Well, now…Retired Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has written a book, “Duty” which will be released within days and IN that book, he lets loose on several things but, the one that is raising the most eye brows, is the revelation regarding both Hillary and Obama and their opposition to the 2007 surge in Iraq.
Let’s get a few things straight here before we delve into the ramifications and the meaning of that bombshell.
First…Robert Gates has served this country through various administrations. He was the Deputy CIA Director for Reagan…The Deputy National Security Advisor and later, the CIA Director for Bush 41…And, the Secretary of Defense for Bush 43…A position he was asked to continue, by Obama.
Gates became the only career CIA OFFICER ever to rise to the level of CIA DIRECTOR and the only questionable activity in his record was due to the Iran/Contra affair but…
In the final report from the Independent Counsel for Iran-Contra Scandal, Gates was deemed, “close to many figures who played significant roles in the Iran/contra affair and was in a position to have known of their activities. The evidence developed by Independent Counsel did not warrant indictment…”
Gates’ service clearly, was driven by patriotism rather than partisanism.
There are those who claim he is doing nothing in this book except grinding an old axe but…
One must remember that axe grinding is done by those by those wanting to reveal the truth in the face of fabrications.
There are others who say Gates has written this book for financial gain.
Really? I rather doubt he needs the money and, with his resume behind him, at the age of 70, Robert Gates has NOTHING to gain politically.
Robert Gates wants to clear the air and his sense of patriotism is driving him to expose what he knows to be detrimental aspects of the current administration.
That brings us to this quote:
“Hillary told the president that her opposition to the  surge in Iraq had been political because she was facing him in the Iowa primary. … The president conceded vaguely that opposition to the Iraq surge had been political. To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me, was as surprising as it was dismaying.”
Gates went on to say the conversation, to him, was “remarkable” but, he didn’t put much weight behind it in his further assessment of Hillary Clinton whom he termed as, “…smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world.”
Those 2 assessments appear to be in conflict with each other but, I’ll deal with that later.
I suggest that the exchange is much more telling of the motives of Obama AND Hillary than Gates gets into in his book, “Duty.”
What we have here are 2 people running for the highest office in the nation in 2008 who took their positions on the Bush surge in Iraq for purely POLITICAL reasons.
NEITHER of them had the interests of the NATION or the best interests of our MILITARY PERSONNEL in mind in their opposition to that 2007 surge.
THEY, Hillary and Obama…VYING FOR THE POSITION OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF THE ARMED FORCES…WERE MORE CONCERNED WITH THE ELECTION THAN THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION IN A WAR.
THAT is more than disconcerting.
THAT is a clear act of putting personal politics above those serving our nation in uniform.
It is also a foreshadowing of things to come.
Think about it.
Obama wins in 2008 and makes Hillary his Secretary of State. Then, together, they become the key players in Benghazi where 4 Americans die in a coordinated TERRORIST attack and BOTH HILLARY and OBAMA cover up the details…
PURELY FOR PERSONAL POLITICAL REASONS!!!
Obama wants to get the weapons he gave to al Qaeda in Libya, to al Qaeda in Syria and, has the CIA start a covert gun running operation using HILLARY CLINTON’S STATE DEPARTMENT as the go-between with the Turkish diplomatic corps acting as the strawmen in the transfer.
HILLARY has OUR SECURITY drawn DOWN in Benghazi…IGNORES repeated requests and demands for INCREASED security there and eventually REPLACES AMERICAN security with security provided by the February 17 Militia…ANSAR al SHARIA aka…AL QAEDA IN LIBYA.
When it all fell apart on September 11th, 2012…HILLARY and OBAMA push that phoney baloney You Tube video crap for 3 WEEKS until they were FORCED to admit it WAS a TERRORIST attack and, the 2 of them have been covering up all the details of what transpired BEFORE, DURING and AFTER those attacks EVER SINCE!!!
IF the Benghazi gun running scheme had been successful…BOTH Hillary and Obama would have taken CREDIT for it claiming THEY were able to take down ASSAD in Syria, ridding the world of another dangerous tyrant.
Never mind how it would pave the way for al Qaeda to control Syria just as the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Egypt once Mubarak was dismissed and how al Qaeda was controlling Libya once Gaddafi was on ice.
If it FAILED…Both would have to coordinate the COVER UP of it.
ONE outcome would have BENEFITED their personal, political careers and the OTHER outcome, if NOT covered up, would DESTROY their personal, political careers.
And, just as neither Hillary nor Obama gave a rats ass about the troops involved in the 2007 Iraqi surge…
NEITHER HILLARY NOR OBAMA GAVE A RATS ASS ABOUT AMBASSADOR CHRIS STEVENS, HIS COMMUNICATIONS OFFICER, SEAN SMITH OR THE COLLATERAL DAMAGE THAT CAUSED THE DEATHS OF TYRONE WOODS AND GLEN DOHERTY!!!
Remember…During their joint appearance on “60 Minutes”…RECORDED THE DAY AFTER THE BENGHAZI ATTACKS, Steve Kroft asked Hillary and Obama about Benghazi and Obama’s response was: “You know, I remember Bob Gates, you know, first thing he said to me, I think maybe first week or two that I was there and we were meeting in the Oval Office and he, obviously, been through seven presidents or something. And he says, “Mr. President, one thing I can guarantee you is that at this moment, somewhere, somehow, somebody in the federal government is screwing up.“
What mattered to Hillary and Obama…was their careers.
4 Americans were killed that night on their watch…WHILE THEY WATCHED…And all Hillary and Obama cared about was how it would affect THEM.
In 2007, regarding the surge, all they cared about was their political ambitions.
For Obama…The Iraq war was as meaningless as those who fought it and the proof of that came upon our exit.
Obama said, during the 2012 campaign, “THE WAR IN IRAQ IS OVER…”
He DIDN’T say WE HAVE WON THE WAR IN IRAQ because winning wasn’t important…GETTING OUT was and now, those who live in Fallujah are paying the price for standing and fighting with our military under the command of one who only cared about his own personal, political career.
Those who paid the price of wounds both seen and unseen, who fought there in our uniforms, now know their “Commander in Chief” made the decisions that will affect the rest of their lives, based on what was best for his own…Personal, political…Career.
The families of those who came home in flag-draped coffins…will never forget how their loved ones died because the “president” cared more for his career than for their lives.
And knowing what they know now, of Hillary’s actions before and during Benghazi, not to mention the cover up after and, how SHE took HER stance on the 2007 surge in Iraq based on what was best for HER personal, political ambitions rather than upon what was best for those who would carry OUT the surge…
How do you suppose the Members of our military will feel should Hillary try to bring those ambitions to the 2016 elections?
How do you think they might feel about the possibility of having yet ANOTHER “Commander in Chief” who makes military or war-time decisions based on what might get her…reelected…instead of what might win the war and give THEM the best chance of coming home?
So…ARE Robert Gates’ 2 assessments of Hillary…Her stance that she only considered her personal, political career regarding her stance regarding the 2007 surge in Iraq which foreshadowed her complicity in the Benghazi attacks and…That she seemed, “…smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world,”ACTUALLY in conflict with one another?
By either account…Hillary Clinton would make a damned shitty president but…An admirable cocktail waitress.