• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CIA director David Petraeus resigns citing extramarital affair.

Author and historian Max Boot offers a spirited critique of Lucien Truscott IV's nasty bit of character assassination in which he  returns to his own "great man" theme by describing: "the gleeful Schadenfreude being exhibited by so many who are eager to kick a great man when he is temporarily down," he goes on to describe Truscott's piece as "egregious and nauseating ... risible name-calling ... [and] runaway nostalgia."
 
Interesting article, thanks for bringing it to our attention.

And to go completely off on a tangent, somebody - Pinnochio maybe - could argue a convincing case that if the CG of the 90th Division had had access to Powerpoint, he would have kept his job. It obviously was the key to the later generation making out so well.
 
Be careful with Ricks, he makes a few salient points that are worth considering (I like the one about generals becoming a guild) but he is one of the biggest promotors of the pop-centric COIN narrative that says "the Army sucked until St David of Patreaus came along and revealed FM 3-24 to all".  I noticed this latest article uses a bit of sleight of hand to transition from general commentary on senior leadership to a focus on Franks and Sanchez, who probably weren't the best of leaders, but are frequently used for him to promote the narrative.  He's made a lot of money and blog hits from selling this line.

The narrative is very Ameriocentric and is laden with selective interpretation of histroy from Malaya to Iraq.  The is a growing literature that is quite critical of the narrative, its poor use of historical analysis and its negative implications for policymakers.
 
FJAG said:
While Truscott's article above was drivel, the following article - also examining failures in US leadership at the general rank - is well researched and well written.

Thomas Ricks, to the best of my knowledge, has no military experience, but is a Pulitzer winning author with excellent credentials on the topic.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/11/general-failure/309148/?single_page=true


It doesn't persuade me, either. It seems to me that failures in command/leadership/generalship are both common and normal, at least as I read the historical record. Those failures seem more common when an army expands rapidly and/or the "rules" of battle (tactics and technology) change. It has been thus since Cannae 2,200 years ago. I remain convinced that David Petraeus was:

E.R. Campbell said:
... apparently, a favourite of the intellectual right in America, even touted, by some, presidential material.

Folks like Max Boot have gone so far as to describe him as a "great" general - when challenged on "great" he has, in fairness, backed away.

But it illustrates a problem we face today: defining "great."

George G Marshall was "great," by any historical standards; in the pantheon of American leadership Omar Bradley, Chster Nimitz and Matthew Ridgway were "great," too. But David Patraeus? Great?

Gen Patraeus was a very fine officer, smart, aggressive, and, and, and ... but his primary skills were on a par with, say, Maxwell Taylor, who hardly merited the designation of "great."

It can be argued that modern, 21st century war doesn't provide the stage that, say, Nimitz, Wavell, Bradley, Slim, Ridgway and our own Murray used to demonstrate their strategic or tactical brilliance, their moral courage, determination and their leadership skills, and, maybe, "great" leaders only emerge, as President Ronald Reagan put it, when speaking of Ridgway, "Heroes come when they're needed; great men step forward when courage seems in short supply."

My  :2c: is that David Patraeus was a good officer who was, no doubt, a highly political general who courted the press (Rick Hillier, anyone?); is that why he is considered, by some, to be "great?" But he made a tragic* error, perhaps fortunately, for his supporters, before he rose too far.


-----
* Tragic in the way that Euripides might have described


I doubt that anyone reaches flag/general officer rank in the modern US (or Australian, British or Canadian) armed forces without having displayed both good leadership and management skills, but the skills that may have served William Westmorland well, making him a colonel and a divisional chief of staff at the age of 30 were, in my estimation, not adequate for the tasks he was assigned just 20 years later when he went to Viet Nam. Why should we be surprisd when the lessons of Viet Nam were not easily transferred to the Middle East?

But I also believe that Westmorland, himself, and his boss, Robert McNamara, embedded a management virus in the US military - a virus that spread, quickly, to all modern armies, including the CF. I also blame a social/political system that rewards "superstars," be they charismatic politicians, businessmen/CEOs or generals:

tru2.jpg
 
lamarre.jpg
 
hillier.jpg

Pierre Trudeau                                          Bernard Lamarre              Rick Hillier
Three charismatic Canadians: a superstar PM, CEO (SNC Lavalin)  and general


My contention that generalship have 'evolved' along with the socio-political system, and political masters, that they serve still seems reasonable to me.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
I doubt that anyone reaches flag/general officer rank in the modern US (or Australian, British or Canadian) armed forces without having displayed both good leadership and management skills, but the skills that may have served William Westmorland well, making him a colonel and a divisional chief of staff at the age of 30 were, in my estimation, not adequate for the tasks he was assigned just 20 years later when he went to Viet Nam. Why should we be surprisd when the lessons of Viet Nam were not easily transferred to the Middle East?

To a point, but we have to be cautious about how we interpret failures in generalship when we try and use metrics that aren't the basic "destroyed this enemy, took that city".  Westmoreland was promoted fast because he was an aggressive fighting general; he did exactly what he was promoted to do and was pretty good at pounding the crap out of the NVA/VC to buy SVN time; is it Westmoreland's fault that the U.S. government couldn't stop meddling in regime change in Saigon, turning SVN's government, especially between 1963-1967, into a complete circus?  I don't care what your military approach is; it will fail if the political conditions do not set the conditions for success.

General Patreaus is considered as "great" (to the point where a fifth star was actually being discussed) because he had promotors worthy of Don King - the crowd of Ricks, Kilcullen, Nagl, McFate, Sewell and the Kagans sold the narrative so persistently that it became accepted as truth.  The "Bandwagonistas", as one article termed them, create dichotomies out of commanders; guys like Casey and McKiernan are unfairly pilloried as "not getting it", despite the fact that they operated within unique policy constraints, while guys like Patreaus and McChrystal are seen as knights on white horses.

What is more interesting is how fast McChrystal and now Patreaus are jettisoned by the Bandwagonistas once their human failures come to light.
 
Want a bit of a split?  Check here ....
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/108329.0.html
.... for the "management virus" stuff - now back to discussing Petraeus' woes.

Milnet.ca Staff
 
Apparently David Frum doesn't agree with Mr. Truscott's op=ed either.

Here's How Not to Craft an Argument

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/19/here-s-how-not-to-craft-an-argument.html

In this Sunday's New York Times, the novelist Lucien Truscott IV manages to set some kind of land-speed record for stupid or wrong observations in the span of a single oped. High among them is his claim that the generals who won World War II did not care about their uniforms. Warning: if the exceptions to your rule about World War II generals include George Patton and Douglas MacArthur, then your rule is wrong.
 
cupper said:
Apparently David Frum doesn't agree with Mr. Truscott's op=ed either.

Here's How Not to Craft an Argument
One of the online comments may be correct; however I suspect that the poster didn't realize it.

"Given that Truscott's grandfather rose from regimental to division to corps and then army command during WWII, he may have some insight into this matter."

Yes, he, the grandfather may have had some insight; it takes more than a birth certificate to assume that the grandson has any sort of insights; none were apparent in the article. Googling the grandson's other writings, he bases a lot of his insights and credibility on his pedigree.....without justification.
 
I was momentarily tempted to post this report, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the New York Post, in our mismanaged medals thread but, of course it belongs here:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/kelley_medal_outrage_Fq5K754z1Nntf5uayAFiUO
Jill Kelley awarded prestigious medal from Joint Chiefs in 2011

By JEANE MacINTOSH

Last Updated: November 22, 2012

They’ll give a medal to anyone.

Military schmoozer Jill Kelley — a central figure in the investigation of Gen. David Petraeus — in March 2011 was awarded a prestigious medal from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The award, the country’s second-highest honor for a civilian, was given to acknowledge Kelley’s “selfless contributions” and “willingness to host engagements” for top pols and military brass.

Petraeus recommended her for the award while he was commander of Tampa’s US Central Command, a spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Tampa Tribune.

22.1N008.petraeus1.C--300x300.jpg

COMRADES: Jill Kelley demonstrates her “selfless
contributions” for which Gen. David Petraeus (left)
bestowed the second-highest citation for a civilian.
Zuma Press


Adm. Mike Mullen, who was then the Joint Chiefs chair, approved it.

Kelley during a Washington, DC, ceremony received a silver medal, lapel pin and a citation for her efforts. Petraeus presented the award, which recognized the Florida socialite’s “outstanding public service to the United States Central Command, the MacDill Air Force Base community and the Department of Defense from October 31, 2008 to May 31, 2010.”

The citation also notes Kelley’s work in “advancing various military endeavors” and her “willingness to host engagements with senior national representatives from more than 60 countries,” according to the Tampa Tribune.

“On multiple occasions, Mrs. Kelley invited senior national representatives, their spouses and senior leaders to her home to demonstrate their gratitude and support,” the citation continues.

Kelley and her doctor husband are known for the lavish parties they throw for civic and military leaders at their $1.5 million waterfront Tampa mansion, replete with free-flowing champagne, caviar and cigars.

“These events promoted camaraderie, understanding and a better appreciation for coalition and military customs, concerns and abilities,” her citation noted.

Kelley also got a nod for helping Petraeus when he first took command of CentCom.

“She [was] instrumental in introducing the commander, early in his tenure, to local and state officials, particularly the mayor of Tampa and the governor of Florida,” according to the citation.

“The singularly distinctive accomplishments of Mrs. Jill Kelley are in keeping with the finest traditions of public service and reflect great credit upon herself, United States Central Command and the Department of Defense.”

Kelley’s complaint to the FBI allegedly threatening e-mails from Petraeus mistress Paula Broadwell sparked a probe and Petraeus’ resignation as CIA boss. The investigation also uncovered several e-mail exchanges between Kelley and Gen. John Allen.

The e-mails are now part of a Defense Department probe: Allen’s nomination to lead NATO’s forces in Europe has been put on hold.

Allen yesterday returned to his post as head of NATO forces in Afghanistan.


I like how they defined Ms. Kelly as a woman of "singularly distinctive accomplishments." But it was only the silver medal; what, inquiring minds want to know, did she need to do for the gold?
 
E.R. Campbell said:
22.1N008.petraeus1.C--300x300.jpg


I like how they defined Ms. Kelly as a woman of "singularly distinctive accomplishments." But it was only the silver medal; what, inquiring minds want to know, did she need to do for the gold?

That picture says a lot.  When I served down in the US, I attended a number of events (Mardi Gras, NIOSA, . . . .) that, like in the pic, made use of "beads" (the partying equivalent of medals?).  The presentation of same to a woman was usually followed by the request, "show us your t*ts".
 
Bumping for new events that unfolded today:

Prosecutors weigh charges against David Petraeus involving classified information

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/prosecutors-weigh-charges-against-david-petraeus-involving-classified-information/2015/01/09/d6b4bb36-9854-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_story.html?hpid=z3

Federal prosecutors have recommended that David H. Petraeus face charges for providing classified documents to his biographer, raising the prospect of criminal proceedings against the retired four-star general and former CIA director.

The recommendation follows a federal probe into how the biographer, Paula Broadwell, apparently obtained classified records several years ago while working on a book about Petraeus. Broadwell was also his mistress, and the documents were discovered by investigators during the scandal that forced Petraeus’s resignation as CIA director in 2012.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. must decide whether to pursue charges against Petraeus, the former top U.S. commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.

The Justice Department and FBI declined to comment, as did Robert B. Barnett, a lawyer for Petraeus.

Both Petraeus and Broadwell have denied in the past that he provided her with classified information. Investigators have previously focused on whether his staff gave her sensitive documents at his instruction.

The prosecutors’ recommendation was first reported Friday evening on the Web site of the New York Times, which said Petraeus has rejected the possibility of a plea deal.

The FBI has been pushing to resolve several high-profile counterespionage investigations that have lingered for months and in some cases years. In addition to the case involving Petraeus and Broadwell, the bureau wants the Justice Department to decide whether to pursue charges against Robin Raphel, a veteran State Department diplomat, and James E. “Hoss” Cartwright.

Cartwright was the target of a Justice Department investigation into the leak of information about the Stuxnet cyberattack against Iran’s nuclear program. The details of Raphel’s case remain murky, but officials have said classified information was found at her home.

FBI agents believe they have strong cases against all four of them, said another U.S. official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. Each of the cases is considered sensitive given the involvement of high-ranking officials in the U.S. government.

The Justice Department has also faced political pressure to resolve the Petraeus matter. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), now the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, wrote Holder last month expressing concern the case has continued to linger.

“At this critical moment in our nation’s security, Congress and the American people cannot afford to have this voice silenced or curtailed by the shadow of a long-running, unresolved investigation marked by leaks from anonymous sources,” said McCain, adding that he wasn’t seeking action “on behalf of any particular interest — and don’t presume to judge the outcome of any investigation.”

Federal investigators first searched Broadwell’s home in Charlotte in November 2012 and seized dozens of boxes of records as well as computer equipment. Aides to Petraeus have said they were often tasked to provide military records or other documents to Broadwell for her work on her book about him. That book, “All In,” was published in January 2012.

Any classified information investigators discovered could expose both her and Petraeus to charges. It is a crime to remove classified information from secure, government locations as well as to provide that information to others not authorized to receive it.

Petraeus now spends his time teaching and giving speeches; he also serves as chairman of the KKR Global Institute, a part of the private-equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts.

The 2012 investigation into Petraeus was triggered when Broadwell allegedly sent threatening e-mails to another woman who was a friend of Petraeus, Jill Kelley of Tampa. Kelley alerted an FBI agent she knew to seek protection and to help track down whoever had sent the e-mails.

The FBI traced the messages to Broadwell, a married Army reservist, and in the course of its investigation, uncovered explicit e-mails between Broadwell and Petraeus.

Investigators said they were at first concerned about the possibility that Petraeus, then the director of the CIA, had had his e-mail hacked. Further investigation led to the discovery of the affair with Broadwell.

Petraeus had become CIA director a short time earlier, in September 2011. His resignation cut short his time at the agency and also seemed to scuttle long-rumored presidential aspirations.
 
And the mystery deepens about "the other other woman" who inadvertently became the whistle blower of the whole affair.

Jill Kelley e-mails depict a striving Tampa socialite and a smitten military brass

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/jill-kelley-e-mails-depict-a-striving-tampa-socialite-and-a-smitten-military-brass/2015/02/03/ef8cb06c-a800-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html?hpid=z5

Judging from her e-mails, Jill Kelley was star-struck by the big-name military commanders rotating between the war zones in the Middle East and her home town of Tampa. And they were equally smitten with her.

“Everyone thinks you’re a RockStar!” Kelley gushed in a 2012 e-mail to Marine Gen. James N. Mattis, then commander of all U.S. military forces in the Middle East. “We agreed how amazing it must be that you’re single-handedly re-writing history,” she added, recalling how she had sung the general’s praises to several foreign ambassadors at the Republican National Convention that August in Tampa.

After another social event, she wrote a similar mash note to Mattis’s deputy, Vice Adm. Robert S. Harward. “What a Leader you were to these heads of State,” she enthused. “You ROCK!!!”

Replied Harward: “YOU ROCK MORE!”

In late 2012, Kelley’s talent as a Tampa hostess and her knack for charming men in uniform indirectly triggered one of the most embarrassing national security scandals of the past decade. Among other casualties, the fallout led to the forced resignation of CIA Director David H. Petraeus — a former four-star Army general — and the early retirement of Marine Gen. John Allen, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Kelley’s chumminess with Petraeus and the military brass had attracted the notice of the spymaster’s biographer and mistress, Paula Broadwell. She bad-mouthed Kelley in anonymous e-mails to military officials and others, according to federal investigators and a lawsuit filed by Kelley. The FBI got involved. Petraeus quit in disgrace. Allen retired.

The case still has not been entirely resolved. The Justice Department is deciding whether to charge Petraeus with leaking classified material to his lover. He has denied doing so.

Long after the scandal broke, it remains unclear what exactly prompted Broadwell to view Kelley as a rival. Kelley has said the two never met and that she never had an affair with Petraeus, Allen or anyone else.

Nor has anyone fully explained why Allen, while busy overseeing the war in Afghanistan, exchanged a blizzard of correspondence with Kelley — between 20,000 and 30,000 pages of e-mails, according to some senior defense officials. Other officials have said that figure includes many duplicate notes and exaggerates the extent of their communications, adding that there were only about 300 total e-mails.

The Defense Department inspector general investigated and concluded in 2013 that Allen had not committed any wrongdoing. But it has kept its report and all of Allen’s e-mails under lock and key.

Now, a glimpse into Kelley’s relationship with military commanders has emerged from another, previously undisclosed batch of e-mails: her correspondence with Mattis, a legendary Marine, and Harward, a Navy SEAL, from when they served as the top two officers at U.S. Central Command headquarters in Tampa.

The Washington Post requested the e-mails in November 2012 under the Freedom of Information Act. More than two years later, after numerous unexplained delays, the Pentagon released 238 pages of heavily censored documents.

The unredacted portions of the e-mails — from Mattis’s and Harward’s government e-mail accounts — contain no evidence of improper behavior. But taken together, the records depict two wartime commanders who were easy marks for the flattery of an exuberant socialite.

“I wish that we could clone a couple thousand of you, but the land is likely not ready for that big an impact,” Mattis told Kelley in a Jan. 31, 2012, e-mail.

Mattis and Harward, who have both since retired from the military, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Kelley, 39, who still lives in Tampa, referred questions to her attorney, Alan C. Raul of Washington. He released a statement that read, in part: “The latest set of e-mails made public by the government simply confirms that Jill Kelley is and was a talented, civic-minded woman doing productive work as Honorary Ambassador to Central Command in Tampa and as Honorary Consul for the Republic of Korea.”

“Nonetheless,” he added, “continued unauthorized government release of the Kelleys’ e-mails exposes them to further unjustified embarrassment and injury.”

A relative newcomer on Tampa’s social scene, Kelley and her husband, Scott, hosted events at their mansion for military officers from nearby MacDill Air Force Base, home of Central Command headquarters. The e-mails show how Kelley was eager to deepen and formalize the relationship, urging the brass to bestow on her the title of honorary ambassador for Central Command and the U.S.-led military coalition in Afghanistan and the Middle East.

“Sooooooooo…..Did you and Jim finally decide to make me your ‘official’ CentCom ambassador?????” Kelley asked Harward on Jan. 12, 2012. “Please! Please! Please! I always wanted to be an Ambassador, since I was made to be a ‘catalyst’ — that helps build or facilitate Foreign relations.”

Harward gave a teasing reply: “We’ll have to put you through the vetting process and interviews to ensure you have the right attributes!”

She passed muster soon enough. On April 19, Harward hosted an official recognition ceremony and reception in which Kelley was anointed “United States Central Command and Coalition Honorary Ambassador.”

Mattis was tied up in Baghdad and couldn’t attend. Kelley, who is of Lebanese descent, e-mailed him afterward with a narrative of the event. She described how she gave a speech, partly in Arabic, and did her best to make a good diplomatic impression with VIPs from Middle Eastern countries.

“I gave my commitment . . . as the Ambassador, to make it my priority to advance global trust, international exchange, and camaraderie within the Command,” she wrote. “But most importantly I thanked Gen Mattis for his priceless support and glorius leadership. I said, without him, this would not be a reality!”

She added: “Harward also spoke — really flattering words about ‘Madame Ambassador’ He explained how they decided to designate this new position — and why the CentCom unilaterally chose me. :) (which was very humbling to hear in front of a million guys)”

A medical researcher and the mother of three young children, Kelley found her niche as a networker, volunteering her time to arrange dinners, charity functions and other events in Tampa and Washington. Her ebullient personality stood out in military and diplomatic circles, catching attention from some unexpected corners.

In January 2012, for example, the South Korean Embassy in Washington informed Kelley that she had been selected to become an honorary consul. Even though she knew little about the country, she accepted the title with gusto.

“YES!!!! Honorary Consul General. I’m soooooo excited about the humbling honor,” she wrote to Mattis on Jan. 31 to inform him of her appointment. “It’s ironic that I get the request from the state of Korea — which is NOT my expertise. However as a lover of International Politics/Foreign Affairs, I do find the Korean Statehood quite interesting . . . (I’m a lover of conflict problem solving, and have a keen sense of seeking opportunities in chaos.).”

While Kelley’s appointments as ambassador and consul general were honorary positions, the e-mails indicate that she was eager to become a diplomatic player.

In July and August 2012, she informed Harward in a series of notes that she had received an official invitation from the parliament of Afghanistan to visit Kabul. In correspondence with State Department officials, she emphasized that her planned visit to Kabul had the backing of Allen, the U.S. general in charge of military operations in Afghanistan.

“I am honored by their petition of me, and would be humbled to serve the request to foster, promote and proliferate future relations and agreements with the Members of Parliament,” Kelley wrote in an Aug. 27 e-mail to an unidentified State Department official, which was copied to Allen. “As I stated in our conversation, COMISAF John Allen is well aware of the invitation by Parliament, and is in support of my visit to Kabul.”

Kelley’s attorney did not respond to a query about whether she went on the trip.

As she embraced her honorary roles, Kelley also became protective of her diplomatic turf. The tone of her cheery, solicitous e-mails changed abruptly in early July 2012 after an unidentified NATO official informed her matter-of-factly that three other coalition ambassadors had been appointed and would be attending a French-sponsored Bastille Day party.

“Bob,” she e-mailed Harward minutes later. “WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT??? You never informed me of ‘3’ other Honorary Ambassadors??????”

When Harward replied that he would check into the matter, Kelley fumed some more. “Please call . . . and make it very clear that you are NOT supporting this,” she wrote. “These NATO guys manipulate passive behavior . . . Clearly, I’m offended, and not standing up for this . . . Please address this today, and kill this for once and for all.”


Kelley’s diplomatic career crumbled a few months later — not because of her perceived NATO rivals but because of the FBI’s investigation into Broadwell’s anonymous e-mails and the ripples from Petraeus’s downfall.

Although Kelley was never accused of wrongdoing, her name and her unusual niche in the national-security establishment were quickly publicized by the news media. In 2013, she sued the FBI and the Defense Department, asserting that her privacy rights had been violated by officials who leaked her name and personal information to reporters.

The federal government has sought to dismiss the case, but a judge has ruled that the lawsuit can proceed in U.S. District Court in Washington.

If this doesn't make you go Hmmm or Huh for several different reasons, I'll be surprised.
 
I'm surprised that there hasn't been an unofficial biography or made-for-TV movie yet.

Maybe they're just waiting to see how the Petraeus will-they-or-won't-they charge him thing plays out?

:pop:

:cheers:
 
Twenty years of SHARP and Harrassment briefings, and years of no fraternization policies won't trump millions of years of evolution.

 
Hamish Seggie said:
Twenty years of SHARP and Harrassment briefings, and years of no fraternization policies won't trump millions of years of evolution.

As I told my CSM in Kabul when he freaked out at me making up a condom dispenser - "Sir, I know exactly what the TFC's standing orders regarding fraternization are, but I also know a thing or two about human nature and biology..."

MM
 
“Bob,” she e-mailed Harward minutes later. “WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT??? You never informed me of ‘3’ other Honorary Ambassadors??????”

When Harward replied that he would check into the matter, Kelley fumed some more. “Please call . . . and make it very clear that you are NOT supporting this,” she wrote. “These NATO guys manipulate passive behavior . . . Clearly, I’m offended, and not standing up for this . . . Please address this today, and kill this for once and for all.”

That's gold. Bitch level 10.

If I was more articulate I could inject a clever joke about what she is and is not standing up for.  Either way it's pretty obvious she held the generals balls in her purse.  She could get a spot on 'Real house wives'.
 
Back
Top