How to ruin your career, part 2
As a tangent to a conversation I would have enjoyed to be more active in (lousy computer), I want to examine the case of Robert Gates. Robert Gates wasn't universally beloved when he took the reins at DoD after the 2006 elections, but he was fairly widely respected, especially on the right.
Since then, Gates has radically changed steadfastly maintained the approach to Iraq that cost Donald Rumsfeld his job and yet, today... he's still fairly widely respected, especially on the right. In fact, his standing on the right may be even bigger and brighter than it was when he took over the job, even as war critics have largely ignored the fact that, in his influential role as civilian head of our armed forces, he oversaw the arbitrary escalation of the war effort which has remained as unpopular as ever, and has been if anything less accountable to the press than Donald Rumsfeld, who, at the very least, would occasionally get himself trapped in moments of accidental honesty during his ceaseless attempts to posture on national television.
Will he escape unscathed?
Comments
We all know that the surge, just like the war, was and is Bush's. Rummy was too visible and flamboyant (and incompetent), and it only took six years to can him. Gates is seen as a manager who is carrying out the boss's plan, and was appointed to do just that. No surprises, no screw-ups, no deviation from what we knew would be the case. Why should his standing change?
Because whereas in October 2006, Gates was president of Texas A&M, one month later he was overseeing an incredibly unpopular war.
Well, Gates also took a pretty firm stance on Walter Reed and thinks we should close Guantanamo. I'd say that's bucking the administration a bit more then we can expect from other Bush administration hacks. And absent a withdrawal (which Bush would never agree to), what could he possibly do about Iraq?
A cabinet member who wants to maintain some influence in the White House can't publicly oppose Presidential positions, as we all know. The key test for Gates will be what follows on Iran. Will he fall into the ranks with Cheney's drive toward a US attack on Iran? We can be reasonably sure that Gates (and the Joint Chiefs) are opposed to further stretching of American forces in the mideast/south asia while we are tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan. He hasn't made this public, but the unnamed sources in DC seem to agree that is his position.
If Gates does nothing else, I'll call him a success if we don't attack Iran before he, Bush and Cheney leave office. Gates may have to put his job on the line to oppose Cheney - but his threat to publicly oppose an Iranian invasion probably would prevent it.
Post A Comment