Friday, November 9, 2012

You've Got To Be Kidding Me!

By Findalis
Monkey in the Middle

Now I have heard everything.  Sit down folks.  General David Petraeus, holder of the following medals:

  • Defense Distinguished Service Medal (4)
  • Army Distinguished Service Medal (3)
  • Defense Superior Service Medal (2) Legion of Merit (4)
  • Bronze Star Medal with Valor
  • Defense Meritorious Service Medal
  • NATO Meritorious Service Medal
  • Officer of the Order of Australia
  • And many others

Has resigned because of an extra-marital affair.
CIA Director David Petraeus submitted his letter of resignation Friday, after admitting to an extramarital affair.

Petraeus, in a message to staff, said President Obama accepted his resignation after the two met on Thursday afternoon. Petraeus said that he asked "to be allowed" to step down.

"After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours," Petraeus said. "This afternoon, the President graciously accepted my resignation."

The move comes amid the unfolding controversy surrounding the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya. Scrutiny has fallen on a range of agencies including the CIA. The director had been expected to testify at hearings next week. But Petraeus, in his resignation message, cited strictly "personal reasons" surrounding his affair which until now had not been disclosed.

Obama, in a written statement, said Petraeus provided an "extraordinary service to the United States for decades."

"By any measure, he was one of the outstanding General officers of his generation, helping our military adapt to new challenges, and leading our men and women in uniform through a remarkable period of service in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he helped our nation put those wars on a path to a responsible end," Obama said. He said he has named Michael Morell, the agency's deputy director, to serve as acting director.

The decision abruptly ends the public-service career of one of the military's most vaunted leaders. He led the surge in Iraq, and was later tapped to lead U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan -- following two years at the helm of U.S. Central Command. In April 2011, Obama again tapped Petraeus to lead the CIA.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Petraeus' resignation "represents the loss of one of our nation's most respected public servants."

Petraeus' wife, Holly, also works in the Obama administration, for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

History teaches us that under in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin the Red Army was purged of its best officers and men.  In fact the purge nearly destroyed the Red Army and it was a real possibility that due to the purge (And killing of these men) that Germany could have destroyed the Soviet Union.

Now look to today.  First Cmdr. Joseph Darlak, captain of the frigate Vandegrift, then, Capt. Owen Honors was relieved of duty Tuesday as commander of the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, then General Ham was relieved.  There is a massive Reduction in Forces happening in the military.  While civilian (union) workers are not being fired, the men and women in uniform are being basically fired.

Rumors are rampant that there was a Seven Days in May coup d'etat being planned if Obama won.  I doubt it, bum Obama is removing all and any opposition to his plans there can be.  Rumors are also rampant that this was the last free election we as a nation will ever have.  That Obama has no intention of ever giving up power and he will soon find a way to eliminate both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court.  Why not?  Already the left has declared him G-d.

I fear the end is nearing for the United States of America.  A once proud and free nation now subjected to the whim of a dictator.  G-d help us all!


Anonymous said...

Check this out from HuffPost.

Anonymous said...

Sorry here's the link.

Bigfoot said...

Definitely deserves a "What the heck is going on here?" This man rose to the rank of General while conducting himself under the UCMJ, but now does something that would be called "conduct unbecoming an officer". My G_d have mercy on him, and help us all.

Findalis said...

Something smells rotten here. I think Obama is trying to destroy Petraeus' reputation. But nobody is buying it.

Now Petraeus can testify without trouble. And he knows much.

Anonymous said...

ThinkAgain: All of the GOP's policies are PROVEN FAILURES says:
November 11, 2012 12:40 pm at 12:40 pm
@inell, Winter Park, FL: “Take a look at how many attacks there were on embassies during the Bush terms, and how many people were killed or injured. Can you spell hypocritical without the aid of spellcheck?”

Here’s some info on the above:

2002 U.S. Embassy Karachi, Pakistan: 10 killed, 51 injured
2004 U. S. Embassy bombed in Uzbekistan: 2 killed, several injured.
2004 U.S. Consulate Saudi Arabia: 8 killed
2006 US. Embassy Syria: 1 killed, several injured
2007 U.S. Embassy -Athens: building bombed with an anti-tank grenade…fortunately no one was in the building at the time.
2008-U.S. Embassy – Serbia: 1 dead; Embassy set on fire
2008- U. S. Embassy- Yemen- bombed 10 killed

Findalis said...

@ Anonymous

1998 - US Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya and US Embassy in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania 212 Killed (12 Americans), over 4,000 Wounded
President at the time: Bill Clinton

Under Clinton, Democrat more killed more wounded at one time.

Or we can remember the disaster of Dhimmi Carter and the Embassy in Iran.

Anonymous said...

Not a peep from all you neocons on those attacks huh? How about that infamous memo titled "Bin Ladin determined to strike in U.S."? Who dropped the ball there I wonder? And how about that Airlift of Evil fiasco? Where Rumsfeld and Cheney allowed senior Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders to escape to placate Musharraf because ISI personnel were imbedded with those particular Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders. The list goes on and on. Rumsfeld and that toad Wolfiwitz not allowing the Rangers to go in and help Dalton Fury's pursuit of Bin Laden at Tora Bora. President Obama has ramped up the Drone Strikes tempo. So much so that in his 4 years he has killed double the number of jihadist leaders than Bush did in 8 years. Bush conducted 1 drone strike in Yemen in 2002. Obama has conducted dozens. Just goes to show who is more serious in killing our enemies. But you neocons were too busy chasing imaginary WMD's and removing from power the one leader that acted as a buffer to Iran. How's that relationship with that Iranian agent Nouri Al Maliki working out?

Anonymous said...

How about that Dhimmi Bush? Trusting that snake Musharraf so blindly? How much resources, men and time did Iraq eat up? Imagine if all that had been used to shore up our initial gains in Afghanistan? Well we wouldn't be in the trouble we are in now. Face it, the neocons Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Bolton fucked up big time. They could have at least conducted Iraq properly. Instead they botched the post invasion preparation. It took a whole revamping by Bush(ill give him big credit on this one) by firing Rumsfeld and putting a competent mind like Robert Gates in charge who in tur

Anonymous said...

In turn fired or transferred incompetents like Sanchez and put in Petraeus and Odierno. Not to mention that it was Gates who recommended Admiral Mike Mullen one of our best Joint Chiefs to the post. All non-neocons.

Findalis said...

First of all I am not a Neocon. I am a conservative and have been for a long time.

I was not a fan of Bush and did comment and call for investigations in each and every incident. So don't lump every one of us in the same boat and I won't lump you in the same boat of the raping, drugged out, idiot OWSers.

Al Qaeda will go for the softest target they can. That is why they did 9/11, 7/7 and the Madrid Railway Bombings. As the Israelis know, you can prepare for the worst but every once in a while the worst happens. That is why you try to stop them before hand.

For the record: Where do you think Assad got his WMD's? I'll give you 3 guesses and the first 2 don't count.

Anonymous said...

Under Clinton more killed or wounded? Hmmmm I never knew Kenya and Tanzania had more casualties than 9-11. Lets not forget that it was under a Republican administration that our nation had the worst attack in its own soil since Pearl Harbor. But you guys keep on deluding yourselves into thinking that despite the ramped up assassination of Al-Qaeda leaders we are some how less safe now than on September 10th, 2001. If any one event should be responsible for the metastization of Al-Qaeda it should be the Iraq war. We took our eyes of the ball because we were so drained by being engaged there and gave Al-Qaeda and their indigenous allies time to regroup and spread. Saddam was NEVER an Islamist. At best he tried to curry favor with them at the end to shore up some support. He was a classical example of a Secular Socialist Arab/Baathist. A great buffer against Shia Fundamentist Iran, and Sunni Fundamentalist Saudi Arabia.

Anonymous said...

I'm a Conservative myself. But unlike neocons I give credit where credit is due. Obama has killed more Al-Qaeda leaders than his predecessor. He's been far more aggressive than neocons thought he would be or care to give him credit for. John McCain and Mitt Romney In 2008 both said that it was too risky and downright naive to go into Pakistan and kill BinLaden. Obama said that if we had sights on him and the double crossing Pakis don't act we will. He promised to kill Bin Laden and he did. Furthermore, Saddam never had nukes, his WMD program was in remission and a Secular tyrant never seeks Armageddon by using WMD's on anyone. He was interested in holding Iraq. The whole notion used by Condie Rice about the evidence of a smoking gun coming in the firm of a mushroom cloud was downright deceiving and frankly laughable. Saddam never had that capability. Just as laughable was the idea that Iraq via drones could launch a nuclear payload on the eastern seaboard of the United States. Iraq couldn't eve get out of its own airspace because of the no fly zones imposed on them, let alone strike us. Not to mention that their air fleet had no drones. Face it the whole thing was a lie. Assad? I don't care about him. If you're suggesting Saddam moved the WMD's to Syria, that's another neocon crock. Satellites would have picked that up. In any case our fiasco with the either nonexistent or in remission Iraqi WMD program has left us in a tougher position to convince the world about the REAL WMD program of Iran. Oh and it's been Obama that has enacted some of the toughest sanctions on Iran.

Findalis said...

@ Anonymous

I got my info on Assad's WMD's from an Israeli source and not from the neocoms.

The neocoms are hawkish to make money for the companies they have invested in. Very few have served (I and my hubby did.) and very few have children who serve.

More killed under Clinton than 9/11 is correct. Or the millions of Serbs he had murdered to secure a Muslim majority in Kosovo. There was no massacre of Muslims in Kosovo, but he did get rid of the Serbs and other Christians.

Or Obama's rejoicing of the Muslim Brotherhood's take over of Egypt. Within a year from now Egypt will have attacked Israel, and Israel will have to destroy Egypt. (There are ways to do it without using Nukes.)

Under the neocons we are worse off. But under the Liberals we will be disarmed.

Anonymous said...

I think the whole OWS crowd is a joke. But I don't like those Big Bankers. They're leeches themselves. Got a bailout and then have themselves bonuses, and bitched about the Stimulus that was around the same amount of money they got. Both OWS and Big Banks want bailouts. Essentially our hard earned tax dollars because both sides are irresponsible fiscally wise. OWS waste all their dough on drugs and Bankers on unsound fiscal policies like speculative bubbles. Neither side deserves our pity or money.

Anonymous said...

Neocons are chicken hawks. I'm Albanian. I can tell you with certainty that Serb death squads were murdering Albanians. But the KLA is far from innocent. They were involved in organ harvesting/trafficking. Besides Kosovo has historically been Albanian land. Serbs moved in and conquered it. If Albanians had been majority Christian instead of Muslim you'd support them and not the Serbs. I agree with you that Clinton propped up Wahhabis in the Balkans. But historically Albanians have been very lax on religion. Inter religious marriage is common if not the norm. In Kosovo they are more religious yes. But in 2011 70% of Albanians identified themselves as non religious.

Anonymous said...

Millions of Serbs did not die. At most in Kosovo 20,000 people died altogether. It seems the only choice we have these days is liberals or neocon. The opposite ends of the spectrum. Extreme left or extreme right. We need a stabilizing force. A traditionalist conservative. Dave Petraeus would have been that. Unfortunately he can't run for office now. He had impeccable credentials.

Findalis said...

I agree on the big bankers. I don't believe in bailing out any thing. Nothing is too big to fail.

But getting back to the point of the article is that Petraeus has been thrown under the bus. What does he know and will it bring Obama down?

Anonymous said...

I don't agree with what Obama did in terms of Egypt or Libya. But he couldn't come out publicly and support Mubarak. That would only give MB more fuel. Libya should have been left alone. Gaddafi would have crushed the rebels and we shouldn't have given a damn. But West Berlin and Lockerbie compelled us to take revenge. Silly but it happens, emotions taking the better of you. I don't think it would have helped us if we had intervened in internal revolutions of countries whose populace already hates. Not to mention that those revolutions were started to topple dictators we had propped up. Yeah I think the Salafists will get impatient as they always do and do something rash like invade or try to invade Israel ala 1967 and get crushed by a superior fighting force.

Anonymous said...

I don't think speculating on the Petraeus case will accomplish anything. I don't see Petraeus as the type of guy that would take a fall for anyone, especially for a Democratic President. A president mind you that he has had tensions with in the past. It could be just as simple as an extra marital affair, or it could be tied to Benghazi. I don't know. I'll just wait for the whole truth to get out, if it does. I doubt it. I think he should testify.