For the time being General Petraeus is safe and untouchable, and was able to save Lieutenant Colonel Paul Yingling from obsecurity, and put his talents to work for the common good.

Would anyone doubt though, that our good General is on his way out? What happens then to Paul Yingling? He's still on the black list with much of the Army's top brass.

Who will come to this Soldier's aid upon his mentor's departure?

To borrow a phrase from Mr. William Lind, "too many generals are more likely to step-up to the trough then to the plate."

"If one advances the Worthy but doesn't employ them, this is attaining the name of advancing the Worthy but lacking the substance of using the Worthy."

Whence comes the error? "The error lies in wanting to employ men who are popularly praised rather than obtaining true Worthies."

A quote by Paul Yingling, "The general that speaks too loudly of preparing for war while the nation is at peace risks his position and status. However, the general that speaks too softly places at risk the security of his country."

I applaud Mr. Kaplan's positive focus in his article, unfortunately, I'm pessimistic as to whether we are seeing any trend toward encouraging mavericks.

Wow---what a keenly ignorant observation.

You write:

Would anyone doubt though, that our good General is on his way out? What happens then to Paul Yingling? He's still on the black list with much of the Army's top brass.

For the record--I will doubt

Let's see if I can track General Petraeus's recent assignments:

Commander 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) (including a successful deployement in Iraq);

Commander Multi-National Security Transition Command--Iraq;

Commander US Army Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth (the Army's Command and General Staff College--where in his spare time he wrote the Army's counterinsurgency doctrine);

Commder Multi-National Forces--Iraq;

and now Commander, US Central Command.

And from this resume, you brilliantly conclude that he's on his way out? Let me inject a dose of reality. Rather than being shown the door, David H. Petreaus's next assignment will be either Army Chief of Staff, or more likely Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

There is a universe of three people who might get to choose General Petreaus's future assignment--they are: George W. Bush, John McCain, and Barak Obama. Tell me professor, which of these do you suggest will be showing Petreaus the door?

Hello SPC123. Just for the record, I'm a big fan of General Petraeus, I observed his keen understanding of the changing dynamic in Iraq, and implementation of civil action as the CG, 101st, around southern Mosul early on. Unfortunately, that all came unwrapped when he left (another story).

I would, at one point, have agreed 100% with your conclusion on the General's career pattern, and thus being able to continue to influence forward thinking within this Nation's largest gun club, but not necessarily premier gun club : - >

My words, "can anyone doubt" were an unfortunate choice. Of course there is always doubt.

However, there is a strong, and heated debate going-on within the Army, which has also gone public several times, as to the future dirction of that "institution."

Although, I will say I hope you are right, were I a betting man, I believe the instituational thinkers will lobby for his retirement after his tenure as CENTCOM.(if Afghanistan doesn't consume him first).

Incidentally SPC123, I encourage healthy debate, but you need not use a condescending tone nor use words like "professor" with me.

I assure you, although I don't have a lock on the future, or big picture, my background does give me some measure of insight, so does my existing connection to that background.

If a PFC tells me he has locked with and put down his enemy looking him in the eye, I know first hand of what he speaks. If a battalion commander describes to me his scheme of maneuver, I also know first hand of what he speaks.

I do understand your, and others, mind se of - - - - what have you done lately, so I will excuse your brashness.

Let's continue to agree to disagree, in a more polished manner.

Incidentally SPC123, I encourage healthy debate, but you need not use a condescending tone nor use words like "professor" with me.

I regret if you were offended by my salutation "professor" -- considering your posting laced with erudite quotations, I thought it appropos.

If a PFC tells me he has locked with and put down his enemy looking him in the eye, I know first hand of what he speaks. If a battalion commander describes to me his scheme of maneuver, I also know first hand of what he speaks.

I do understand your, and others, mind se of - - - - what have you done lately, so I will excuse your brashness.

I'll assume your accusation of brashness is just intended as tit-for-tat. Fair enough. Alas, I have no idea from where you detected a mindset of "what have you done lately" none whatsoever. Nor can I detect anything in my message to suggest I would find your commentary regarding General Petreaus's future more persuasive were you a PFC, a battalion commander, or both.

My thoughts regarding General Petraeus don't require membership in any "gun club" (there appears to be some bravado here I cannot decipher--perhaps the Special Operations folks, or Marine Corps, or heaven forbid, the Air Force is a more premier "gun club"). Instead I just cannot think of an actual scenario where General Petraeus is not advances. Admiral Mullen will need to be replaced in the Chairman's seat. Neither the Air Force, nor Marine Corps officers most recently holding that position aquitted themselves particularly well. Further both the Marines and the Air Force are in the middle of major acquisition blunders that won't go away in the near future. This makes it less likely the President would send an Air Force or Marine Corps officer's name to the Hill for confirmation. The Navy won't get the job twice--their far-and-away best candidate was Admiral Fallon, and I think he can now be safely excluded. This leaves the Chairman's seat presumptively open to an Army officer.

There just aren't a great many Army candidates for the position. If General Casey moves up--this leaves the Army Chief job open and Petraeus is the likely candidate for this. These service chief jobs are not determined by 'crudgemon' Generals, they are for all practical purposes political appointments. Accordingly any President who fails to advance the extraordinarily well-known Petraeus up will be seen as either "caving" to the "crudgemons" or as rejecting "forward thining influence."

My thoughts spring from neither hopefulness nor Petreaus fandom. Instead its just my analysis of the military and political realities that will drive the decision of who to advance.

Having rubbed elbows with some very smart and capable senior officers in the Air Force I often wondered how they could mentor the people they did. It was apparent so many protegees were second class thinkers and not at all creative.

I used to think maybe I just wasn't seeing the brilliance beneath. But now I think there is a certain kind of blindness that affects both senior officers and enlisted. They mentor based on personal likes rather than capability.

Their pull puts their protegee into positions where he/she is either set up for success or just filling a square. The mentorees are not challenged, perhaps to prevent them from failing. They move up and when their mentor is gone they are left not knowing what their jobs really are and with no capabilities.

I've seen too many Chiefs who just didn't know their jobs and therefore could not explain to their junior enlisted what that job was and what the standards were.

I've seen the same happen with officers. I've listened to them talk about their experiences knowing they did nothing in the jobs they were in.

Occassionally a Petraues sneaks through. But not too often.

Just some comments from the peanut gallery, but...

1. GEN Petraeus may indeed be on his last job. Combatant Commander is the highest command position in the military. Any position that can be considered higher (VCSA, CSA, Chairman JCS) are, in reality, political REMF jobs. I would not be in the least bit suprised if GEN Petraeus retires after completing this job.

2. Has anyone considered that maybe LTC Yingling doen't have what it takes to be a flag officer. Writing a good essay and having great ideas doesn't necessarily translate into being that special leader. LTC Yingling's true calling may be to work in the school-house and write doctrine, foment discussion, and form the next generation of military minds. If that is the case, he'll retire as a COL.

WAR STORY: I worked for a guy who did what LTC Yingling did and finished his career in the school house. I saw many accusations about the old guard protecting their own and putting this guy out to pasture. These accusations were made by people "outside the know". In reality, the guy was an arrogant asshole who would have never made it past LTC if it weren't for his writings.

Last comment, Tyratios, you should go back and read some of your own posts before ever deeming to lecture someone on being condescending. When you give people assignments to research stuff you can be extremely condesceding "Professor".

Thank you Bobarian, I remember you without researching back; and you are correct in taking me to the woodshed.

I meant it constructively, not in mean spirit. I don't waste time on those I don't think worthy of a response : - >.

Your comments on Lieutenant Colonel Yingling, and others who publish writings, etc. is valid. Publishing an article doesn't make one anymore qualified as a future commander then one who doesn't publish his thoughts.

My inference is allowing, and protecting those that offer dialogue, done properly, in military publications. Which wasn't the case with Yingling.

Another respondent took me to task as well, on my take on General Petraeus's future. My thoughts are, although Chief of Staff of the Army, or Chairman, JCS are political appontments in general. Advice is sought from the "lobby."

And there are those in that "lobby" that our General has irritated.

Keep up the good spirit and as I said before, I will always expect good things from you - - - don't disappoint!

Good to here back from you. I'm not sure that Petraeus has anything to worry from the "Lobby"; if he wants the job, he can probably have it. From what I know of him (i've never worked for him) I believe he might want to be the TRADOC Commander but I don't see him wanting CSA.