Sack Odierno, Send A Message
By Steve Hynd Friday Jan 30, 2009 6:45am
Back in December, during the transition but before Obama was sworn in, General Odierno was publicly saying that he thought the US/Iraq agreement on withdrawal was ignorable. In his view, US troops should stay in Iraq's cities past the summer 2009 deadline and the 2011 final withdrawal date should be flexible. A few days later the Three Amigos - McCain, Lieberman and Graham - threw their weight behind Odierno in a WaPo op-ed by describing him, rather than Commander-In-Chief Obama, as "the person whose judgment should matter most in determining how fast and how deep a drawdown can be ordered responsibly." Suitably emboldened, Odierno announced that he was the Deciderer: "any decision on force structure here in Iraq will be made by me," and that there would be no substantial drawdown of troops from Iraq until he was ready to agree it. Odierno got backing from Gates, Ambassador Crocker, Admiral Mullen and General Petraeus in the dying days of the Bush administration too, with all making statements suggesting that the SOFA wasn't worth the paper it was printed on.
Now that President Obama in in the Oval Office, Odierno is still suggesting publicly that Obama's campaign promise of a 16 month withdrawal - one that would be in advance of the SOFA requirements and has been endorsed by primeminister Maliki of Iraq - isn't Obama administration policy because he's the Deciderer, not Obama. And he still apparently has a lot of backing among the Bush-appointed senior cadre at the Pentagon and, of course, the hawkish foreign policy elite who were always just fine with Bush's invasion of Iraq and only got upset when Bush so cack-handely mismanaged the occupation.
The military/VSP plan, however, is just the same old imperialist hubris re-packaged for a new administration. It ignores any Iraqi say in the matter and ignores any impact that arrogance might have on Iraqi stability in favor of yet more Friedman Units of occupation. Marc Lynch:
Odierno's intention of keeping troops in Iraq through the national elections is dangerously wrong. The CFR/Brookings/Odierno "go slow" approach ignores the reality of the new Status of Forces Agreement and the impending referendum this summer -- which may well fail if there is no sign of departing American troops. It sends the wrong messages to Iraqi politicians and the Iraqi population. It would badly hurt Obama's credibility in the region and with Iraqis, who will see his most important public commitment fall by the wayside. And it would lose the unique window of opportunity offered by the transition to signal real change.
This strategy is also a recipe for endless delay. Given the very catalog of Iraqi political fissures and emerging conflicts that Odierno cites as reason to stay, there is little reason to think that conditions will be so much more stable at the end of this proposed year of caution. At that point the exact same conversation will ensue about why drawdowns are imprudent at this time -- and does anybody believe that the people currently calling for prudence and high troop levels will suddenly reverse themselves a year from now when conditions look much the same as they do now?
And it isn't just a year: senior Iraqi officials have suggested that the national elections, which Odierno suggests as the point when drawdowns might begin, may well not be held until March 2010. I don't think that 16 months is a sacred number. But what Odierno is proposing is no significant drawdowns for 14 months, followed by another period of wrangling. This could ironically make the "rush for the exits" that everyone wants to avoid more rather than less likely -- whether or not it leads to the failure of the SOFA referendum.
If Obama is serious about sticking to the SOFA with his Iraqi allies - indeed, if he is serious about being CinC rather than letting the Pentagon tail wag the Presidential dog - then he needs to send a clear message. That message could be most clearly sent by sacking Odierno. Let rightwing blatherers whine all they want about "alienating the military". The military shouldn't set US foreign policy, it should follow the orders of civilian authority.
Login or Register to post comments.
... every future casualty among American forces should not come home in a flag-draped coffin, but a yellow body bag and be left on General
OdiousOdierno's desk.The military shouldn't set US foreign policy, it should follow the orders of civilian authority.
They have been in charge for the last 60 years, and they ain't gonna change now...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
...it's the military industrial complex that has been in charge with the unwavering support of repugnicants; not the Pentagon. Elected official with a pair can easily wrest control back to government. Doubt the current batch in Washington has the guts though.
I agree that this guy (and many more in the Pentagon) need to be shown the door.
A president can sack any member of the military that (s)he chooses, and for reasons (s)he need justify to no one. That's one of the prerogatives of being the military's CIC. What Odierno is advocating amounts to sedition. If he keeps it up, he'll be lucky not to be busted back to private before being booted out on dishonorable conditions.
I wonder why this man believes that he is the final arbiter (deciderer) of military action when he is, as the post states, under the authority of civilian leaders?
have obama rattle off the following, then see if the american people will support his intentions
U.S. Monthly Spending in Iraq - $12 billion in 2008
U.S. Spending per Second - $5,000 in 2008 (per Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on May 5, 2008)
Cost of deploying one U.S. soldier for one year in Iraq - $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)
Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq - $9 billion of US taxpayers' money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also, per ABC News, 190,000 guns, including 110,000 AK-47 rifles.
Missing - $1 billion in tractor trailers, tank recovery vehicles, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other equipment and services provided to the Iraqi security forces. (Per CBS News on Dec 6, 2007.)
Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq - $10 billion, per Feb 2007 Congressional hearings
Did this asshat general remember what Harry Truman did to General McArthur during the Korean War? POTUS Barack Obama should fire this idiot immediately!
Here's the story of MacArthur firing on our own troops in D.C.:
http://www.gandalf23.com/?p=2536
put the entire pentagon on notice of who's in charge. fire any one of them who squawks. this is no tin-pot military junta dictatorship.
Guatemala, Honduras, Grenada, Vietnam, Panama, Sudan, Kenya . . . .
I can't believe a C&L blogger actually made mention of the CFR and Brookings in a post.
wow, that's some progress.
persistent pressure on the MIM (Mainstream Internet Media) can do
by courageous activists.
Your boss is President Barack Obama.
If he says the troops will be redeployed within 16 months then you had better the hell do it or risk court martial.
thats right !dammit weve got other fish to fry in afganistan and no two bit generals going to thwart baracks mission of sending iraq worn out troops to afganistan to piss off and rile up the afgan tribsmen who the hell does he think he is ? we got more agression to perform ! and flag draped coffins to burry in arlington , unpatriotic bastard!
just how much those pentagon warriors are devoted to the constitution and the rule of law.
you saw it before this. on 9-11.
all the major players in the Pentagon were PROMOTED.
gee, I wonder why?
General Ordinary will do what President Obama tells him to do or General Ordinary will be out the door so fast there will be no time for it to hit his ass on the way out. Go ahead General, tell President Obama that
and see what happens. Asshole!!
President Truman unceremoniously sacked General MacArthur after MacArthur publicly disagreed with him. The same thing can and should happen to Odierno.
... at least that's what I heard from watching Happy Days. Can learn a lot of history from that show, lol.
Based on my reading of Thomas Ricks' book "Fiasco" Odierno was one of the least effective division commanders in Iraq. His men were too trigger-happy and tended to do more harm than good in the battle for "hearts and minds." There are a lot of generals in the military who are not only more effective and better educated. They also respect civilian authority. This guy is a product of the Rumsfeld Pentagon. He's got to go.
In reading so many books on Bush&Co over the past 8 years, I am not sure which one applies here, but I think it was after reading Fiasco that I realized Odierno is not a good man to have at the top.
Is it a subliminal message or something?
Odierno. Paulson. Chertoff. Cheney ...
...Gannon
....Mr. Freeze, Dr. Evil
Shinzon...
Kashkari...
Alister Crowley.
http://b4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/00484/45/9...
col. kurtz
col. klink
Gen. Hammond: "Well Henry, the battle for Mount Baldy is finally over."
Henry Blake: "Great news, general. Who won?"
General Hammond from Stargate: SG1
after Bighorn
Admiral Ackbar, before and after "It's a trap!"
i think the 'wickedest man in the world' has been out-wicked-ed
Good one. The real Dr. Evil.
in the field. They're lots easier...
and he never met a microphone in the field he couln't seize and hold for at least three minutes.
Can anyone say "MacArthur?"
Same principle, guys.
Odierno should not be fired like MacArthur. He should be allowed to
redeem MacArthur. Strap a suitcase nuke to his back, put him in a jeep, drop him in the DMZ and order him to take the Yalu.
I remember a lot of us getting up in arms when Bush would fire wiser generals who disagreed with his Iraq policies. it would be hypocritical for Obama to fire this guy because he disagrees with Obama's Iraqi policies... and for those of us on the left to openly applaud the move.
even though, well... I would love to see a fucker like this get fired, especially during a shitty economy.
better idea though? keep him on the payroll, and force him to do his job. patronize him. let him rant about how he wants to keep troops in Iraq indefinitely, then say "well, Raymond... we appreciate that you feel very strongly about this, but we're going to need you to cooperate with our decision..."
=)
demote him to LT, send him to the fiels to fight. I would bet he will QUIT befor he picks up a gun and stands with the troops.
Odierno's bravery. But these guys get used to the power. It's obviously gone to his head. As Alex Haig said after Reagan got shot, "I'm in charge here."
Haig even went so far as to say, "Constitutionally, you have the President, then the Vice President, then the Secreatary of State in the order of succession."
I chalk it up to stupidity.
it's that he basically says he won't obey the orders of the commander-in-chief. And I hope the c-in-c boots his butt.
this guy is the most arrogant jerk left from the bush war co. Obama should Fire him yesterday. what an asshole. Hey President Obama, F you. Now we will see if Obama has any balls.
Governmentality reports President Obama's new appointment to the National Security Council. Hopefully her insight will be valued.
http://www.governmentalityblog.com/my_weblog/...
It used to be the DOD, run by Rummy and the the neocons, that had it's hand up bush's ass. The State Dept, with Powell at the helm, was irrelevant.
Now the power is back at State, and Gates and his toy soldiers are relegated to second class citizenship. Odierno better get used to it.
(I hope)
when President keept gates it was a big F*#f-up, just like he did not kick leaberman out of the Dems.
And yet Gates is about as relevant as last week's garbage.
I think Hillary has the reigns now.
Gates will be gone soon enough. Obama had to keep the continuity for a while until his administration is up a running. Gates will do what Obama tells him to and I suspect Gates would just as soon get out of Iraq as stay in. IMHO. Obama has a shitload on his plate at the moment and keeping gates for a few months will make it easier for Obama to concentrate more on the insane economic mess Señor Bush left us with.
The Missile Defense System slated for Poland, for example... heard yesterday that Obama is "examining" that one. Didn't yet say that it would be sacked, but it's a crazy scheme from the beginning and guaranteed to show Russia that all those Cold War attitudes are not gone. That was a ridiculously large cash outlay to begin with, probably meant to enrich Raytheon et. al. and enrage the Russians. Here's hoping that program is shut down. We need those billions of dollars here at home.
always a pot of gold for the MIC
Sinsimelia gold?
See Malkin warns of Mexico collapse.
Seedless criticism, even for me.
it will only go off-budget and back into the shadows.
those things NEVER die.
Like the undead, they keep coming back.
the Crabby Nebula of Truthistan.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQV7wOg3hYQ
Israel has a weapon that would protect out tanks. it has a 99.95 kill. it cost about 350 thousand per weapon. what did bush do, he gave raythoen 350 million to make the same thing. raythoen said they would have one by 2012 to test. war contractors FIRST, troops second.
i wouldn't even put them in the top 1000 concerns of the out-going bush junta....
if obama keeps odierno on i imagine he will use the good general the way bush used petraeus: as an 'unimpeachable' advocate for cont'd troop presence, and thus a shield from a lot of criticism.
Whatever happened to military officials who looked like this?
http://www.gardenofpraise.com/images/garalex.jpg
Or even
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/union-generals/c...
the Little Big Horn will be made by me."
George Odierno Custer
Teabag Odierno
like stick him in hot water, pull him out and then squeeze him? Is that teabagging?
When MacArthur disobeyed, he just "faded away". Same thing should happen to Odierno.
and a speech to a joint session of Congress. I believe Truman faded to numbers it took George Bush to eclipse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd6zBMZ423g
... They're stealing our precious bodily fluids!!!
Monica?
Read Thomas Ricks excellent analysis of the Iraq debacle and you will see that Odierno is not only a particularly brutal general but an incompetent one as well.
This man should be replaced immediately ....
I'll read it if you do.
if President Obama is talking with many of the officers who were forced to resign by Bush, asking some to return to the military, others to serve in civilian posts. There is a lot of real TALENT out there, President Obama doesn't have to stick with the Loosers (Bush sycophants). There aren't enough screen-doors in the World to deal with those pompous poops!
Yes there is a lot of talent there, and such a gesture would undo some of the shabby insult that the chimperor laid on them as payment for them remaining true to principles.
http://irancoverage.com/2008/07/22/why-is-bil...
is trying to assert their 'authority' and 'wisdom' over this 'kid' named Obama. I think they will find out they are making a mistake. President Obama strikes me as the kind of guy who believes in walking softly, but carry a big stick. I think many mistakes will be made in many aspects concerning how the Good 'Ole Boys will deal with President Obama. It is going to take awhile for these guys to catch on. After all, they are old, with the exception of Graham who is just a butt-boy, and do not accept change easily. They are also used to dealing with Bush who has no intellectual curiosity to speak of.
Maybe someone should ask the Iraqis what they want. After all it is really more about them. The Good 'Ole Boys are nation building. They interested in making Iraq another Israel most like likely at the behest of Israeli Government. While getting a share of some that oil they have at the same time. As bad as things were under Saddam Hussein, at least there was no violence amongst the population. The Shiites, Sunnis, and Christians lived together peacefully. American occupation is not part of the answer, it's a big part of the problem.
If the statements attributed to General Odierno are accurate, he has put his hubris before his Country and CINC. This is unacceptable. General you can go behind closed doors and yell, scream and disagree with your Superior, but when that door opens, you smile for the camera and say what the CINC has put down as your orders.
If you do not agree with your superior, you retire with honor and become a TV commentator and bitch about it there.
As a retired military -- If General Odierno is making this ludicrous statement, it is time for him to be immediately reassigned and asked to retire.
It is the Chain of Command, either you support or you don't.
Also remember the framers of the Constitution ensured that a civilian is in charge of the military...General follow the course that is required of OUR CINC or retire.
You want to speak your mind to a reporter? You can, just resign first. That's how its done. A few of the older people in career military families I know wouldn't even vote while in uniform, they considered it a conflict of interest on their part.
Some things don't add up here. He has a bad rep. for the initial actions of the 4th in Iraq, and how that may have contributed to Abu Ghraib. But, he also has the reputation of having learned from that. He also in a recent interview listed Shinseki (and George Marshall) as role models. That's a pretty hard slap to Rumsfeld, so this is no villager. The other wildcard is Camp Bucca & Cropper. Also, some of the comments linked here he made before Obama took office. So maybe this isn't as bad as it sounds.
I've also seen interviews with various Arab leaders saying that while the US needs to "be withdrawing", doing it too fast might, yes, be bad. As long as he starts the process when and how he is asked, and I see no reports of comments like this *after* Obama took office, I'll withhold judgment.
I don't think Obama would sack someone just to send a message. I think he would talk to him first, or he would have someone from the administration feel him out and find out why he made those statements. The military is used to taking orders. If this guy is a true soldier, he'll accept his new marching orders. I think that if Obama talks to him personally, he will send a message. If he sacked him, Obama would just end up with a bunch of yes-men like Bush had. Sacking is what Bush did.
During his first tour in Iraq, General Odierno earned even the odium of his fellow commanders with his heavy-handed techniques, some of them outright war crimes. Aside from his penchant of breaking down doors and terrorizing entire households, he was a fan of hostage-taking.
When he would go to a house where a suspected insurgent lived and not find his target at home, he would round up the suspect's wife and children and have them interned in Abu Ghraib. Then he would leave a note on the table for the suspect saying that, if he wanted his family released, he should turn himself in immediately.
Even when some suspects did turn themselves in and were sent for "interrogation" at Abu Ghraib, their families were not released. Once you were in the prison and its bureaucracy, you were pretty much lost to the world.
This is one of the most heinous of war crimes listed in virtually every international treaty on the conduct of war and occupation of invaded countries. In a fair and just world, Odierno would stand trial ala the Nurenberg defendents after WW II, and pay a similar penalty.
Oh yeah, something moved up ahead call in an air strike kinda guy. A real gung ho fuckup. Win at all costs.
Odierno should be fired, but that could entail some serious political blowback. It might be better to reassign him to a newly created U.S. Army Marching Band Command, headquartered in Wasilla Alaska.
I thought these fucktards believed in the power of the Unitary Executive..?
I'm just sayin...
Just reassign him to some humiliating job. Great career ender.
Login or Register to post comments.