Many in Military Close to Sen. Clinton
By SusanUnPC on March 27, 2007 at 5:16 PM in Current Affairs
“Mindful of Past, Clinton Cultivates the Military,” New York Times, March 27, 2007:
. . . Donald L. Kerrick, a retired general and former deputy national security adviser to President Clinton, acknowledged that some people inside and outside the military were skeptical of Mrs. Clinton’s intentions and wary that she would shift federal dollars to domestic programs like health care.
General Kerrick, who is close to Mrs. Clinton, said he believed that her appreciation of the military was genuine, but that it would take time and effort for that to come across.
“If, as president, she treats commanders and troops the same way she does now, she will quickly gain their support and respect,” General Kerrick said. “Military people are very loyal to the chain of command, and to people who understand them.”
In the Senate, Mrs. Clinton has supported expanding medical benefits for National Guard members and reservists and providing aid to those with traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder. She has also defied liberals in her own party at times, endorsing the expansion of the Army, supporting financing for missile defense, and refusing to support a total ban on land mines.
[...]
Essential to Mrs. Clinton’s courtship of the military was winning a seat in 2002 on the Senate Armed Services Committee, which she had vigorously sought. In that role, she regularly meets with military officers, has traveled three times to Iraq and has attended hearings on global conflicts and the needs of the armed services.
Privately, two current military leaders who have testified before the Armed Services committee, and who by custom do not comment publicly on political figures, said they both found Mrs. Clinton conversant about the military and thoughtful in her questions.
Active-duty generals have sought her out, and she has reached out to them. Among those with whom she has built relationships are Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, and Adm. William J. Fallon, the new head of Central Command. Recently, too, James T. Conway, the commandant of the Marines, invited her to be his guest of honor at the “Sunset Parade” at the Marine Corps War Memorial in Washington, a high-profile tradition. (She has accepted.)
[...]
The Republican National Committee’s research staff members have already compiled a series of examples that they say show Mrs. Clinton at odds with military interests, including her Iraq war positioning and her opposition to sending additional troops there.
General [Jack] Keane — whose support for sending more troops to Iraq is at odds with Mrs. Clinton’s view — and other admirers of hers see these skeptical or critical portrayals of her as playing into false stereotypes. He recalled how his own initial impression of her changed after their first meeting: It was supposed to last 15 minutes, but continued for a half hour longer as they talked about West Point and moved onto global hot spots.
John Batiste, a retired major general and former commander of the First Infantry Division, who also consults with Mrs. Clinton, said, “Very, very few politicians have any military experience, and they’re naïve — they don’t understand what it takes to develop a big picture, unified strategy to take a country to war.
“She’s the kind of person who would listen to sound military advice,” General Batiste said, “and not dismiss it or discard it. And I’m a lifelong Republican.“
As you’ll recall, Maj. Gen. Batiste, the former commander of coalition forces in northern and central Iraq, was an outspoken critic of Donald Rumsfeld on his Iraq war strategy.
One positive I see in Sen. Clinton’s strong stand for the military is that she would attempt to address the current sorry state of military readiness, which Larry Johnson wrote about here last week.
It’s been painful to see the U.S. military’s reputation suffer thanks to an unnecessary war that was so poorly planned.
And I think that the experience in Iraq has made it clear that we need to expand our armed forces in case, someday, there is a real conflict somewhere that requires large numbers of ready forces.
Our military leadership — in fact, all who serve in the military — will desperately need a president who is highly cognizant of the needs and missions of the military. For the sake of morale. And for the sake of the enormous rebuilding effort that is to come, but can only be accomplished with an presidency that “gets” the military and its many issues.
It seems that Sen. Clinton’s careful stance on the Iraq war may have been influenced by her closeness to many in the military — even a surge hawk like Jack Keane. The earlier part of the article recounts her husband’s struggles with military leadership, and the mistakes he made in his presidency. Sen. Clinton seems dedicated to not repeating those mistakes, and to paying attention to the counsel of military leaders, and that’s to the good. Perhaps her caution now on the Iraq war — irritating and vexing to so many in the Democratic party — will hold her in good stead in a general election.
by Ronald Scott
* More novels by 
* 
(
)
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
