Military Leaders Hope Obama Will Be More Realistic Than Bush

November 30th, 2008 · No Comments · The President

November 30, 2008

The Facts

Barack Obama and Admiral Michael Mullen, Joints Chiefs of Staff chairman, had their first meeting at the end of November. Evidently, it was a one-on-one meeting with no fanfare; just a “get to know you” meeting. Mullen said afterwards it “felt very good, very positive”.

Retired Major General William Nash has said “open and serious debate versus ideological certitude will be a great relief to the military leaders”. In reference to what it was like to serve under President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, Nash said “the joke was that when you leave a meeting, everybody is supposed to drink the Kool-Aid. In the Bush administration, you had to drink the Kool-Aid before [bold added] you got to go to the meeting”.

On the point of being more realistic, many officials have said Bush’s ideological objectives toward Afghanistan is unattainable, and they hope Obama will have a more realistic view. They also feel much better about Obama’s stance toward Iran, in that he wants to sit down and talk with Iran rather than take Bush’s strong-hand stance.

My View

During the past two years of campaigning for the White House we have all heard how terrible it would be for the military and our global efforts if the Democrats won. Now it appears the real thoughts of the military under the Bush administration is beginning to leak out, just as I suspect many other things will as Bush’s time winds down and he is gone. And on the other side, we are beginning to see the actions of Obama’s campaign promises that he will not “destroy” the military, but will build it up. He has committed to increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps with money saved by getting out of Iraq.

As time marches on, I imagine Bush’s true legacy will be established, and it won’t be what he was hoping for. Just about every thing he’s done has been for ideological reasons; not for the good of the country. For reasons beyond my understanding, folks just seem to either ignore or deny what Bush’s presidency has been. It seems that “just because he’s a Republican, whatever he’s done is fine by me”. I readily admit I haven’t been one of his admirers for nigh on five years now, as reflected in my post on George W. Bush & his presidency. But by the same token, I wasn’t a big Bill Clinton fan either, but at least he didn’t commit any “mortal sins” during his tenure.