Panetta to Defense? Could be Worse
According to the Wall Street Journal, tomorrow the President will nominate CIA Director Leon Panetta to succeed Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense.
A former member of Congress, and, during the Clinton years, both a director of the Office of Management and the Budget and White House chief of staff, Panetta knows his way around Capitol Hill, the federal budget process, and the White House. And as he’s shown at the CIA, he sticks up for his own people. Tough, shrewd, widely experienced, loyal, and intent on getting the money he believes his department or agency needs. Not bad for a Secretary of Defense.
But Panetta’s most important qualification? Take a look at this, from today’s Wall Street Journal:
He [Panetta] was an early and strong advocate for the CIA’s controversial drone program to kill al Qaeda and related militants in Pakistan, and he presided over a major increase in drone strikes in the country. The bulk of the more than 200 drone strikes launched under the program have occurred since Mr. Panetta took over at CIA.
Leon Panetta, in other words, knows how to fight.
- Comment (5)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Jan '11
Re: Panetta to Defense? Could be Worse
Peter,
I agree it could be much worse. Panetta is probably the best we could have hoped for. He seems to understand the necessity of American power in the world and yet has the respect of the President. I would guess there are not many people who share those characteristics.
Moving GEN Petraeus to CIA is also a great choice IMHO.
Feb '11
Re: Panetta to Defense? Could be Worse
If the only game you have, as Panetta has said, is drones, then who is directing those drones through intelligence becomes central. When intelligence services are penetrated by the enemy as thoroughly as the CIA was by al Qaeda, then why would you want to rely on them or Panetta? The CIA is a joke. An expensive one. That gets Americans killed.
Jul '10
Re: Panetta to Defense? Could be Worse
One thing I rarely hear remarked upon is how well-stocked the Obama administration is with Clinton re-treads.
How about a military man for Secretary of Defense? And not one of those Petraeus faux-warriors who wage war by building schools and doling out tribute to tribal elders. We need a red-meat eating, bomb 'em to rubble guy.
May '10
Re: Panetta to Defense? Could be Worse
Kenneth, Agree with you comment, but BHO and the rest of his team don't know any people with the attributes you suggest would be ideal for SecDef. If they did know of such a person, there is no way he/she would be appointed.
Sep '10
Re: Panetta to Defense? Could be Worse
We could certainly do worse for Defense than Panetta but the drone program is not one that instills a lot of confidence in the man. I have long thought that the drone program killing al Qaeda is an over-hyped, feel-good strategy. While killing al-Qaeda via drones is certainly better than nothing it is a tactical victory that could potentially prove strategically a loser. Why? Because it would be much more effective to capture at least some of the al-Qaeda we are killing via drones in order to glean important intelligence. Think of all the potential intelligence we are wasting by doing the easy, risk-free drone attacks.
John Yoo shares the same opinion over at National Review's The Corner today.
Peter, how about we hear you discuss the overall efficacy of Obama's drone war with John on the podcast? Maybe VDH has an opinion on this as well?
Edited on Apr 27, 2011 at 3:19pm