Recent Comments

And now the knifes come out…

It’s probably not hard to imagine that a four star general over the years of a long Army career would find more than a few people that don’t really like him or his style all that much, so its not surprising that when the opportunity presents itself these people come to the fore as willing accomplices to attempt to smear a person who over the years gave a great deal for his nation in a time of war. This of course doesn’t excuse the general’s actions which resulted from being all too human and giving in to desires that many a person in his position have done before.

The history books are full of generals who let their privates do the thinking for them, so this is nothing new. I personally question the timing of these revelations and this whole thing stinks worse than a cat-house at low tide.

A friend of mine from the Army posted a link to an article in the NY Times Sunday Review today on his Facebook page. Entitled A Phony Hero for a Phony War and written by Lucian K. Truscott IV ( a name folks familiar with WWII might recognize) the article amounts to an assembled mass of disjointed thought, poorly reasoned conclusions and piling-on given full voice on the pages of the NY Times.

Here’s a sample:

FASTIDIOUSNESS is never a good sign in a general officer. Though strutting military peacocks go back to Alexander’s time, our first was MacArthur, who seemed at times to care more about how much gold braid decorated the brim of his cap than he did about how many bodies he left on beachheads across the Pacific. Next came Westmoreland, with his starched fatigues in Vietnam. In our time, Gen. David H. Petraeus has set the bar high. Never has so much beribboned finery decorated a general’s uniform since Al Haig passed through the sally ports of West Point on his way to the White House.

But wait there’s more…

The genius of General Petraeus was to recognize early on that the war he had been sent to fight in Iraq wasn’t a real war at all. This is what the public and the news media — lamenting the fall of the brilliant hero undone by a tawdry affair — have failed to see. He wasn’t the military magician portrayed in the press; he was a self-constructed hologram, emitting an aura of preening heroism for the ever eager cameras.

I personally beg to differ with the author on whether Iraq was a real war or not. Those bullets flying past my cockpit were “real” enough and so were the explosions, rocket attacks, IED detonations and casualties we suffered.

From reading the entire article I can see the author wishes we had fought “total war” as his grandfather did during the great WWII. Unfortunately, or fortunately we can’t and won’t fight that way anymore. Baghdad (where I fought and the majority of the actions during “the Surge” which Petraeus is credited in leading were fought) is a city containing over 4 million people. We could not and didn’t have the forces available to carry out a block by block attack WWII style, even if we had wanted to. As to whether “The Surge” (I can’t believe people are still debating this 5 years later) actually accomplished anything. I can tell you that from my own personal experience, my battalion which in the year 2007 had over 300 direct fire engagements against the enemy, returned to the same area of operations in 2009 and had zero engagements for an entire year. By the time we left in 2007 after 15 months of being deployed there significant acts (attacks on friendly forces, IEDs and indirect fire) had decreased to nearly nothing.

As for the general’s grooming habits, I am pretty sure his aide sets up his uniform, the general probably doesn’t spend a great deal of time fussing over it…unlike one of the generals the author mentioned…Patton.

If you’d care to read the entire article go HERE

I think we can have an open and honest discussion about the way this war has been fought the last 10 years, but basing that discussion on superficial things is not helpful and comes off sounding petty and vindictive. I question the timing of this and other attempts to sully this man while we are attempting to find out the truth behind why 4 Americans were left to die in Benghazi, Libya on 11 SEP 2012.

21 comments to And now the knifes come out…

  • JimmyC

    “…but basing that discussion on superficial things is not helpful and comes off sounding petty and vindictive.”

    Outlaw, didn’t you see how Obama won reelection? “Petty and vindictive” is in right now.

  • -fritz-

    So…the General happens to be human. I agree that the timing of this “outing” seems mighty suspect, especially in light of all the rumble regarding F&F, misconduct by the DOJ and the POTUS…what he knew and what he didn’t know. The whole thing with Gen. P seems almost contrived! The crimes committed at Benghazi are the important matter here, so, the “human-ness” of Gen. Petraeus regarding his personal life should not be the issue. The issue is what the POTUS and The State Dept. knew, when, how much, and why their seeming lack of desire to correct the issue before disaster struck!

  • It looks like a petty, substance-free attack piece.

    Not excusing Petreus’s personal behavior, but there’s nothing easier–or more dishonorable–than to kick a man when he’s down.

  • Texacalirose

    Several years ago there appeared in the San Francisco police officers’ monthly newspaper a re-print of an article originally published in the early 70’s. The 70’s brought in the first wave of female officers. Women had theretofore been classified as “policewomen” and were restricted to “inside” work. The article focused on the impact women would have on the male officers and their marriages. There was a vocal contingent of officers’ wives who were adamantly opposed to allowing women to work side by side with their husbands, in a patrol car, all night, driving around and around or being involved in an intense police action that evokes an intimacy between officers regardless of sex that cannot be matched in the bedroom; and sometimes life and death situations become foreplay to copulation. The commentary by the female officer who had re-printed the article and revised the debate admitted that the wives were proven correct, but the damage done to marriages and families were relegated to “the cost of progress for women” and the ever popular catch-all excuse that being human covers for a myriad of behaviors. “Hey, cops are human, too.”

    At the time the article was printed, I kept my pen quiet having spent most of my law enforcement career in a politically sensitive position that would have been compromised if I revealed many of my personal opinions. But I did not keep my mind quiet. Rather, I immediately drew the analogy of police officers’ exposure to graft, and drugs and citizens’ property (In SF, we are not allowed to say “citizen” because it implies that illegal aliens have no rights; so we say “private person”). Who will miss a small bag of confiscated cocaine when you’ve just uncovered a hundred bags? Who will miss a hundred dollar bill when you’ve just uncovered the dealer’s money stockpile? And if you become a user after spending years in the narcotics division, hey! cops are human, too! Same ole same ole, right? No one should be expected to rise above and resist temptation, right? “Oh,” you might say, “It’s different because one activity is illegal and the other is not.” OK. Great. Chalk up another victory for women’s liberation!! The feminists have diluted marital fidelity to be whatever Gloria Allred says it is at any given moment. And no patriarchal church leader is gonna tell us gals who we can and cannot sleep with!! Hear me roar.

    Illegal or immoral, marital infidelity is the “broken window” that cracks the foundation of the high virtues of those among us who are necessarily held to a higher standard. How about this from the US Air Force Academy:

    Honor Code: We will not lie, steal or cheat nor tolerate among us anyone who does.

    Honor Oath: We will not lie, steal or cheat nor tolerate among us anyone who does. Furthermore, I resolve to do my duty and live honorably, so help me God.

    Spirit of the Code: Do the right thing and live honorably.

    I neither see nor infer any “adultery exemption.”

    And this: when Johnny is across the pond fighting Jerry or Omar or Hai, the girl he left behind is expected to be loyal; if she is unfaithful during Johnny’s long absence, do we excuse her as “just being human,” or do we have a special and directed scorn for her? Johnny is facing dire circumstances; he is in harm’s way. The least she could do is have empathy and share his burden by not sitting under the apple tree with anyone else but him, right? But is she not “just human,” too?
    I am not of the mind that Petraeus (and Allen and Bill Clinton and many others) deserve a pass whatsoever here on earth. Their forgiveness can come from God and their families; our country, our society of men depends upon their virtue to guide and protect us. I expect nothing less than fidelity to their oaths, in service or in marriage.

    General Petraeus was medaled and pensioned and safe and sound in the CIA when he started to boff Broadwell, right? He was reunited with his wife at home, right? No excuses, sir. And what about Holly Petraeus? It is a profound pain to bear. I sympathize.

    I’ve been accused here of believing that all men are predators, pedophiles, parolees (maybe pimps, too?), but I do not. Our society is lost unless and until women re-discover and re-assert their power under the light of God and stop f&cking each other’s men. Therein is the problem. Simple, ain’t it?

    • Texacalirose

      I’m off to another ranch for a Californio buckaroo clinic. Have at me, fellers & fellas. Pile it on if you must. I have broad shoulders. I am woman. Hear me roar. *o^

      • -fritz-

        I agree 100% with what you’ve said here TCR! ” You are woman and I’ve heard you roar !” Mightily, I must say. Women, because of the liberation movement, have sadly become, in a lot of cases, the same kind of predators that men have been. I’ve seen it among cops, medical workers, and even hotel security staff (Observed, here, but not participated in; hit upon, but did not fold)!

        I’m old enough to remember life in the USA during the 50s and early 60s. Essentially crap hit the fan with the advent of the “Hippy Movement” and the escalation of the Vietnam War and all the protesters, read that to indicate those who did their damage then bailed out and went to Canada! Our country was, I fully believe, irreparably damaged during those years, and started down the steepest part of the slippery slope we find ourselves upon this very day and time! America has lost it’s focus on God, and has taken “many idols” with which to replace Him! ‘Tain’t workin’!

    • People cheat on their spouses all the time. I never said or meant to imply it was acceptable. It is however being used as a distraction. 4 people were left to die and people care more about who the General was sleeping with.

      Truscott obviously has his own issues and is using this situation to trot out his own crap…once again, 4 people were left to die, nobody gives a shit.

      • I agree that this piece of drivel is an attempt at distracting from Benghazi and the awful slaughter of brave Americans. I also agree with TCR and Rufus. For example,
        Clinton’s behavior was “just human” and he subsequently (whether in spite of, or became of) became extremely popular. In Clinton’s case – “boys will be boys”, in the case of Petraeus – “how have the mighty fallen”.

        • Kit

          “Clinton’s behavior was “just human” and he subsequently (whether in spite of, or became of) became extremely popular. In Clinton’s case – “boys will be boys”, in the case of Petraeus – “how have the mighty fallen”.”

          From what I know some of that may have been the GOP over-extending themselves with the impeachment, allowing the media to paint them as over-eager to get to the President instead of letting him crash and burn on his own.

      • Texacalirose

        Like the guy who asked the woman if she’d f&k him for a million bucks. After she said that she would, he offered her two bucks, for which she was offended. He says, “Ma’am, we’ve already established that you’re a whore; now we’re just negotiating the price.”

        My point is that fidelity and loyalty to spouse is on par with fidelity and loyalty to other vows, to corps [not the dead body “corps”] or country. It is Petraeus’s fidelity that is on stage now. He revealed to the world that he is not an honorable man, that he is disloyal, that he cannot withstand and reject temptation. He has fed the Democrat beast. He did it. He fed it. What credibility is there in anything he says now? If his lying down with the camp follower whore had not been uncovered, he’d be in Australia wine tasting with Hillary, still mouthing the video meme.

        So, this is only one distraction from the Benghazi truth. If not this, there would be others front and center in the news, but there most certainly would be others. And other distractions and reasons and excuses are being devised, formulated, brewed by Axelgrease as I type. Just because the Democrats and the press and the GOP and the peepul are talking about Petraeus’s penis does not mean that they/we would be focused and talking about Benghazi and our dead and murdered treasures if the general had never “strayed.”

        Yes, we should make a huge deal out of his judgment lapse because it’s part of the story. It’s not a separate component. Focus on everything. Burn ’em all for every sin. We are rotten to the core and need a great assist.

        Outlaw, I do not nor did not infer from your post that you tolerated infidelity. I understand your point but don’t agree as I’ve explained above. And I really, really appreciate your post and the other comments. Feeding my brain. Thanks a million.

        • Loyal Goatherd

          ….fidelity and loyalty to spouse is on par with fidelity and loyalty to other vows,…

          I’m afraid I must disagree with you TCR.

          The Presidential Oath: Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:–“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

          The Presidential Oath is not nearly as binding as the vows of Marriage.

          The traditional oath from the common book of Prayer: WILT thou have this Woman to thy wedded Wife, to live together after God’s ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her in sickness and in health; and, FORSAKING ALL OTHER, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?

          One is taken until relieved, the other until the death of one or the other. Marriage, the ultimate oath, then all others on the same par.

          Do Not forsake me, oh my darling

          Call it the romantic in me, or just call it nicotine withdrawl.

          • Texacalirose

            I accept your point. We can agree that while the oaths are in effect, one until relieved, the other till death, they are on par or comparable; I can also accept that the marriage vow is greater, making my points about the ex-CIA director stronger. Many believe that the marriage vow is temporarily suspendible if the lights are low and the wine is flowing.

            Your notions may be romantic, but I think they are profound, societal bedrock.

            (Don’t do it! *o^)

    • Kit

      “Our society is lost unless and until women re-discover and re-assert their power under the light of God and stop f&cking each other’s men.”

      I’m reminded of what I heard about the show Desperate Housewives and how it seemed that nearly all of their problems could’ve been avoided if they simply didn’t sleep around!

      • You may be right, Kit. I wonder how that very young woman fared in life as a consequence of allowing herself to be flattered and used by Clinton. She has had her name used to describe a sexual act while his reputation is none the worse for his behavior. Unfortunately, there is, and probably always will be a double standard.

        • -fritz-

          I agree INFJ. In reality there is no difference between the terms playboy and whore , The latter simply sounds dirtier when dribbled off the lips!

      • Kit

        I also want to make clear, that I know the impeachment was over perjury and obstruction of justice charges NOT adultery. Instead, I am wondering if it was strategically smart to impeach him instead of simply keeping the pressure on him and allowing him to crash and burn on his own.

  • Scott M.

    The invasion of Italy,1943

    As I recall,General Truscott was a descendant of Thomas Jefferson.Lucian Truscott 4 is a piece of shit.

  • About the Honor Code, since we have decided to stroll down this trail…

    “Although West Point did not formalize the Honor Code and system until the 1920s, the history of the honor code at the Academy goes back to its inception in 1802. The Code of Honor within the officer corps at the time was simply that an officer’s word was his bond. When Sylvanus Thayer was the Superintendent in the 1820s, he focused on the principles of good scholarship and expressly forbade cheating. West Point treated allegations of stealing singularly under Army regulations through the 1920s. The first major step toward formalizing the unwritten Honor Code came in 1922 when the Superintendent, Brig. Gen. Douglas MacArthur, formed the Cadet Honor Committee to review all honor allegations. In 1947, the Superintendent, Maj. Gen. Maxwell Taylor, drafted the first official Honor Code publication marking the beginning of the written “Cadet Honor Code.” However, the Cadet Honor Code did not formally include a “tolerate those who do” clause until 1970.

    The origin of the word “hooker” (which refers to prostitutes) comes from the “camp followers” who trailed after GEN Hooker’s union army troops during the Civil War. Until our current conflicts sexual activity historically was tolerated “downrange” as recently as the Vietnam War. There was a famous saying from WWII England about US troops, “oversexed, overpaid and over here.” I’m sure all those Soldiers weren’t single.

    I know of many Soldiers who were disciplined for their sexual behavior downrange in Iraq. There is a general currently on trial for things far worse than anything Petraeus ever attempted. See this STORY. For a profane, funny take on this try LOOKING HERE

    Just like the rest of society, the military has more than its fair share of skunks. For the record I don’t approve of that kind of behavior, there’s no excuse for it other than surrendering to personal weakness. But THAT is the least of our problems.

    My post was never meant to call attention to the problems with adultery in military and in this nation in general, but the fascination with it seems to prove my point about people missing the damn point.

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>