An endless ROE of them…
would never equal a single Curtis LeMay
General Petraeus’ depressing testimony yesterday confirmed (while, expectedly, it did not prevent the Gen. from becoming confirmed) yet again that the era of real US warrior leaders—like Curtis LeMay—is over. LeMay, so unlike his post-modernist “successors,” such as Petraeus and McChrystal, actually possessed both the moral rectitude and abiding faith in American exceptionalism to value his own troops above all else, certainly any inhabitant of the enemy domain, military or civilian. LeMay’s military, and simultaneous moral calculus, was that crushing the enemy and therefore his abiding, motivating ideology, saved the lives first and foremost, of his own troops, his fellow citizens, allied citizens, and even those of the enemy.
Diana West viewed yesterday’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearings assiduously (video available at this Senate Armed Services Committee link), and as she reports, Petraeus—no surprise to those who aren’t delusional—re-affirmed his commitment to the current heinous ROEs:
It’s really about the implementation of the rules of engagement and the tactical directive, both of which I think about fundamentally sound. I don’t see any reason to change them in significant ways. Rather. what we need to do is make sure that the intent behind those, the intent being to reduce the loss of innocent civilian life in the course of military operations to an absolute minimum — that’s an imperative for any [counterinsurgency]. We must achieve that. I have pledged to continue to do that, to continue the great work that General McChrystal did in that regard.
Petraeus, in a passing remark (hat tips to Hillel Stavis, Ruth King, and Diana), also recast the very costly 1946-1979 Helmand Valley Project nation-building boondoggle, as a “successful” effort. This negationism of very recent history—combined with the COIN-concocted bowdlerization of the enemy’s Islamic jihad war doctrine—further undermines Petraeus’ credibility.