"We know who the real enemy is;...in the White House." It is unfortunate, but, the USA military post Bush/Cheney needed this reality check.

It is a relief to hear Admiral Mullens speak in such clear and concise terms regarding the LIMITS of the USA military.  In recent months, including the issue with the EPA Secretary and her order to stop using the oil dispersant, has resulted in alarming responses by our military.  The EPA Secretary was ignored.  Virtually, ignored and then she back peddled and allowed BP and the Coast Guard to have their way.  Eventually, the amount of the dispersant was cut back, but, the toxic chemical is still being used when it was ordered originally to stop it.


I sincerely believe during the Bush/Cheney years the USA military was elevated to a status that took the 'civilian' focus and 'neutrality' priority away while replacing it with a 'right to increased importance' over the citizen.


I am pleased the USA military is taking all this seriously.  It is more than 'putting the skids' to participating in 'risky interviews' that bring 'shame' to the 'officer;' it is about 'the authority' of the military within this democracy.


It is especially unfortunate the 'issue' has resulted around General McCyrstal.  There are many soldiers and officers under the Commander in Afghanistan.  Many of those soldiers were placed in their positions during the Bush/Cheney years.  A General cannot fight a war himself.  There has to have been significant pressure on General McCrystal from many venues under his authority to allow him to believe such an outrageous interview appeared appropriate.


In his first interview with CBS after his assignment and promotion he portrayed a General with a clear strategy in front of him, but, he also was disappointed in the officers that surrounded him when he stated the Officers Club should be a firing range.  That coming from their new Commander didn't go over well, I am sure.  He was between a rock and hard place the entire time.  He was not receiving support from any corner of his command and he began to find himself isolated in his priorities.  He turned to ridicule of the White House and the comfort of the esteem showed him by NATO. 


It was bound to happen that he would be demoralized from his value system and turn on those that were in his way of carrying out priorities from others surrounding him.  He was probably harassed in more ways than one, in ways subtle but real.  He, as a human being, also had to survive the pressures and seek cooperation where he could find it.  His staff was probably a support and to a degree a comfort to him.


What is so astounding is that he turned to a radical news media to allow his frustrations to come to life.  He also believed it would not touch him or his staff.  I still believe he was a victim of the hideous environment in Afghanistan, the lack of cooperation by Karzai and the incideous enemy of 'cooperation' amoung the citizens of Afghanistan that escaped him, no matter how much he tried to 'reach out to them.'


His 'speciality' was to turn an insurgency into a functional arm of society in a country that has known nothing but war for decades and a neighbor with an ISI that is basically corrupt.  I believe the corruption of Afghanistan was too mcuh to bring about effective results in his initiatives and it might be that the corruption never was going to be turned around and he was making decisions about such things as the Poppy Economy that insulted his values as an American more than he could himself cope with in the ways available to him.


I also believe this failure of the military to come to terms with the reality of Afghanistan is not the entire problem.  I believe Karzai is a power icon that coerces the USA power into allowing corruption to exist.  I do not believe Karzai is an ally, so much as a puppet to the Taliban.  Given that as the truth the reality is that Afghanistan IS an enemy to the USA and NOT just al Qaeda and the Taliban.  Turning the corner on an insurgency is one thing, but, turning an entire corrupt nation around is quite another.


When reflecting on 'the condition' of the USA military in their Officer Lounges rather than finding firing ranges, it is OBVIOUS the entire military was demoralized under Bush/Cheney.  There is more than one way to surrender, espeically when there are no 'life choices' or options.  When looking back of the previous administration, there were record number of resignations.  Think about it.


I believe General McCrystal was the best choice.  He had the correct strategy.  No one worked harder at it then he did, placing his own life 'on the line' everyday when he strolled without armor or weapons among the people of Afghanistan. What he didn't have or still today does not exist is an ally within Afghanistan and a populous to defeat the Taliban and the Poppy Economy. 

Acceptance of an insurgency only to allow it to result in 'a draw' is more than he was willing to accept in his own value system.  I believe he felt defeated and projected his desire to expand his military force as a failure of his country to believe in him.  That wasn't it.  We believed in him.  We just don't believe in Afghanistan anymore and aren't willing to commit more soldiers to die when the enemy surrounded them, including within the infrastructure of the Afghan government.

At this point General Petraeus has to be given all the support of the Upper Command structure to rid Afghanistan of its 'dysfunctional military' infrastructure.  I am not comfortable with the idea of Karzai appreciating General McCyrstal while the dynamics within Afghanistan can only be stated as 'a draw.'  There is something very, very wrong and I am not sure it can be solved by any Commander.