That's good, cuz after the Afghans finish whipping his ass, at least he won't need to cry to his shrink about it.
Michael I wouldn't count on any quick US withdrawl from Afghanistan!
(ps: how's that promise to close Gitmo workin out for ya?...lol)
Obama's choice suggests longer troop presenceBy Daniel Dombey in Washington
June 24 2010
Barack Obama's decision to put David Petraeus, America's most celebrated serving general, in charge of
the war in Afghanistan lays groundwork for a longer troop presence in the country, a senior military figure
told the Financial Times.
The comments by retired General Jack Keane, a leading figure behind the 2007-2008 surge in Iraq who remains
in contact with General Petraeus and General Stanley McChrystal, the previous Afghan commander, highlight
the complicated relationship between the US president and the generals running the war with which he is ever
more identified.
They also come at a time when there is increasing scrutiny of other divisions within Mr Obama's Afghan team,
which includes officials such as Karl Eikenberry, ambassador to Kabul, and Richard Holbrooke, the administration's
envoy to the region, both of whom experienced tensions with Gen McChrystal.
Speaking in the context of Mr Obama's promise to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in July next year,
Gen Keane said: "If we are going to be successful, we will have to extend the political clock in Washington DC
and I don't know anyone who will be better able to do that than Petraeus, if indeed he is able to make the
progress we think he can make."
In congressional testimony last week, when he spoke in his outgoing capacity as head of US central command,
Gen Petraeus warned against rigid timelines. Asked whether the July 2011 date reflected his best personal,
professional judgment, he gave only what he described as a "qualified yes". A day later, after consternation
in the White House, he gave more full-throated support for the president's strategy.
The irony of Mr Obama's decision to replace Gen McChrystal with Gen Petraeus the second time he has dismissed
the commander in Afghanistan in 12 months is that although the president did so to safeguard "strict adherence
to the military chain of command and respect for civilian control", Gen Petraeus's own clout has become much greater
as a result.
"Petraeus was the most celebrated general we had since world war two before he stepped up and took this mission on
Afghanistan," said Gen Keane."
Clearly it will enhance his reputation significantly and his ability to influence "that's the
positive aspect of it . . . it gives him influence in the conference room back in Washington DC and the halls of the Congress
of the US and I would also hope in the governments of our allies."
Officials hastened to dismiss any talk of a civilian-military divide. On Thursday, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint
chiefs of staff, said he was "very supportive" of Mr Obama's decision on Gen McChrystal and described Gen Petraeus as
"fully in support" of Mr Obama's Afghanistan strategy. As head of US central command, Gen Petraeus helped shape that policy.
Nevertheless, Gen McChrystal's departure follows a series of incidents involving civilian-military tensions in recent years.
They include doubts within the military establishment about the relatively small force used for the Iraq war in 2003;
reservations in the Pentagon about the surge strategy championed by Gen Petraeus and George W. Bush, then president;
and a difference over policy on Iran, which led to the departure of Adm William Fallon, the previous head of CentCom, in 2008.
In this instance, however, there was no clear policy difference between Gen McChrystal and the administration; instead, the
magazine profile that forced his departure on Wednesday laid bare the tensions between Gen McChrystal's entourage and
figures such as Mr Holbrooke and Mr Eikenberry, as well as including disparaging comments about senior administration officials.
Many past and present military officials have described those remarks as insubordination and called for Gen McChrystal to go.
But there is now a renewed focus on the other, civilian members of the feuding Afghanistan team. "Those locker-room comments
that McChrystal and his staff were making are an indication that we don't have that unity of effort," said Gen Keane.
"The undercurrent was the cynicism about others who are part of this team who are maybe not making the same contribution."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/132b9fd0-7fb9-11df-91b4-00144feabdc0.html
