More than a Fifth Star for Gen. David Petraeus
As Gen. David Petraeus steps down from the helm of what is now America’s longest war, a war that according to many is not going well at all and at a time when casualties in that war are on the increase — sadly accentuated by the tragic loss of 30 of our heroes in a single enemy attack just last week — his accomplishments in Afghanistan and his legacy are already being fiercely debated.
To some, the jury is still out but others have already made up their minds, one way or another.
TIME’s Joe Klein, for example, calls Petraeus’ career “brilliant.”
I for one have been a staunch supporter of the general ever since he took charge in that war-torn country on July 4, 2010, after having served for over 20 months as Commander, United States Central Command.
I have admired the General, his record and his performance so much that one year ago last summer, I argued for giving Petraeus a fifth star based on the following:
If we are serious about fighting and winning in Afghanistan, then let’s give the commander of that war the rank and the authority to match our seriousness and commitment.
General Petraeus has now become the face of the Afghanistan war — many say our only hope to win that war or to come home with honor.
It would show that the President and Congress truly trust and believe in Petraeus — Americans already do — and that he has the unambiguous support of the president, the Congress and the nation.
I also mentioned that I was not alone in making such a suggestion and pointed to the words of D.B. Grady, a former paratrooper with U.S. Army Special Operations Command and a veteran of Afghanistan, in The Atlantic:
He is, quite literally, the only man for the job. He is the last man standing with the public who can credibly be called upon to not only win the war, but to do the impossible. He has, after all, done it before.
…
He is the only man, general or civilian, who can stand before the American people, the American soldier, and military families, and discuss the conflict without being second-guessed or dismissed out of hand as a partisan hack.
I was not the only one arguing for a fifth star for Petraeus.
As far back as April 2008, during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Petraeus, “If I could promote you to five stars, I would.”
Then, in January of this year, prompted by an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal by two distinguished combat veterans, Pete Hegseth and Wade Zirkle, I rejoined the debate quoting their words:
The U.S. war against terrorism is now the longest war in U.S. history, and Gen. Petraeus has clearly distinguished himself as a leader worthy of joining the ranks of Gens. MacArthur, Marshall and Nimitz.
It has been more than half a century since a U.S. general was awarded a fifth star. David Petraeus’s generalship has spanned 11 years, three presidents and seven Congresses. It is time to promote him to “General of the Army” and award him a fifth star. Our military deserves it, and he has certainly earned it.
In a little more than two weeks, Gen. Petraeus will retire from the U.S. Army, after having served our nation in many historic roles in a distinguished manner for 37 years, and will assume his new duties as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency on September 1.
Despite being one of the finest military officers of his generation, the general will retire without becoming Chief of Staff of the Army or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — two positions for which he is eminently qualified and more than deserving of. Equally sad, that fifth star which so many of us wished upon the general has also eluded him. (To be sure and to the best of my knowledge, Gen. Petraeus has never sought such an advancement.)
When David Petraeus enters the “original” CIA headquarters building lobby as its 20th director, he will come face-to-face with the “CIA Memorial Wall,” a white Vermont marble Wall carved with 102* stars. An inscription on the Wall in gold block letters says it all:
IN HONOR OF THOSE MEMBERS OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES IN THE SERVICE OF THEIR COUNTRY.
Regrettably, new stars are added periodically to the Wall. One of the duties of the new Director will be to approve the new stars.
Gen. Petraeus’ and his soon-to-be Agency’s most important responsibility, as the nation’s first line of defense, is to “accomplish what others cannot accomplish and go where others cannot go.”
As such, the four-star general will be trading the honor of a possible fifth silver star for the solemn responsibility — and honor — of ensuring that the ultimate sacrifices represented by the more than 100 stars forever carved on that Memorial Wall will not have been for naught.
“These stars are testament to our past and
our present. To our history and our spirit.
To a defining trait of the CIA and the nation
it protects: devotion to duty in pursuit of
freedom for all.”
Director George J. Tenet
May 2004
* Most recent number according to Wikipedia.
Photo: CIA Public Records
Memorial Wall sources: CIA Library
Cross posted from the Huffington Post
Share This
Related Posts
-
George W. Bush’s Legacy: The Debate Continues
Posted on Apr 23, 2013
-
Military Working Dogs
Posted on Apr 18, 2013
-
A ‘Hummingbird’ Flew in Afghanistan
Posted on Mar 31, 2013
-
Women in Combat: ‘He Can Kiss My Combat Action Badge’
Posted on Mar 29, 2013
LOL Patty isn’t anywhere close to an Eisenhower. So even a 5th star isn’t warranted.
In my opinion McArthur did not deserve a “fifth” star. History shows us that his military skills were mostly theatrical. He was effectively sidelined in Australia/New Guinea with a figurehead title while Nimitz did the thinking and implementation.
You are clearly a great fan of Petraeus. I’m neutral on him. The reason, is that he may not be perceived as a “political hack” by many, but he has indeed moved into the political realm. A conscious choice. The last General we “hyped” turned out to be a disaster. Do you remember Colin Powel standing in front of the UN openly lying for George Bush and Dick Cheney? Because of that, our military leadership is held in lesser esteem today and rightly so. Besides, we are not going to leave Afghanistan victorious. Vietnam has already showed us that there is no honor in non-victory. Moreover, that “honor” should not dictate whether or not we should remain in conflict.
I agree with you on MacArthur not deserving a 5th star, just as he did not deserve,in my opinion, the Medal of Honor—he did not perform any acts of valor as described in the criteria for that high honor.
We’ll have to disagree on Petraeus, especially since I criticized him during the Iraq war, but then realized that the General was conscientiously and honorably performing his duties as a soldier, a General. I was misplacing my disgust for the war on him, instead of on the jerks who took our nation into that war under lies and false pretenses.
Don’t get me started om that!
Colin Powell, I have mixed feelings about him. Yes, he made the mistake of covering up for the jerks—as a civilian member of that administration—and he’ll probably pay for that for the rest of his life. But as a military officer, he was OK.
Dorian-
We are in general agreement regarding Colin Powel, except that I read his book and was not impressed by his self described leadership qualification.
I do not see military leadership skills equating to civilian leadership skills. In fact I consider them inferior in practice. There is a grand difference between a civilian leader that can inspire people to follow than a general, with his captive audience followers, whom must obey or pay the price. Regarding the superior, more difficult form leadership, I do not see any Petraeus examples yet, but time will tell.
“I do not see military leadership skills equating to civilian leadership skills. In fact I consider them inferior in practice. There is a grand difference between a civilian leader that can inspire people to follow than a general, with his captive audience followers, whom must obey or pay the price.”
Wow, Allen, I need to fully digest this one, but if I read it right, I have plenty of disagreement with it.
Logan,
As I have mentioned before, I am not the hallway monitor for other threads. If you see “vulgarity, name-calling, and threats of violence,” on my threads that I don’t “slap down,” please let me know.
Thanks
General Colin Powell UN Speech on Iraq Part 1of5
Maybe that video will help you remember why people think Powell is a lying sack of s**t.
Now there is always the possibility that he is an idiot, but somehow I have a hard time believing that an idiot could become a general.
I wonder how he sleeps at night with all that blood on his hands.
Logan-
…and our entertainment.
LOL
I was a Petraeus fan since I read Thomas Ricks Fiasco in 2006, and was happy to see him take over a badly run war in Iraq. His career was brilliant on that basis alone.
I was not so happy to see him take over in Afghanistan, where the tactics he used successfully in Iraq would not translate as well to success. His reputation gave credibility to a futile and expensive war. For that reason he does not deserve another star.
Since he’s moving to the CIA it’s a moot point anyway.
The only other star David Petraeus deserves is maybe on the Hollywood Walk of Fame (or whatever it’s called now). He is a hollow man, a media hog: self-serving, arrogant, brutal, greedy about his image. He has stoked the Afghan War to his own purposes. Look at the mind-numbing destruction: the dead soldiers and civilians, all the articfical limbs for both, the billions of taxpayer dollars blown. More contractors on the ground than boots on the ground. No doubt, one day he will work as a consultant for one of them. He’s spent a lot of time babysitting those dudes as they enriched themselves and hit on young Afghan girls. He is a small man by all measures – though smart enough to deceive media, military wonks and D.C. insiders – and is nothing but a sycophant and politician. From P-4 to 007. What a laugh. He is the kind of empty human being who will get his, and something tells me he won’t be awarded a star for it.