out to his wife and family. They deserve better.
CarmineD
BTW another General is caught up in the scandal and his appointment to Supreme Allied Commander in Europe/NATO is on hold. General Allen. He was conducting a lurid, sex mail exchange with a Petraeus female friend in Tampa, Florida. So what is the Admin's answer to all this "boys will be boys" nonsense. Sec of Defense Panetta is asking the military to give some well needed character guidance classes to military officers in the military academies. Right, like that works. They sleep through the classes when the lights go off.
CarmineD
Although, I don't agree with what he did, but it was something that was in his personal life. It's a moral issue and shouldn't detract from his professional career. (as long as it didn't spill into his professional career) In my opinion he was an outstanding General and military leader of the troops.
Here is a small list of gentleman that were probably highly regarded by their peers and their parents throughout their road to the political spotlight that made the same mistake.
Thomas Jefferson, Arthur Brown Political Career 1896-1897: United States Senator (Class 3) from Utah, John F. Kennedy, Wayne Hayes January 3, 1949 -- September 1, 1976: Member of the United States House of Representatives from Ohio's 18th district,
Neil Goldschmidt 1973-1979: Mayor of Portland
August 15, 1979 -- January 20, 1981: United States Secretary of Transportation
January 12, 1987 -- January 14, 1991: Governor of Oregon, Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston August 27, 1977 -- March 1, 1999: Member of United States House of Representatives from Louisiana's 1st district, James McGreevey
January 15, 2002 -- November 15, 2004: Governor of New Jersey, Rudy Giuliani, Eliot Spitzer, Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes, led the Army's Training and Doctrine Command at Fort Monroe, Va., Major-General Chris Hughes, and Maj. Gen. David R. E. Hale just to name a few. I'm sure others can come up with more names.
"but it was something that was in his personal life. It's a moral issue and shouldn't detract from his professional career."
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Did I mention wrong? Why? Simple. If the General did not hold a top secret security clearance [in fact the highest security clearance of the land], it would be a personal matter. But he does and it isn't. With this clearance, any and all compromises of his personal life become a national security issue of the utmost importance. That is a professional career matter not a personal one.
CarmineD
Carmine, has the exact time of the affair been confirmed? Also, do you know what someone has to do to get a security clearance of that level? The background investigation? Didn't a few former Presidents go through the same thing? Both the affairs and the security clearances? So what? You must be in the spy novel fantasy world of being blackmailed. Haha