Petraeus: Option 3

Instapundit notes regarding news that General Patraeus may be named the Europe/Nato Commander:

Yes. Several possibilities: (1) Somebody’s jealous of his prominence; (2) This is just rotation as usual and they’re clueless about the importance of continuity here; or — most disturbing — there’s a bad enough prognosis for Europe that some people thought we needed him there more.

He is missing the third option.

Since the surge seems to be working in Iraq, and since Sen. Clinton calls the general a liar and Sen Obama is endorsed by an organization that calls the general a traitor, it may be the Bush administration is trying to get him in one of the Combatant Commander slots before a possible Clinton or Obama presidency ends the general’s career (it unlikely either one of them would nominate him for one of those slots).


3 Responses

  1. Why would he be more valuable as Nato commander? I’m not familiar with the authority of that role.

  2. Tom mentioned that as NATO is in charge of Afghanistan, becoming Supreme Allied Commander moves him to the new central battleground in the war against al Qaeda.

  3. I didn’t explain my thought real good. The few combatant commands are the top slops.

    Yeah, Afghanistan is a NATO mission…but t also in Central Command…so I am not sure who would be in charge.

    I am not sure he would be better in the new slot.

    I think he role in iraq…and his career ends when/if Clinton|Obama are inaugurated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: