Friday, November 16, 2012
Apologists for Petraeus Are Getting It Wrong!
I admire General Petraeus and thought he might even make a good president someday. However, unlike some in the media and the "talking heads" (both on the Left and the Right) who lament about how this shouldn't have caused him to resign, I think he did indeed need to resign. Like those who said the Clinton-Lewinsky thing was no big deal - it was just sex - the apologists for Petraeus are wrong! Those who think this didn't need to be brought to the attention of the President and Congress as soon as it was discovered are wrong! And those who think this didn't threaten national security are wrong!!! This isn't about David Petraeus' personal life. This isn't just about sex. It's not just between he and his wife or he and his Maker. I don't care about that. Those are his problems. This is fundamental to security because an extramarital affair makes someone vulnerable to blackmail. General Petraeus had to know that, yet he did it anyway which also calls into question his judgement. Further, even if he apparently did the right thing by resigning, look at the enormous distraction and disruption this has become and at a time when we can ill afford it. We have a looming fiscal crisis and serious questions about Benghazi that require the government's full attention. In the end, I think we should take comfort in the fact that, had he been threatened with blackmail, General Petraeus' resignation demonstrates that he would have been willing to put country ahead of self in that situation too. Or maybe this has already happened? We automatically assume that the blackmail would come from some hostile foreign country. With all the controversy surrounding this incident and the many questions still to be answered about what really happened in Benghazi, General Petraeus' testimony was and is going to be crucial. Could the blackmailer be closer to home than we think? Could someone or some group have been trying to influence his upcoming testimony and never dreamed he would resign and accept humiliation rather than toe the line? Eventually we will know for sure.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Reject the sexual blackmail premise out of hand on the following basis:
ReplyDelete++ No Cold War anecdotal basis in case of gays - would love to have some evidence to support the "blackmail fallacy" but fact is that no (credible) examples exist.
++ I buy the military "medals" blackmail scenario. The evidence is the Boorda suicide. The Petraeus case is not a "medals" case
++ In civilian life blackmail cases are extremely rare
++ You military "leaders" are self destructing all over the place. Most of the cases are related to sexual and financial misconduct. None that I am aware if have been exacerbated / prolonged by blackmail
BV: You seem to feel as though you have a much better historical knowledge of security breaches due to sexual impropriety than I would be willing to claim myself. The vast majority of espionage or blackmail cases never make national news, so I would argue the data available to draw conclusions is probably insufficient. I believe you are correct that blackmail is rare but certainly not nonexistent. I cite as an example the Marine Embassy guard case from AmEmbassy Moscow where the Marines got involved with Russian women who eventually coerced them into espionage. I would also point out that the WikiLeaks case resulted, at least in part, over PFc Bradley Manning's being distraught over a breakup with his boyfriend. While not a case of blackmail, homosexuality is involved and I don't recall any cases involving service members divulging secrets over a breakup with a girlfriend - just saying. The recent rash of our military leadership falling on their swords due to sexual or financial improper behavior may not have involved blackmail but that shouldn't be seen as proof that it isn't a risk. Were it not, it wouldn't have been part of spycraft for thousands of years. Perhaps scrutany of our leaders has rooted out these vulnerabilities before blackmail became an issue.
ReplyDelete