Vantage Point speaks out on “brand Petraeus” at Altercation
Don Hynes
Most of what LTC Bateman had to say about serving military officers speaking out with political opinions is a deserving debate among currently serving and recently retired military. However, Tom Engelhardt's recent TomDispatch is also worth a reflection:
"By then, of course, the President himself was a thoroughly tarnished brand, not exactly the sort of face with which to launch 1,000 ships or even 30,000 troops into a self-made hell against the urgent wishes of the American people. Instead, he pushed forward his all-American general -- the smart, bemedaled, well-spoken, Princeton PhD and counterinsurgency guru, beloved by reporters whom he had romanced for years, and already treated like a demi-god by members of both parties in both houses of Congress. He became the "face" of the administration (just as American military and civilian officials had long spoken of putting an "Iraqi face" on the American occupation of that country). In the ensuing months, as New York Times columnist Frank Rich pointed out, the surging Brand Petraeus campaign only gained traction as the President publicly cited the general more than 150 times, 53 times in May 2007 alone. Never has a President put on the "face" of a general more regularly. "
The idea that any of the four stars and other high ranking officers in the Iraq and/or Afghanistan theater are somehow to avoid politics is patently erroneous and their presentation to Congress and the American people is almost always founded on imagery and ideology, not actual military performance.
It may be easier for me to say as a non military person, but what right do "they" have as men of conscience to remain silent?
Don Hynes
mediamatters.org/altercation/200804280003#18