posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 07:15 PM
reply to post by mars1
That is a vaild point. We most likely will have no knowledge if he did or did not have anything else serious going on. Most likely it will remain as
a bout of dehydration coupled with stress and/or lack of sleep.
His military career is decorated and I personally believe he has the troops in mind and does not wish to play politics. Hence the reasons for the
Surge type plan in Iraq. From what I have seen, he understands that if we are at war, then let us act like it and use on the fundamentals of warfare,
force in numbers.
While I would like to see my brothers and sisters in arms come home, a lot of them wish to do their job, which is war. It is an ugly profession that
throughout these years through military propaganda has highlighted as one that doesn't just entail war, but schooling and such. While those are an
aspect of duty, it is not the main mission.
I believe General Petraeus understands that and wishes to accomplish his mission. If he is more sick than letting on, I would hope that no political
pressure for him to remain on because for the most part, he is well received, it would leave our forces at a disadvantage having a sick general making
decisions regarding war.
On a side note, these are the same mistakes we as a country have made since the end of WWII in regards to warfare. We truly believe that smaller
numbers weighing heavily upon technology to carry us through, yet time and time again show that in a field of battle such seen in Afghanistan and
Iraq, they are a recipe for disaster...
Either way my personal beliefs are we need not turn tail and run, but rather act like it’s a war. If we are going to do, let us do it to win, not
play politics and pussyfoot on the battlefield. Maybe not the most politically correct statement, oh well.