More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Sen. Mike Gravel

GET UPDATES FROM Sen. Mike Gravel
 

The McClellan Flip

Posted: 09/26/10 07:45 PM ET

The popular Union General George McClellan, who as the Democratic candidate promised to end the Civil War by negotiating with the Confederacy, lost to Abraham Lincoln in 1864 because of the Union's military successes in the field. Lincoln wanted to persist in fighting to total victory. The presidential election of 2012 may see a reversal of roles: a popular general could make a campaign issue of the winning the Afghan War, while an apparently timid President grapples with his promise to begin drawing down the troops by August 2011.

General David Petraeus, through his own self promotion and a meager field of viable candidates, has been touted by certain Republican interests as a potential candidate for president in 2012. President Obama may feel he scotched that possibly by demoting Petraeus to commander of the Afghan War. "Obama's War" has become "Petraeus and Obama's War." The President must be gloating over what he thinks is a deft political move.

However, he shouldn't gloat too much. In fact, he may have sowed the seeds of his own destruction. Obama should be parsing Petraeus' recent media-blitz statements very carefully. The General is raising doubts about the efficacy of a draw down next August, a position the President is politically committed to. The General is also touting modest progress in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Making the draw down an issue in 2011 is an ideal opportunity for Petraeus to dislodge himself from owning the Afghan War and at the same time to thrust himself into the fray as a Republican Party candidate.

Petraeus could contend that a draw down in 2011 is premature and jeopardizes victory. He could then resign in protest over Obama's policy, appearing to courageously taking the high ground. He would then argue in the campaign that we can win in Afghanistan if only we had a real Commander-and-Chief that had the experience, patience and courage to persevere.

The image of America turning tail and retreating from Afghanistan like the Russians did is more humiliation than the American public can take. The campaign slogan "we can win" should play well with the electorate though they are disenchanted with the war. It will appeal to American triumphalism. Senator John McCain and a good many influential Republicans still feel we could have won in Vietnam if only we had persisted. Their support of Petraeus will be an attempt to reverse their distorted view of history.

This scenario is so logical for an ambitious politician like Petraeus that it's hard to think he will pass it up. The economy will still be in the doldrums while Obama will suffer the ignominy of appearing to be a feckless military leader. The military industrial complex that supported Obama in 08 will readily desert him for a popular military leader on a white horse who is prepared to fight to win and thereby vindicate the nation's honor, something very appealing to America's militarized culture.

You heard it here first!

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 39
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
09:09 AM on 09/28/2010
Petraeus would make an excellent President. I just hope he runs as a Democrat and wins the 2012 primary.
03:42 PM on 09/27/2010
This is definitely the first place I have heard that anyone might "argue in the campaign that we can win in Afghanistan if only we had a real Commander-and-Chief that had the experience, patience and courage to persevere."
Most of the time you hear things like: "Nobody believes that, are you insane?"
03:36 PM on 09/27/2010
I'm sorry, but we have been there for over 9 years, supposedly training the Afghans. So far, the largest most powerful military in the entire world has not even been able to train an effective police department for the city of Kabul...in NINE YEARS! If that is the kind of "Success" that the GOP wants to use to promote this guy as a presidential candidate, then more power to them.
03:35 PM on 09/27/2010
Sadly, I agree. Petreus' first loyalty is to the military and he will do anything to preserve the careers of his fellow officers who would, if we stop the war, be forced to fince work in the civilian world. Our politicians, through their greed, have allowed large corporations to forge unseemly relationships directly with the military. I work in defense and I can tell you that, more often than not, senior military officers are consulted about business decisions either through industry forums or as invited guests at corporate meetings. I don't know what his solution would be but, if I were Obama, I would be deciding today to start withdrawing troops immediately, relieve Petreus of his command and start to break the cords that now directly link military and civilian organizations. Otherwise, we will have at least an attempt at a military takeover within the next couple of years.
03:20 PM on 09/27/2010
How about if Obama said, ok, we have had enough. Everyone is coming home! That would be leadership!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
doriath22
Born-again Jacobin. Robespierre had the right idea
02:17 PM on 09/27/2010
Generals should stick to fighting wars, not trying to run governments.
photo
castlerider
"A man's home is his castle"
01:37 PM on 09/27/2010
Thanks for the heads up.

It's well recieved and urgently appreciated.

However, Afghanistan isn't a war. It's an occupation. Big difference.

In the classic sense, Vietnam wasn't a war either. It was a mother of all occupations where tribes and communities pulled together to try to defeat their unwelcome occupants. However, the Viet cong had long since been obliterated in terms of becoming strong enough to claim or spread to other nations. McCain's so full of garbage to say that it was a war that could've been won. We need more voices batting that kind of ignorance down, immediately after it's mentioned. Shame on him for even saying that. For all practical purposes, we won that war many times over. We stopped the spread of communism which was the supposed principle reason we went there. What would he have wanted, to kill everyone until they threw flowers at us for allowing them to be the few who remained to live? Such a classic ignorant stooge.

Harry Reid did Dems a great disservice 6 years ago when he said the Iraq war was "Lost",,, Such a foolich thing to say. America DOESN'T LOSE WARS!!! Iraq wasn't a war. It was a bloody, violent and horrible occupation.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
normathumb
01:37 PM on 09/27/2010
Yeah, I heard it here first. And it is a fantastic idea, as in what kind of fantasy are you indulging? The most Petraeus might get is second fiddle on someone else's ticket. He has no natural constituency. Nobody is going to step out of his way. He will always be seen as too close to this administrations policy. It is, after all, essentially his own. Opposing the drawdown is only maintaining the status quo and he isn't likely to ask for another 30 or 50,000 troops. However disatisfied with the current situation, that is not something the public will embrace anytime soon.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
Give peace a chance
01:21 PM on 09/27/2010
Obama should force the draw down next year irregardless of what the general or neocons says. Enough people in both parties are fed up with the losing battle and wasted American lives and resources to make his re-election easy.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
springsm
11:44 AM on 09/27/2010
Well Mike, FORMER senator...it could be that Obama wanted some real leadership of a warrior with smarts to get us finished with this stupid Afghanistanian war.  Just maybe....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marignymitch
E pluribus unum percent
12:54 PM on 09/27/2010
If that is the case then Obama made the wrong choice. Petraeus is campaigning for permanent war.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
springsm
07:52 PM on 09/27/2010
Well Obama probably did make the wrong choice.  But..he knows more than I do and is too easily led in some situations.  We know he thought it out thoroughly.  I don't trust Petraeus as far as I can see him...and I can't.  SO.  He is a warrior..and we know he wants to be permanently working.  It is a war we cannot win but perhaps something will change overnight and we can help.  Otherwise it is a waste of human lives and of our finances.  (the lives, however, come first.
photo
Buckeye54
...the One your mom warned you about!
11:13 AM on 09/27/2010
I think Afghanistan could be the downfall of this nation, not just President Obama's presidency. It is a sinkhole that is swallowing our national treasure and killing our military.

I think if you put it to a popular vote, the majority of the American people would say: "Get out now!"
10:51 AM on 09/27/2010
The Civilians in this country make military policy. If the 4 stars don't understand this, they should all be forced out and replaced.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marignymitch
E pluribus unum percent
12:49 PM on 09/27/2010
I like what you say, altho I think your old-fashioned ideas are quaint. MIC and Wall Street make policy and Obama and the rest of us do as we are told.
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
10:08 AM on 09/27/2010
This isn't a war it is an occupation and pacification effort.

There are more serious issues to be dealt with and Petraeus is not suited to deal with those issues.
09:22 AM on 09/27/2010
Petraeus is not going to run in 2012. He's also not going to run in 2016 or 2020. He's not going to run for President. Ever.

He's said this, many MANY times. His family has said this. His friends, closest colleagues, associates in government, and every person in the media who have actually knows Petreaus since he was Aide-de-Camp to Shelton when he was CJCS have said this.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
springsm
11:46 AM on 09/27/2010
he is the most politically ambitious military person we have had in a long time with the exception of "myFriends".  I wouldn't count him out for 2016.  Who will the GOP have found by then?  DP is trying to be Ike.
When the power hits and the pleading begins...it is a whole different ball game.
09:53 PM on 09/28/2010
Since when were Any politicians known to tell the truth?
09:03 AM on 09/27/2010
There would be no reason for General Petraeus to run for president as he has so stated so many times already. Why would he want the job? Why would he put his family through all of that? No reason anyone here can factually come up with.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marignymitch
E pluribus unum percent
01:01 PM on 09/27/2010
Plus Palin would mop the floor with him.