« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Sec. Gates: Time to do the honorable thing: Resign!!

Nothing” in his life became him like the leaving it”   “Macbeth”  Act I, scene 4

History will, I believe, view Robert Gates’ time as Secretary of Defense in a favorable light. But as he prepares to leave the Pentagon, there is one last action that he can do for the greater good of the troops, and the country, that he loves; and that is to resign, immediately.

When Pres. Bush decided to replace Donald Rumsfeld as SecDef ( whether or not one agrees with that decision) Gates was the perfect successor. Competent, calm, he brought instant stability to America’s military structure, at a time while it was  heavily engaged in two difficult wars.

And after the 2008 election, he acceded to Obama’s request to remain as SecDef. There were many on the right who openly wished that he had retired. They felt he gave Obama “cover” in many ways; Obama could cite “bipartisanship” as he attempted to close Gitmo, hold trials in Federal Court in NYC, reshape the military by voiding Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, increase troop levels in Afghanistan ( but not as much as requested), and then announce when they’re scheduled to depart…it’s a fairly long list. And Gates did often attempt to explain, and advocate, for the administration’s positions.

Many have wondered why he chose to stay on. Running America’s military, especially in times of conflict, is an awesome, and also exhilirating, responsibility, and I believe Gates welcomes the opportunity. He also has a great love for the troops, and I expect  that deep down, he felt that he could do a far better job than anyone else that Obama might name. (recall that the last Democrat president, BIll Clinton, first gave us Les Aspin)  So he stayed on, and has no doubt helped to limit the damage that Obama has done to date.

Last year, before nearly the entire Middle East erupted, Gates announced that he would be leaving sometime this year, probably around mid year.  Since that was also the time when our newly surged troops in Afghanistan were scheduled to begin rotating out, many viewed it as an implicit rebuke of Obama’s policy.

But now Obama has embarked on a chaotic “non-policy” in the Middle East. There is no policy, and it changes every few days. It is NOT a war, it is a “kinetic military action.” We are not running it, NATO is ( maybe?). Qadaffi MUST go, but our objective is NOT to remove him. Obama announced that US forces were being committed while he was on a South American jaunt, without bothering to let Congress, or the American people, know what he was doing, and his reasons. Heck, Obama could have Tweeted everyone…a mere 140 characters..This could have worked: ” Hey, USA!!!  Barack baby here! Rio’s the bomb! Speaking of bombs, we’re gonna bomb Libya. Home by Friday. SYS. .”

OK, Mr. Secretary. It’s Sunday afternoon. Obama’s Final Four picks have all bit the dust. But we are at WAR in Libya. America’s treasure is being expended daily; our troops our engaged, and inevitably, lives will be lost. So today you were trotted out on just about all the Sunday talking head shows, along with Sec. Clinton, to try and explain the unexplainable. And when you honestly and forthrightly stated that “Libya was NOT a vital US  interest,” she all but cut you off at the knees ( and possibly other body parts)  and you sat there like a school boy being sent for a time-out.

Mr. Secretary, please resurrect an action that has long been absent from American politics and governance: a resignation to protest a given policy. Do so now, make your case, state your reasons to the American people at a time and venue of your choice, free to speak your mind.

You owe it to the troops, those brave Americans it has been your honor to command  You owe it to the American people.  And you owe it to yourself, and to history. You are a far better man than we saw on television today. Show us.

COMMENTS

  • rightwingmom52

    at the end of his tweet, as in:

  • http://twitter.com/biggator5 BigGator5

    I cannot hit the recommend button hard enough.

  • ntrepid

    I both share and fear your position

  • Doc Holliday

    You set up the circumstances, and made your conclusion. Do I recommend the question or the answer? The question is certainly worthy of discussion and thought. I am not sure if I agree with your answer though.

    Would Gates be helping the troops and the country if he resigned? Should he say he can not serve the president in good faith now? Or should he stay on because his troops are in combat and the next guy will likely be less qualified, and a ideological progressive? I don’t have the answer to this question. I am leaning towards Gates should stay on an try to unass us in the best way possible.

    Here is the problem, America simply can not overtly “lose” a war. Mark Steyn argues that we don’t “win” wars anymore, and I agree with him. In fact he agrees with me because I wrote basically the same thing he did here a month ago. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/263110/art-inconclusive-war-mark-steyn

    So, if we reject the idea of just ending the mission right now, someone qualified has to be in there trying to conclude this in the best way possible. To me the only way to conclude this is to kill or capture Gahdaffi. I have a feeling Gates feels the same way, but I am not sure. I know the next Sec Def will not think this way.

    We are certainly in a quandary.

  • gawken

    Thanks for the link…

  • aesthete
  • gawken

    He’s already announced it..it’s a done deal..probably within a few months, so if he resigns NOW..he has a huge opportunity to make his case, speak freely, and command the public’s attention.

    It’s interesting that with America heavily involved in military conflict, and with Obama now adding another task for the troops, there has been zero, nada, zilch speculation about who will be his next SecDef…not a peep. ( and I’m not counting that insipid rumor a while back that Hillary… gawd help us…was going to take the job. Imagine that…being SecState is too “tiring” for her..so let’s try something easier, like SecDef..It’s as almost if it ain’t a big deal for Obama..it’s akin to picking an EPA or FCC administrator.

  • Kudzu

    of resigned already if he knew Clinton would not take his place. He’s essentially holding on to ensure that she does not get the job. If you saw today’s morning brief with the most disastrous interview ever then you saw what a danger she is. There were rumblings that she was wanting the SecDef job in the media because it would round out her resume.. making a run in 2012 or 2016 that much more lucrative for her.

    This Libya mission is exactly like the Bosnia interventions we went through in the 90s under President Clinton. We say our enemy’s leadership has to go but we won’t launch decapitation strikes against him. We intervene on behalf of a civilian population with questionable loyalties to the West let alone the United States of America. We impose unrealistic ROE on American fighting forces for the sake of domestic consumption because American’s are afraid of their own blood. We stomp and shout about how this is so humanitarian when in reality if we wanted Qaddafi gone we would of done it… two years earlier when President Obama took office. Qaddafi played ball when President Bush was in office because he was scared of this (well not THIS) happening. But since the current CINC is half-arsing it, Qaddafi is going to stall for time and ultimately win out.

    If this was purely a European (i.e. non-NATO) mission and we were in a support role from the start I’d have an easier time swallowing this. But as a Soldier I see this and question the validity of the mission itself because Libya poses no threat to us, SecDef said so. God help us because we aren’t helping ourselves.

  • gawken

    I can see some validity to your thesis a few months ago, that Gates didn’t want her to succeed him, but since that time she has publicly announced many times that she’s done, finished…that SecState was very tiring and hard on her…so now, no way that gets the job if he resigns..

  • Doc Holliday
  • blooch

    http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/10/colin-powell-secretary-of-defense.html

    Barry’s got a serious disconnect with his die-hard base right about now.

  • blooch

    http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6200009n

    This has always been her best ticket out. WIll she punch it?

  • claude5

    It was always gonna be some New Black Panther from Philly!

  • luciusacius

    He is a retired regular army general officer. His appointment as SecDef would violat ebedrock principles of civilian control of the military. No retired army officer has ever seerved in such a capacity.

  • claude5

    (Grant, Eisenhower, etc) then implicitly a retired general can be SecDef- (an executive position) it is unconstitutional for an active general, of course. Powell’s doing the Get Motivated! thing with Laura- I sincerely doubt he would want to work with a Democrat with a lucrative private sector gig.

  • spainishirish

    from what we are learning, the United States has intervened on behalf of rebels composed, at a minimum, in part of jihadists associated with al-Qaeda and other Islamist terror organizations. Many of these Libyan Islamists have fought against and killed American military men and women. Now members of the United States Armed Forces are being used to install these Islamists, who murdered our fighting men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan, into power in Tripoli. This is unacceptable, and Sec. Gates does not need that blemish on his record. He needs to state as much after he is gone.

  • http://www.reddit.com/user/pi_over_three/ Pi Over Three
  • Getting_Back_to_Basics

    He should do the honorable thing and he will be a hero for it.