Obama faced down Gates, Mullen and Petraeus on Iraq pullout

[cali]

Gates, Petraeus want longer pullout period from Iraq
By MARTIN SIEFFPublished: Jan. 23, 2009 at 1:05 PMOrder reprints | Feedback
/White House)

WASHINGTON, Jan. 23 (UPI) Barack Obama faced down his three top military officials in a policy confrontation during his very first day in office, U.S. military sources have told UPI.

On Wednesday, the president met with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen and Central Command commander four-star Gen. David Petraeus. Gates, supported by Mullen and Petraeus, vigorously argued that the president should back away from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat forces from Iraq within the next 16 months and space out the withdrawal over a longer period of time. However, the president instructed the three officials to prepare a plan that would still implement the 16-month withdrawal period, Pentagon sources said.

The discussion between the president and the three officials was friendly and respectful. However, the president's determination to implement his stated policy took the officials by surprise, one of the sources told UPI. Petraeus, in particular, had expected the recommendation to extend the period of the withdrawal timetable to be accepted, several sources said.

The sources all stressed that the necessity for the troop withdrawal was never at issue. Since July 7, 2008, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki repeatedly has demanded a firm timetable and deadline for the completion of U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. He made it a condition of the Status of Forces Agreement that he finally signed with the outgoing Bush administration. The deadline in the SOFA for the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces is three years hence.

Once the president made his position clear, Mullen made clear he was determined to implement the policy, the sources said.

<snip>

http://www.upi.com/news/issueoftheday/2009/01/23/Obama-Gates_in_tug_of_war_on_Iraq_timeline/UPI-71691232733919/

[LittleBlue]

1. Good. Someone tell these shithead generals this isn't Imperial Rome

and we have a civilian in charge; not a chimp.

[tekisui]

2. Very good! Don't give in, President. We are behind you!

[bluestateguy]

3. In the long-run the military brass will respect a president who sticks to his guns

Clinton let himself get pushed around by the military, and never earned their respect.

Bush Jr. has a my way or the highway attitude and did not even listen to the counsel of the military brass.

Obama will listen to what they have to say, change course on secondary issues if he is convinced, but otherwise he will stick to his guns and leave no doubt about who is in charge.

[cali]

4. re chimpy, not true

he simply did whatever Rummy and Cheney told him to do.

[Catshrink]

6. Isn't it great to have a President again?

A leader? Someone of integrity?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. You got that right. Forgot what that was like.

[Dennis Donovan]

5. The only thing that worries me is the continued fragility of Iraq...

...and that, should the civil war flare up again, they'll be quick to blame Obama for it.:grr:

[MichiganVote]

21. The ME is in a perpetual state of one war or another regardless of who is in WH office.

[Muttocracy]

7. don't know who's "leaking" this, but I'm kinda glad they did :)

[Inuca]

13. Actually I would very much like to know who & WHY

is doing the leaking. Sounds to me like the kind of meeting where very few people are likely to have been present.

PS: this change of userID is very confusing :-)

[Muttocracy]

14. yep, it will be interesting to see how Obama admin handles leaking

on purpose or not on purpose.

[merwin]

16. Unless Obama was the one who did the leaking.

In order to let people know who's boss :)

[Muttocracy]

17. yep, that's what I meant by on purpose - someone in his admin... nt

[Hansel]

24. If it was Petraeus

he should be looking forward to spending more time with his family.

It could very well have been Obama though, to let everyone know who is boss.

[underpants]

23. leaked it to UPI no less (Rev. Moon owned)

I don't like implication that I have been hearing since the election which is basically the establishment of a military apart from civilian leadership. That is what exists in Israel (or has) and it is not a good situation and is definitely not according to our Constitution.

This might just be some chest thumping. Either way Obama can decommission them...and they know it.

[jpak]

8. COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF Barack Hussein Obama is the "Decider" now

Elections have consequences.

:D

[liberalpragmatist]

Dupe - nt

[liberalpragmatist]

9. "But you'd disagree with Gen. Petraeus?!!"

What all the talking heads were saying during the primary and GE debates.

I wanted to scream at them, "yes, fucktards, because there's a little thing we call civilian control of the military."

[camera obscura]

11. And they never asked McCain if he disagreed with Petraeus about engagement with Iran, of course.

Because diplomacy isn't as important as TEH SURGE!!11!11

[Gregorian]

10. What? Someone with principles and backbone? The Big Chief!

Thank you for posting this. Although I never doubted his intentions.

[Imagevision]

12. Petraeus >Betrayus

[Lint Head]

15. I see a Harry Truman - Douglas MacArthur type firing incident in our

near future. History does repeat itself. It especially happens to people that don't see a need to 'look back' at the past.
“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it” George Santayana
:dem:

[Hellataz]

18. They were taken by surprise because i bet Bush let them run free with the military.

They all sat around that table, like "Wha WHAT? What do you mean you wont just let us do what we want?"

[beac]

19. "Brass Aghast, New CIC Isn't Ass"

It must be quite a change for them to have a President who actually lives up to his promises.

[Jennicut]

20. Good for our President. Its time to get the hell out of that money hole.

[JaneQPublic]

22. Jeez, they've been at it longer than WWII.

I guess someone ought to tell them that continuing to spend $12 billion a month in Iraq is a bit rich for a country deep in recesson.

[Muttocracy]

25. and it's not like we're going down to zero wars anyway. nt

[Zhade]

26. Excellent.

If I were Obama, I'd have shortened the time, just to remind them that they have to follow the president's lawful orders.

This is a good sign.

[Clio the Leo]

27. This is one of those times I wish I could call Joe ....

... and ask him to talk me down from....

"they say it is unrealistic to withdraw the 140,000 or so U.S. troops still operating in Iraq, along with their equipment, without running the risk of letting Iran vastly increase its influence and power in Iraq, or facing a resurgence of al-Qaida and other insurgent groups, or both possible outcomes."

(from the same article)

If Barack (and Joe) think it's doable then I trust their judgement but a good old fashioned Biden pep talk would be handy right now.

[lumberjack_jeff]

28. Maybe Obama was right about Petraeus, Gates and Mullen.

They gave recommendations to the CIC and accepted (and will implement) his policy decisions. There's not much more that a CEO can expect from their managers.

[cooolandrew]

29. Barack has played his cards so wisely he let them feel they had all the cards and now he says hey >

it's my game now. He runs politics like poetry. Change was clearly far mroe than a slogan this is revolutionary in a good and peaceful way.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

30. We've finally got someone who can stand up to these warmongers. GObama!!!

[Thothmes]

32. So those troops coming out of Iraq are on the first plane

to Afganistan.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

33. Now *THAT'S* what I call LEADERSHIP! Way to go, President Obama!

Keep 'em in line!