Panetta: A Good Pick For SecDef?
Recently, I attended a small town hall event for Congressmen Ben Quayle sponsored by “Sun Devils for Israel”, a pro-Israel ASU student group. First of all, I want to say I was really impressed by Quayle’s knowledge of foreign policy issues. Even though the event was supposed to be focused primarily on American-Israeli relations, a lot of questions were asked about his opinions on the uprisings in the Middle East, China, and the changes to the President’s national security team. He didn’t duck those questions and delivered articulate and thorough responses. I think the guy has gotten a bad rap primarily because of his last name and because of some stuff he posted on a trashy website four years ago. Additionally, he is building a pretty conservative voting record.
Anyways, I asked a question about how the culture of State Department is often very left-wing and anti-American. In his response, he brought up some of the changes being made to Obummer’s national security team and mentioned he thought Panetta had done well as head of the CIA. I was surprised by this considering Quayle’s past statements about President Obama and wasn’t expecting praise for Obama’s choice for Gates’s replacement. Quayle is not the first Republican to praise Panetta either. Peter King, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Mike Rogers of Michigan, and other Republicans (including some whom you would not consider RINOs or moderates) have jumped on board the Panetta bandwagon.
When Panetta was nominated to head the CIA in 2009, I was initially worried that Panetta was sent to CIA to gut the organization and conduct a purge of critical personnel similar to what we saw in the 1970s. However, as CIA chief, Panetta has advocated the continuation of drone strikes, increased the number CIA paramilitary operations, and most importantly, fought against torture investigations that would have harmed the CIA. So, in short, I was wrong about Panetta.
Today, many are making the same assumptions about Panetta at the Pentagon. Particularly, that he is being moved to the Pentagon to help implement Obummer’s defense budget cuts. But could he turn out to be a fierce defender of the Pentagon, just like he was a fierce defender of the CIA, and fight Obummer’s cuts? Or will he tow the administration line? You tell me.
Category: Politics
I think that Panetta will fight for the DoD. I think he understands what the Muslim threat is. Obama does not. That is not to say that there is not waste in the DoD. That will need to be found and cut out.
Having lived in Panetta’s district when he was a Congressman (I was stationed at Ft. Ord) I don’t trust the man with the military as far as I can throw him.
I like Panetta and so do most other people in Washington, he’s a smart, even keeled guy. He did what he at CIA because that’s what Obama wanted and he understands you have to have institutional credibility to run an organization staffed by technocratic lifers. The same applies to the DoD, I think he’ll bust hump to make sure the Pentagon trusts him to be looking out for their best interests but he’s there on a mission from the Obama Administration; expect him to back up the White House on most substantive policy concerning spending.
Leon Panetta…..the same Leon Panetta that was head of the USDOT? That Leon Panetta??
re: #4
He never ran the DoT. He was a Congressman who headed a few Committees, the head of the OMB, and a WH Chief of Staff before he took over the CIA.
Wrong Panetta, musta been Leona Panetta then…*eyeing* my glass of water….damn it boy this chit tastes funny. Hey, Thanks NSOM!
*salute*
I think he is indeed going to be Obama’s hatchet man over at DoD. Having said that, the President gets to nominate whomever he wants, and Panetta’s a lot less worse choice than some other options he had.
I am going to respectfully dissent with some of my colleagues. IMHO, Panetta is a purely political animal. He has no operational experience (I’m not counting his 2 years in the Army where he earned an Army Commendation Medal and left as a 1st Lieutenant), and spend most of his life as a Beltway Beancounter. His only real accomplishment in the CIA has been Stuxnet against Iran, which was started under Robert Gates when he headed up the CIA.
As far the drone program, I believe it is more a DoD program than a CIA program. Objectively speaking, what have we gained from an intelligence standpoint from the drones? Under Panetta, Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri are still on the loose, and 480 Taliban fighter just escaped from prison under the CIA’s nose. Under Panetta, the CIA suffered one of the most damaging intelligences losses in the history of the CIA when 7 CIA officers were killed by an al-Quaeda double agent suicide bombing in December 2009. Under Panetta, the U.S. was unable to stop the Wikileaks publication of thousands of secret and top secret documents, all of which happened after Bradlee Manning was uncovered. The CIA appeared a day late and a dollar short in the uprisings in Iran, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Libya.
My judgment is based on accomplishments, and quite frankly I don’t see anything from Panetta that logically translates into “Hey, this is the guy that we REALLY NEED to lead DoD” or “Hey, bring some of that CIA magic over to DoD.” I think Panetta is in there to be a political foil for the DOD over the next 2 years.
I’ve said this on another website on this same topic.
Leon Panetta is a very loyal Democrat. When the party gives him his marching orders, he will salute and move out swiftly. The first order of business is going to be slashing DOD’s budget – Panetta is the right man for the job.
Now, this may be a cover to allow congresscritters, under the guise of patriotism, to jump whole-hog into pork-barrel spending again, but that’s another fight.
The main concern I have is that Panetta may not have the right people around him: extremely ruthless brainiacs who can honcho the Roles and Missions Study, develop coherent national strategy, and develop an acquisitions strategy that meets the needs today, tomorrow, and for the next 30 years. General Odierno is available with JFCOM shutting down.
Ah hah! THAT Leon Panetta, 1st Luey!
Since, as head of the CIA, he got his intel from CNN, will he, as SECDEF, get his information from the Military Times?
Chuck, more likely he’ll get the info from Kos and DU.
The CIA had far too many annalists in the DI (Directorate of Intelligence) and not enough in the DO (Directorate of Operations). Also as a rule the intelligence gathering organs (NSA CIA DIA) tend to rely too heavily on SigInt and Sat Photos. Its a disturbing trend in Defense as well. We are relying too much on tech and not on core skills. (boots on ground sort of things)
Sadly I DO think there’s a need for a certain draw down in Defense. Namely the Desk jockeys in the puzzle palace, and also to speed up and decorrupt the acquisitions process. Sadly this will NEVER happen because Defense is one of those cookie jars everybody loves dipping their hand into.
Streetsweeper, that would have been Norman Mineta, also a dim.
You say Panetta.
I say Mineta.
Panetta, Mineta. Mineta, Panetta.
Oh, let’s call the whole thing off.
Yeah, it’s giving me a headache.
Panetta is a democrat first and foremost, and an American a distant second. He will be a disaster as secdef. But it is a done deal, so we better just get used to it. After all President Urkel won the election as he periodically reminds us. He can do whatever he wants.
I would like to revise my remarks about Panetta in light of the fact that he has successfully helped Osama Bin Laden break his nagging addiction to oxygen.
Well done, Mr. Panetta.