Washington shuffle: Panetta to Penatagon; Patraeus to CIA

Just caught this one on yahoo. Pretty big news.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110427/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_national_security_changes

 

What do you think T_B_F?

Panetta faced a lot of questions about his lack of experience when he was named to CIA. With that job under his belt, I assume he'll sail into the SecDef job.

Patraeus isn't a spook, but he's worked with them enough that I imagine he'll have the respect of the rank and file.

Odd that Obama stepped on this news by also releasing his "long form" birth certificate today.

 

All the news of day could be trumped by what Ben Bernanke has to say.

 

I have a lot of respect for Patraeus, who showed up at my friends' memorial service after they crashed in Afghanistan. He still wore his 101st Airborne Division (my unit) patch, which was apparently always his favorite unit. Things seemed to be getting quite a bit better under him. It's certainly a loss for the Army.

He's a conventional Soldier, but he'll do well no matter what he does. I'd like to see him run for president, some day.

Gates pretty much demanded to shake hands with everyone in my company during his visit late last year after he heard a couple of stories. He always seemed pretty level-headed to me, and you could count on him to make the right decisions after listening to those who knew more about the situation than him -- certainly a change from what we were used to.

 

That's an interesting development too.

Very weird news day -- and the birth certificate news is getting the most attention.

It was pretty interesting to watch the news this morning. They weren't prepared for the birth certificate story. They were all promoting coverage of Bernanke and were already dealing with breaking news with the Panetta & Patraeus announcements.

And then they had to blow all that up and cover the birth certificate on the fly.

 

It's nice to hear your impressions. Sounds like we're pretty lucky to have had the service of both Gates & Patraeus.

Gates didn't have to come back into public service, wasn't looking to, and stayed longer than he intended to.

Patraeus has taken a lot of shit, but has always done what was asked of him.

 

Petraeus has one big advantage at the CIA. He knows more than enough about the military to detect spin when given an assessment of facts on the ground. And of course, that means he's also good at delivering spin, a must for CIA heads.

 

From what I can tell, the CIA doesn't always operate "by the book" and their field operatives want a boss who will back them up. When their Director doesn't come from the field, they worry that they'll be held out to dry.

This was their big concern about Panetta. That, and that as a former Budget Director, he was put in the job with the goal of taking a knife to their budget.

But Panetta did back up his people. He strongly defended them. I would guess that Patraeus will too.

 

I know the Petraeus rumor had been out there for a while, but I'm surprised he was moved after less than a year in Afghanistan. They'll be on their fourth Afghan commander in about 2-1/2 years. I guess that means Obama is comfortable enough with the progress made that they're willing to make a change, obviously that's good news.

Who will they move in to replace him? Caldwell? They really need a high-profile figure there, as well as one who can deal with Karzai, Pakistan, et al.

Keeping Gates around for almost five years was a nice feather in Obama's cap. At least Bob's getting out before the major budget hacking begins.

 

John Allen, a three-star, will replace him at ISAF (International Security Assistance Force, In Shorts And Flip-Flops, I Suck At Fighting, etc.). Allen is the deputy commander at CENTCOM, according to the story. I've never heard of him.

 

As a Screaming Eagles fanboi, I love Petraeus.

 

The primary need of a Defense Secretary is to be good at bureaucracy and bureaucratic infighting. Gates was. Panetta is.