It wasn't long ago Americans knew who their military leaders were. I wonder, how many Americans had actually listened to General Petraeus speak for any length of time prior to this week?
When I got home from work Monday, I turned the channel to CSPAN-3, set up shop with a cold McSorley's ale, and watched the Petraeus/Crocker hearings in the House. When my wife and 12 year old got home, both asked me who the General was. Despite being a very bright and informed 12 year old, and my wife who is an Attorney for one of the largest international Law Firms in the US, neither had seen General Petraeus before, but
both were impressed afterwards.
My wife and daughter represent the relationship between the majority of Americans and the military leaders fighting the War in Iraq and the Global War on Terror. If you ask someone on the street who Admiral Fallon is, you will probably get a blank stare, yet that person has a better than average chance of identifying who
Chris Crocker is.
Chap identifies a slur being tossed around about
Admiral Fallon by the anti-war types. I think it is interesting, the anti-war types are applying the stereotype of General Tommy Franks (the last well recognized military leader) to Admiral Fallon (a relative unknown Admiral) claiming at the first meeting between Admiral Fallon and General Petraeus, Fallon labeled Petraeus “
an ass-kissing little chicken-sh*t.” General Franks was well known for such 'colorful' comments.
I have never heard Admiral Fallon speak, but I have researched him extensively both for professional reasons but also out of curiosity. In my opinion, he is one of the most thoughtful Admirals in the US Navy today. His approach to China in the Pacific has been praised both inside and outside the Navy, and his approach to leveraging soft power in his command is insightful as to who the man is. He is clearly a thinker, and his reputation is one of thoughtful and patient in approach, while wise in action.
The
questionably reported rift between Fallon and Petraeus represents a larger problem to me though. The
Moveon.org hit job on Petraeus... well it pissed me off to be honest. How bad is it really? According to my attorney friends, and because I'm married to an attorney I have more than I'd care to admit, had Congress declared war on Iraq, under the law the advertisement would be an act of sedition. In fact, all of them believe they could successfully defend Moveon.org in court because there is no declaration of war from Congress, yet all of them think they would lose defending Moveon.org if their was a Congressional act of war against Iraq.
I'd have given Moveon.org money to print a full page ad in 2004 to flame Rumsfeld (a civilian) and his transformation platform, or any number of Navy Secretaries prior to Winter (also civilians) for their absence at the helm in dealing with US shipbuilding problems, but I have no respect at all for people who assassinate the character of men and women in the armed forces, and to be honest it makes me angry that it would be done in wartime, angry enough that I wrote a check for Giuliani last night solely because
he countered this nonsense with his own ad (and I may not even vote for him).
There is a grand canyon sized gap between being critical of job performance (for example I have no limit of criticism for Lieutenant General Sanchez's performance in Iraq) and being critical of someone personally, as if they are measuring the quality of a person like the General, or Admiral.
It is an effective political tactic though, and since Admiral Fallon is General Petraeus's boss, he is a natural target for this deplorable smear campaign. Actually the reason the Moveon.org ad backfired is because America met General Petraeus this week, and realized Moveon.org was wrong. The slur tactic is actually more effective right now for Admiral Fallon, because nobody in America knows who Admiral Fallon is. Like I said in the beginning, it wasn't long ago Americans knew who their military leaders were. In a war 4+ years old, it is incredible that Americans barely know who our military leaders are.
Imagine living in 1943 wondering who this General Eisenhower guy is. Wake up! It is 2007 and Americans have no idea who Admiral William Fallon is, except what "they" tell you.
Update 1: A couple of posters have rushed to the defense of Porter, the author of the IPS story. I would advise everyone to take a healthy dose of skepticism regarding his reporting. The Washington Post story on the 9th still seems to be the more credible, because this isn't the first time Porter has exploited Fallon with "
access to his thinking."
That story, btw, is bogus. What 3rd carrier? The KH or the Lincoln in drydock? The Reagan which covered the Pacific duties for the Stennis? The Atlantic carriers all returning home or in various levels of maintenance. The only Atlantic carrier that could have gone is the Enterprise, which btw, is there now. That story stinks with too many questionably sourced details and flat out fabrications, but it is part of the current discussion with Fallon. Same author too, hmm....
The Milcom Monitoring Blog has a very interesting story about the degraded Russian Early Warning Satellite network. The editors note introduces the story:
