Ed's Blog

"Some people know everything, but that's all they know."

GENERAL PETRAEUS TO CIA: Is He the Right Person to Replace Panetta?

David H. Petraeus

Image via Wikipedia

Listen to Ed’s Audio Blog:

President Barack Obama has named CIA Director Leon Panetta to replace Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and GEN David Petraeus to replace Panetta. My April 18 column discussed the kind of person that should replace Gates and concluded that Panetta may not be the right person for the job. What about Petraeus; is he the right person to lead the CIA in these troubled times, and how will Osama Bin Laden’s death affect how Petraeus does his job.  (More)

Advertisements

Filed under: National Security, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

12 Responses

  1. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Republican Party

    If “IKE” were President, he’d answer flatly “no.” He expanded the CIA’s civilian staffing presence and independence due to dissatisfaction with receiving poor, inaccurate Intel. He needed realistic, accurate information to guide foreign policy to deal with the realities of a very cold war, that only got worse. Seems we have come full circle, to where military backgrounds have taken an increasing roll in key department leadership.
    I could argue either side of the issue. The real question might therefore be, IKE’s other warning, “Beware the military industrial complex.”
    I have to trust and go with “IKE.”
    Ed, you seem to have a pay grade that could recall the two terms of “IKE.” What do you think?
    Regards, Sir.

    Posted by H. Glenn Chaney

  2. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Department of Defense

    Is He the Right Person to Replace Panetta?
    This is a very sound and logical decision. It does not seem as though politics have weighed as part of this appointment. I consider this as logical as the appointment of the Noble laureate Dr. Steven Chu, a very sound decision as the best person suited for the appointment.

    Posted by Francis Xavier Cunnane III

  3. EWRoss says:

    Late breaking news Sunday night and confirmed by President Obama’s in his speech to the nation is that Osama Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan. Fox News reports that this was a unilateral covert operation that did not involve the Pakistanis. They may have contributed intelligence information, but had they known of the operation in advance, Bin Laden likely would not have been in the compound when the US team arrived.

    What’s also interesting is that the compound where Bin Laden was killed was an elaborate compound specially built for Bin Laden. What does this suggest about Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence organization? Was Bin Laden living right under their nose and they didn’t know about it?

    Congratulations to our real-life Mitch Rapps,

  4. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: U.S. Veteran

    It depends on what Patraeus will be expected to do. One has to assume he will be loyal to Obama and do what BHO wants him to do. Since so much focus of intelllignce agnecies seems to be in the region Pataeus recently served as general he would seem to have some important knowledge and experince for the job.

    What do others think about him as CIA Director?

    Posted by George Walsh, MBA, GRI, SRES

  5. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: US Army

    Well everyone was skeptical when General Hayden took over during the Bush Administration. I think everyone will is more at ease now that General Petraeus is taking over. They all love him

    Posted by Anthony Eashman

  6. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: US Army

    He might be the right person, but it is a political move by Obama to prevent him from expressing his views on Obama policy regarding the war and make him unable to be a political contender through 2016. It isn’t that Obama thought he was the best or right person it was a democratic defensive move.

    Posted by Thomas Sauls

  7. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Republican Party

    If “IKE” were President, he’d answer flatly “no.” He expanded the CIA’s civilian staffing presence and independence due to dissatisfaction with receiving poor, inaccurate Intel. He needed realistic, accurate information to guide foreign policy to deal with the realities of a very cold war, that only got worse. Seems we have come full circle, to where military backgrounds have taken an increasing roll in key department leadership.
    I could argue either side of the issue. The real question might therefore be, IKE’s other warning, “Beware the military industrial complex.”
    I have to trust and go with “IKE.”

    Ed, you seem to have a pay grade that could recall the two terms of “IKE.” What do you think?
    Regards, Sir.

    H. Glenn Chaney

  8. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Naval Postgraduate School Alumni

    Panetta was the Congressman who represented Barstow, CA when I was assigned to the Marine Corps Depot there from 1990 to 1993. He was a supporter of the military -that is true. But he had to be because of the large number of military installations in his district. I could never understand the reasoning for assigning him to lead the CIA. I concluded that he was one of the few Obama supporters who knew anything at all about the military and therefore might have some understanding of what the CIA’s role was supposed to be in National Defense.

    As for General Petraeus, he is certainly “as qualified” as Panetta to head the CIA. Whether he is sufficiently qualified is to be debated. Certainly he has knowledge of what good and bad intelligence is at the military and strategic level. I do not get the impression that the Democrats have a lot to choose from among their supporters.

    Bill Hestir
    LtCol USMC (Ret)
    Duke Energy
    Oconee Nuclear Site

  9. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Republican Party

    I agree with you, Petraeus is well qualified, and I’d much rather see him continue service to this country rather than retire to the golf course. We’ve lost some really good leadership the last few rounds to retirement.

    I’m also curious as to what leadership talent we have at the Langley Company headquarters coming up through the ranks. Moral in the past has suffered as outside non-professionals have filled the top slot. The military personnel bridges that gap and issue to a degree. As is said, wouldn’t we love to be flies on the wall. BTW, you’re not old, you only have a 5 yard lead on me down field. I can recall Eisenhower very well.
    Made my first bones in 64′ stumping the neighborhood for Barry Goldwater, the Best President we almost had!

    I cornered the market in vintage Goldwater pins. I bequeath one every now and then for conservatism and Patriotism beyond the call of duty.

    Regards as usual, Sir

    Posted by H. Glenn Chaney

  10. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Naval Postgraduate School Alumni

    Ed, your ‘General Petraeus to CIA’ article on your website provides some good insight.

    I feel the General will be better received by the CIA than Panetta was; however, I feel the head of CIA should typically have a CIA operational background. When an organization’s culture needs to change, bringing in an outsider can often prove beneficial; but, having back-to-back outsiders leading an organization like the CIA doesn’t seem as beneficial as appointing someone who has come up from within the operational ranks of the CIA.

    Posted by Keith Felker

  11. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Defense ViPs

    The right person? I don’t know enough about Leon Panetta but I have met General Petraeus and I believe anybody with field experience and a career dedicated to matters military rather than political has to be at least a decent choice for the post. That, of course, presupposes that we consider the job to be one of leadership in intelligence matters rather than running political interference.

    If Petraeus can bring further focus to bear on improving human intelligence and thoughtful analysis rather than dependence on ‘national technical means’ or other electronic intelligence, then he will indeed be the right man for the job. Like practically all other issues in life, actionable intelligence is a matter of balancing complex issues and arriving at an action plan based on alternative solutions. Petraeus’ background leads me to hope he has the ‘right stuff’ in terms of knowledge and experience.

    Posted by Tim Mahon

  12. EWRoss says:

    Reposted from LinkedIn Group: Naval Postgraduate School Alumni

    I have found Panetta a skilled man with a budget knife. My personal experiences with programs he has focused on, is that he lacks a good understanding of military worth and often makes decisions based on staffers input rather than personal evaluation. This would be OK if he had the right staffers but … DoD will have a significant focus put to “value”, “redundancy”, and “impact”. All good things if the right perspective is maintained – one that understands how operations are accomplished and won.

    I also have had some interface with the General. He CAN be politic if necessary and he IS a good leader/manager. I hope he integrates well with the CIA and hope he finds a communication pathway to the President.

    Posted by Carl Schone

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

EWRoss on Twiter

RSS EWRoss.com RSS

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
%d bloggers like this: