General Petraeus - 2012 President?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Sinatra, Oct 6, 2009.

  1. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    General Petraeus has been uncommonly quiet of late - with growing speculation he is putting out some political feelers for a possible run for the White House in 2012. He recently underwent successful treatment for prostate cancer, but remains elusive regarding both his potential political aspirations, and the current Obama administration's foreign policy - or lack thereof. It is quite possible this administration is finding itself at increasing odds with its military leaders, who are increasingly alarmed at the president's consistent apologist tours for America, and his inept contradictory handling of foreign policy - namely Afghanistan...

    ____

    October 06, 2009
    Gen. Petraeus treated for prostate cancer
    Pauline Jelinek And Anne Gearan
    Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, was diagnosed with prostate cancer in February and has since undergone two months of radiation treatment.

    Petraeus, 56, was diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer, which was not publicly disclosed at the time because Petraeus and his family regarded his illness as "a personal matter" that "did not interfere with the performance of his duties," said his spokesman, Col. Erik Gunhus. President Barack Obama and top members of his administration were informed, he said.

    As commander of a region running through the Middle East and across Central Asia, Petraeus did make at least one overseas trip during his treatment.

    The Pentagon termed Petraeus' treatment "successful." He was treated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

    In recent months, Petraeus has been noticeably on the sidelines of the public debate over how to salvage the war effort in Afghanistan.

    Known mainly for the troop build up in Iraq that helped calm the war there, Petraeus once had great star power and used it publicly. He was a darling at Capitol Hill hearings and had former President George Bush's ear in regular video conferences to talk about military matters, a relationship that doesn't exist with the Obama White House.

    As the head of the U.S. Central Command, he is still very much involved in the conversation about the two ongoing wars, debating the new Afghan strategy with the National Security Council and flying late last month to Germany for a meeting with the commander in Afghanistan.

    But he has taken such a low profile publicly of late that some inside the Washington beltway speculated that he was contemplating a run for the presidency in 2012, something his advisers have denied.

    The more prominent public face of the current war debate is Gen. Stanley McChrystal, sent in the summer as Obama's hand-picked commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan. Petraeus has said that he supports McChrystal's assessment of the campaign and McChrystal's call for more troops, a position finding limited favor in the administration.


    The Associated Press


    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ne...en__petraeus_treated_for_prostate_cancer.html
     
  2. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    Interesting.. but as with the people saying Palin or various other names.. it is way too soon to tell... much can happen to whatever individual, and the situations within our country can change in many ways between now and then
     
  3. potter 58
    Offline

    potter 58 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    996
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +57
    great maybe then he can explain how he lost all those weapons in Iraq that were used to kill our troops, what do ya think
     
  4. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    This Petraeus story is finding some legs - the New York Times picked up on it the other day, and it compliments the whisperings of a widespread agitation growing from within the military regarding this Obama White House.

    McChrystal most likely leaked his Afghanistan report to the media after it was basically ignored by the White House - who had demanded said report in the first place. This would be a very aggressive move for a military commander of McChrystal's stature, and indicative of serious frustrations and doubts about the Obama White House's ability to properly support what needs to be done in the Afghanistan campaign.

    With that fact in play, and rumors circulating around Petraeus and a potential run for 2012 are even more significant - a potential that apparently has the White House VERY concerned.

    Interesting indeed!
     
  5. rdean
    Online

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,015
    Thanks Received:
    6,878
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,883
    Great. Republicans hope to nominate someone who can attack more countries and start more wars.

    Who are they going to get to fight? I remember Chris Mathews asking a group of Republican college kids, "Who supports the war?" Wild screaming and cheering "We do!" Chris Mathews, "How many of you are going to enlist to go to Iraq?" Deafening silence, many turning their backs and rapidly walking away.

    So, let's take a look at our standards. Raising the age of private to 40. Giving a pass on felonies. GED? Doesn't matter. Anything to get cannon fodder in uniform so Republicans can have someone for other countries to shoot at.

    I suspect Petraeus won't make much of a difference. People will look at that uniform and say, "No mas".
     
  6. LibocalypseNow
    Offline

    LibocalypseNow Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    12,337
    Thanks Received:
    1,356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,357
    Hmm? He's an interesting candidate. Maybe he's got a shot? I guess we'll see.
     
  7. Dr.Traveler
    Online

    Dr.Traveler Mathematician

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,925
    Thanks Received:
    650
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    In a Non-Euclidean Manifold
    Ratings:
    +1,047
    Its interesting, but two questions:

    Could he win the Republican nomination? Do you really think that Mitt, Huck, Jindal, or Palin won't eat him up on domestic policy? If the economy is still an issue in 2012, domestic policy will be king and Petraeus would have an uphill battle on that versus his rivals in the GOP. If the economy is sound, Obama will be practically untouchable in 2012 so its a moot point anyway.

    Could he win the General Election? G.H.W Bush's loss to Clinton in 1992, Dole's loss to Clinton in 1992, Kerry's loss to Bush in 2004, and McCain's loss to Obama in 2008 makes me hesitant to say that military experience holds any advantage for a nominee. Recent history shows that actual military experience couldn't guarantee any of these guys a victory against opponents without military experience and military experience won't shore up other weaknesses in a campaign.
     
  8. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005

    ___

    Certainly no guarantee - but with the rising concerns over Obama's seeming inability to transmit a competent message of actual leadership, America could very well reach out to someone with a strong military background - particularly if Afghanistan devolves even further than it already has in recent months.

    Early speculation - but interesting. And the White House is apparently very concerned over the prospect...
     
  9. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    I haven't seen this much absolute bullshit in a long time
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005


    Yes it was utter BS - including the fabricated Chris Mathews.

    I wasn't aware Mathews was still on the air! :lol:
     

Share This Page