Military Leaks

The only time Obama worries about leaks:

The initial set of Afghan discussions had been marred by a series of leaks that infuriated Obama and led the president to accuse his military advisers of trying to box him in politically. Earlier this year, as the administration began to gear up for the withdrawal debate, Gates and National Security Adviser Tom Donilon sent out word informally that any leaks would be interpreted by the president as insubordination and as an attempt to improperly influence public opinion.

Is it insubordination?  Probably.  But that’s just the convenient club that the CinC can use to fight back.  What it really is has been unspoken — it is a vote of no confidence in the Commander in Chief.  Military guys don’t leak things to the press on a whim.  They leak thing that they think are important — things that will get soldiers killed and wars lost if they continue.

Are they right — both in leaking it and in their assessment of the situation?  I don’t know, but it has my attention.  There is also this part:

A third military official, speaking on the condition of anonymity in order to avoid publicly criticizing the president, said of the White House: “No one is talking about succeeding or winning… the phrase [Wednesday night] was bringing this war to a ‘responsible’ conclusion. I’m not really sure what that means.”

Yeah, you do know what it means.  It means losing without telling anyone that you lost.

Comments are closed.