Could This ‘Rock Star’ General be Our Next CIA Director?
- Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:18pm by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
U.S. Gen. David Petraeus, command of NATO forces in Afghanistan.
General David Petraeus, who replaced disgraced Gen. Stanley McChrystal as the top commander in Afghanistan last June, could be getting a new office soon. And it wouldn’t be on a different battlefield or even at the Pentagon. Rather, the popular general is rumored to be a top candidate for director of the CIA.
NPR reports Petraeus could take the country’s top spy position by late fall:
Several sources, including government officials, say Petraeus is being seriously considered for CIA director, and would take the job if offered.
The current spy chief, Leon Panetta, is currently seen as the top replacement for Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says he will step down this year.
White House and Pentagon officials say they will not comment on any personnel changes.
For some time, there was an expectation that Petraeus would take the top NATO military job in Brussels. NATO’s current supreme commander, U.S. Adm. James Stavridis, is wrapping up his tour and is expected to become the Navy’s next top officer, chief of naval operations.
Sources say Petraeus has cooled on the Brussels job. And there are few high profile military jobs left for him.
The Army chief of staff job has already gone to Gen. Martin Dempsey. And there is little indication that Petraeus is being considered for the top military job in the Pentagon, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Sources say that the current No. 2 Pentagon officer, Marine Gen. James “Hoss” Cartwright, will be nominated for the top job when Adm. Mike Mullen leaves the post in September.
While the musical chairs could just be a case of plugging people into the right position, others are speculating the Petraeus/CIA move could be political. From the London Telegraph:
The possible move shows that the Obama administration is having a hard time finding a slot for the general, once considered a potential 2012 nominee for Republicans. Some might view a Petraeus appointment to the CIA as an attempt by President Barack Obama to neutralise a possible rival.
I would have thought he would be a natural choice for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when Admiral Mike Mullen retires at the end of the year but apparently he’s not viewed as a contender for that. There would be some pushback from the Left over nominating him for CIA but Petraeus is such a bipartisan rock star on Capitol Hill that it’s hard not to see him being confirmed almost unanimously.
One big thing the CIA job would do is give Petraeus an entry point into the civilian politics of Washington. Certainly, Petraeus is extremely well connected in DC for a military man but there’s no doubt that a stint at CIA would be a broadening experience for him.
Which means, of course, he would be an even more attractive presidential candidate in due course.
Petraeus in 2016 anyone?
Business Insider adds another possible reason: “It would also enable President Obama to rearrange the Pentagon without having a ‘Bush General’ in the mix.”
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 677 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 529 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 417 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 329 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 270 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 279 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 154 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 270 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (75)
DellnMontana
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 4:35pmI don’t think he is his own person anymore. If he thinks that burning a book will make them mad, why didn’t all the years of blowing things up and killing them make them mad already? His response to the book burning was right out of the WH.
Report Post »NatGuardMom
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 4:04pmWith all due Respect General please don’t He would only use you as a scapegoat like he did with Lt. Col North
Report Post »AmeriCat
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:38pmObama is keeping Petraeus to himself…
He know the Tea Party would LOVE him!
By the way, MchCrystal was NOT disgraced!
Report Post »Bias is showing!!!
Author/Editor need to find some soap and wash out their mouths.
momprayn
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:27pmI’m with those that thought they sorta liked Petraeus at first but have grown not to in the last few years….too much of a nation builder & not realistic enough re Afghan, Muslims, & didn’t like what he said about the Koran burning, etc.– but then again, what General isn’t???? I think they all think military action is always called for — it’s like any other profession – the surgeon thinks operations are always necessary; dentists always think dental work is necessary; if you’re a hammer, you’re always looking for a nail – human nature. I’m a distant cousin to Pres. Eisenhower, who didn’t believe in wars like Vietnam, etc. and was very worried and warned about the military industrial complex deal — he was worried about when there would be a President that didn’t have the experience, etc. like he did to have the wisdom to tell the Generals “NO” when they wanted to do this. He would’ve told Petraeus & others like him, no – to these wars in Muslim countries. They are never winnable & I don’t see them keeping us any safer from terrorism. Unfortunately, his worries happened starting with Vietnam and JFK onward (except for Nixon who ended it). Fortunately, more and more Repubs. like Ron & Rand Paul (like Eisenhower) are increasing & I hope take over.
Report Post »Thing
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 9:41pmThere are/were ppl dressed up like generals {who cant wait and will do anything to start their new political/M.I.C. carrers} and there are true Generals{ last ppl anyone could call warmongers, but first to fight if war is unavoidable}. Fake ones are living only for their career , they will always tell politicians what they want to hear, and always do what poiliticians want them to do{like during Vietnam conflict era}, never what is right and should be done or said{like during WW2, last war during which military had anything to say} . They always take credit for others achievements and blame their failures on others to. Patresus probably belongs to the first category, hardcore military ppl beged Bush/Rumsfeld to stop playing idiotic games, and bring more man power, and proper equipement {not Rumsfeld’s idiotic excuses, visions and ideas}, and to remove restrictions that tied their hands, since first days of occupation. But no one listened to them, until it was imposible to hide the fact that they were right. So Patreus wasnt genius gin out of the magic lamp, they just allowed him to loose a chain they put on military
Report Post »RightPolitically
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:26pmGeneral P. would excel at whatever position he is offered.
Report Post »Jaycen
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:24pmLike many of you, I was shocked at the “disgraced Gen. Stanley McChrystal”.
I’m not impressed with Petraeus. Nation building smells progressive to me.
Report Post »GIDEON612
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 10:47pmAgreed, reinstate Gen. Stanley McChrystal, let those that know the field stay in the field. I believe that we will need them there very soon. Every military personnel has sworn to defend this nation against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC.
We must bless God again before we ask God to bless America
Report Post »historypaper
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:14pmWe need results David Petraeus not your resume
Report Post »pwatkins
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 2:17pmI don’t trust Gen.Petraeus anymore since he has been brainwashed by this administration. Any one that would play both sides of this dictatorship would never get my vote. When he spoke on the Koran burning, he appeared to be reading a teleprompter and sounded as if he was being told what to say. It was like his voice was weak and unsure he meant what he was saying.
Report Post »I agree with MISSIONARYDAD above with his statement on Gen. Stanley McChrystal. I think he was set up by this administration and would have been the better man to handle the war. Obama knew that he would not go along with his PROGRESSIVE way so that is why I think he was removed and replaced.
Geopatriot
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:37pmThe good General didn’t have to be brainwashed. He either had part of his brain removed to make it fair or the Implement of Obedience imbedded for him to be where he is. These positions are nothing but political. Qualifications or ability to do a job well are not necessarily Obama’s justification for placing someone into a position. Take Geitner or Big Sis, as two examples. He’s interchangeable just like the rest of the clowns!
Report Post »AmeriCat
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:41pmAgree. Petraeus now seems docile and too willing to acquiesce and please the Commander in Chief.
As a result….our troops have suffered. But they are so strong, THE Best, they will NEVER show it!
Report Post »mickrussom
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:59pmThis man is a Muslim apologist. We burn the Koran, a satanic text, and for this paper that was burned the Islamists/Satanists murder people. And this man took issue with expressing our freedom of speech and not with the Islamists murdering people.
Report Post »lisalake
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 7:42pmDitto..
Report Post »Atilla
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:48pmHe may be a rock star and very competent as a field commander but when he comments on civillian activity such as the Koran burning, he violates a long standing ethical standard of protocol. There is far to much political intrigue within the General Officer Corps in my view. MacArthur got canned for having an opinion on civilian pollicy.
Report Post »temple62
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:08pmApparently they want another Bush retread to drive Miss Daisy! Obama hated his Bush administration and yet he has surrounded his “Hope and Change” administration with many of the same Bush lackeys???
Report Post »GeorgieJo
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:31pmBINGO Temp EXACTLY what I was thinking!!!!!!!!!!!
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:59pmI sure would NOT use “disgraced” to describe Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
Report Post »jttri
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 4:11pmI would look what he did with the PAt Tillman fiasco
Report Post »DVT
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:48pmLord I hope he’s not got a future in anything but retirement, he’s just another muslim appeaser…we dont need anotherone in govt. we’re ALL full up!
Report Post »ImahaIngttta
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:46pmJust keep appointing him to positions so he won’t run for president.
Report Post »ED4237
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:43pmWe need a true intellingence person back as a director of the CIA. Panneta is the head of the American Centers for Progress for crying out loud. Gen.Patreaus good man just not from the intell comuntity and see the last tow years almost three under these academics that we get now we are the followers not leaders anywhere. A Petraus move would be purely political move and not the best one. Panetta lead CIA did nothing when 7 of its top people were killed nothing. As a chief he should be advising against theses wars they arte killing us here at home because we aren’t there to win and get out.
Report Post »ED4237
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:37pmNo offense but Petraeus not the man for CIA as the current CIA chief is not the man for the job either Panetta lead CIA has missed everything in the middle east to the Honduran coup. They should no better than to let anybody into that job and I know Petreaus is as great general nodoubt about it that dosen’t make a good Intelliagance chief. As an Intell chief he would have to conclude that America dosen’t want to kill the enemy cause they hid in Pakistan, war in Libya not good. You know as an intell chief you have to vote against these matters and stand for the America people not the politicians that give you a job to do. It would be a political smart and notso bad move to make for Obama who for the most part is surrounded by idiots in the intell world need only look at there record of faliure arrests are a celebration of that failure in couterterrorism. Hell most of pres Obama‘s National Security team aren’t intell people and the ones that are have been proven to be moroons.
Report Post »eat-more-bacon-USA
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:36pmBut, obama’s Move-On.org propaganda unit calls General Petraeus, “General Betray-Us“ and has accused him of ”cooking the books for the (Bush) White House” on operations in Iraq – - Are they really going to allow their “president” to elevate the good General to the position of CIA Director? Barry better get written permission before he makes this offer….
Report Post »and to the republic
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:57pmmy thoughts exactly. The left hated this guy in the Bush years but now they want him in to be part of them. Confused here…
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:36pmDavid H. Petraeus is a current member of the Council on Foreign relations. If you read my posts before then you already know that the CFR.org is Americas leftist/ globalist think tank. If you want to properly VETTE a candidate then start here. If we had done this the following presidents would not have been, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama to name but a few, other notables are Dick Chaney, Donald Rumsfeld, Henry Kissinger, George Soros………The lists are lengthy, but worth the time to follow, KNOW YOUR ENEMY!
Report Post »Petraeus graduated from West Point in 1974. He earned the General George C. Marshall Award as the top graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College Class of 1983 at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He subsequently earned an M.P.A. in 1985 and a Ph.D. in international relations in 1987 from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, then served as an Assistant Professor of International Relations at the U.S. Military Academy from 1985 to 1987. His doctoral dissertation was entitled “The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam: A Study of Military Influence and the Use of Force in the Post-Vietnam Era”.[24] He also completed a military fellowship at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service in 1994–1995, although he was called away early to serve in Haiti as the Chief of Operations for the UN force there in early 1995…..source wikipidea.com
Additionally Moveon.org ( Soros fundee) attacked the General during the Iraq campaign under Bush Jr. , calling him “ Betray us”. If some betrays someone, then they were/ are on the same side so to speak? Move on.org has since removed all pages in reference to this in an attempt to “ sanitize”, as Petreaus has stated his goals of one day being President. Paraphrased from wikipidea source.
stefooch
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 7:22pmBETTERDAYS you are right. Know your enemy! I’ve studied this general b/c someone I love served two tours under him. He’s more of an indoctrinated military progressive than people realize. If “Social Justice” scares people…they should remember what “Military Social Justice” looks like. Germany comes to mind…
Report Post »entropy
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:35pmThe admin is trying to squelch Patraeus, just like they did Hillary with the Sec of State job. They like to hide people so they cannot compete with them. This is what is going on with Patraeus.
Report Post »entropy
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:33pmMy god Glen, get some fricking proof readers! How much are you paying those people? “BY” our next CIA director? Geez.
Report Post »Lily1943
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:32pmGeneral David Petraeus is a smart man back in Iraq the Kurds [tribe] called him King David you have to admire a man whose own son was serving in Afghanistan. The terror supporting countries like syria Iran etc are making sure Afghanistan is a losing proposition. My soldier daughter did a year and a half tour of duty in Afghanistan the first time she called me she told me Iran ran the phone system so i said to myself “ okay Lily be careful what you say”. I never prayed so much in my life as when she was there.
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:29pmI hope he doesn’t lose his soul.
Report Post »Untameable-kate
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:39pmGood morning Grandma,
Report Post »Washing DC is worse than a brothel soliciting underaged boys when it comes to losing your soul. It is nothing but a cesspool of lies and backstabbing criminals.
grandmaof5
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:49pmWell spoken, KATE, if their lips are moving, etc. Hope all is well with you today!
Report Post »Afternoon, SHOW, same to you and, of course LOVENFL3 (did you get our storms?)
lisalake
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 7:41pmToo late…
Report Post »Sinista MACE
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:28pmWhat difference does it make?
It doesn‘t make the agency’s associations with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Mexican drug cartels any more palatable for the American public.
Our entire government is corrupt from the top, and the stream of excrement runs downhill from there.
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:36pmNot to include General Petraeus. The politicians are corrupt, but Petraeus is not a politician.
Report Post »Sinista MACE
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:03pmAre you serious?
Isn‘t he the guy that’s overseeing our corrupt associations with the Taliban in Afghanistan?
Get real.
Report Post »Sinista MACE
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:27pmIsn’t Petraeus the one who made jokes with Gates about attacking Libya, another WAR we cannot afford, unconstitutional, at the behest of the UN?
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on April 6, 2011 at 6:06am@Showtime… LOL.
Report Post »Ironmaan
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:27pmI don’t love this guy as much as most. He needs to stop with all the sensitivity and winning of hearts and just go kill people and break things like a good general/army is supposed to do.
Report Post »http://guerillatics.com
Showtime
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:34pmHe has to follow guidelines set by Obama. If Petraeus had his way, the wars would be over and our troops would be home.
Report Post »drbage
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:17pmAs said, he has to take his marching orders from the idiot who gives them. In Iraq, his orders were clear, get rid of Saddam and win the war. In Afghanistan, the orders are coddle one of the most corrupt governments in the world (ranking slightly below the USA) and make nice with those who are trying to kill you. Never start a war where the end goal is not to win the war.
Report Post »Stu D. Baker-Hawk
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 2:55pmAgreed, agreed, agreed.
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on April 6, 2011 at 6:03am@Showtime- and this is a good thing for a general or CIA director? Allowing a wimp child tell him how to run a war or who he can spy on or what he can spy on? Or how his troops can fire back after they get permission slips from the White House?
Report Post »Betrayus is another lackey boot licker.
LSX
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:25pmSure would straighten out a few things with the Obozo agenda!
Report Post »lovenfl3
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:30pmAgreed, I wouldn’t mind seeing Petraeus run for president. I think it would certainly bolster our strength as a nation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11eYGdOVnvc
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:35pmHe still has to take orders from Obozo. I wouldn’t like to be taking orders from someone I detested.
Report Post »missionarydad
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:35pmI think disgraced is a bit overkill when referring to Gen. Stanley McChrystal. His crime was being candid to a druggie magazine that basically stabbed him in the back. While he exercised poor judgement are we going to honor the rest of his military career by remembering him as disgraced. I am sorry I have too much respect for our soldiers to let this one pass.
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:38pm“And there is little indication that Petraeus is being considered for the top military job in the Pentagon, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.”
It would serve Obama right for Petraeus to run against Obama in ANY election!
Report Post »banjarmon
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:38pmThere must be others that are better qualified.
Report Post »hauschild
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:00pmIf Pet takes that position, it tells me he’s simply another crony among many.
Besides, you don‘t get offered that position if you’re not considered “playable”. Last thing numb nuts needs is another department proving his incompetence.
I would never serve under a progressive in any capacity. Doing so only perpetuates the big lie. I would love for Pet to say, “Hell, no, I ain‘t schlepping this loser’s water!”
Report Post »13th Imam
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:01pmGen Peteaus
Stay out of Obamas cesspool. The statement that Gen McCrystal was “disgraced” stunk. The proper use of “disgraced” is what Barry is doing to the Presidency.
Report Post »cycloid
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:03pmRearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Report Post »Gold Coin & Economic News
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:29pmIt must be humiliating for a seasoned General to have to take orders from such a pretend kid like Obama that has ZERO experience and understanding of what these guys have had to see and go through. Gotta hand it to our military leaders for not just jumping ship on our current POTUS.
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:40pmPatraeus is a good man and a great leader, BUT, he is too much behind nation building and war, (international intervention), for me. Recent statements he make in support of the war in Afganistan did not impress me at all.
Report Post »He IS a great General though and if it has to be done, I would be all for him leading the troops in a conflict…….CIA Director?…………Not so much!
thepatriotdave
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:47pmmissionarydad
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 12:35pm
I think disgraced is a bit overkill when referring to Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
—————————————————
That is the instantaneous reaction I had when I read that first paragraph. General McChrystal served our country honorably for his entire career and I think the Blaze owes him an apology!
Press Release: (Freedom Jamboree), Tea Party – 9.12 gathering this year… “Woodstock” but without all the Hippies, drugs, and trash!
Report Post »http://www.AmericasTeaPartyNews.com
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 1:55pmNot necesarrily straighten things out with Obama.
This looks more like Obama is getting a potential challenger for the POTUS run out of the way, for himself and Hillary if she does run again. Also, if there is another intel failure of any level, or failure in the op’s of Libya, Iraq, or Afghanistan, he can then be used as a conveinent scapegoat.
Report Post »Anti_Spock
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:26pmI HOPE NOT. He is criticizing the koran burner. Hey General… KILL THE ENEMY and leave our freedoms alone.
Report Post »GONESURFING
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 3:41pmGood points everyone, but Petraeus would be an improvement.
Report Post »avenger
Posted on April 5, 2011 at 6:05pmat least he knows what a terrorist is …
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on April 6, 2011 at 5:54amROFLMBO- straighten out obozo’s agenda? What rock have you been hiding under? Ever since obumbo and Betrayus had their little tet-a-tet there’s been unending left compliance by Betrayus. What kind of ‘general’ will allow a diplomat dictate how his troops are allowed to be armed or when they can fire back?
Report Post »Betrayus has earned his nickname now.