December 5, 2009
THOSE WHO CAN'T LEAD GET LED:
Meet the commanded-in-chief (Tom Engelhardt, 12/05/09, Asia Times)
You may not think so, but on Tuesday night from the US Military Academy at West Point, in his first prime-time presidential address to the nation, Barack Obama surrendered. It may not have looked like that: there were no surrender documents; he wasn't on the deck of the USS Missouri; he never bowed his head. Still, from today on, think of him not as the commander-in-chief, but as the commanded-in-chief.And give credit to the victors. Their campaign was nothing short of brilliant. Like the policy brigands they were, they ambushed the president, held him up with their threats, brought to bear key media players and Republican honchos, and in the end made off with the loot. The campaign began in late September with a strategic leak of Afghan War commander General Stanley McChrystal's grim review of the situation in that country, including demands for sizeable troop escalations and a commitment to a counterinsurgency war.
It came to include rumors of potential retirements in protest if the president didn't deliver, as well as clearly insubordinate policy remarks by General McChrystal, not to speak of an impressive citizen-mobilization of inside-the-Beltway former neo-conservative or fighting liberal think-tank experts, and a helping hand from an admiring media. In the process, the US military succeeded in boxing in a president who had already locked himself into a conflict he had termed both "the right war" and a "necessary" one. After more than two months of painfully over-reported deliberations, Obama has now ended up essentially where General McChrystal began.
Not that he's been a leader on any issue, but everyone knew that the UR lacked the credibility on security matters that leadership would require. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 5, 2009 6:12 AM

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=03e8f0ed-7f6f-4290-abaa-3ca4a8886a92)