You had them mad at you last year as well when you decided not to attack the regime of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for his use of chemical weapons, and decided to use a diplomatic alternative instead. You did this, sir, despite derisive comments and condemnation from John McCain.
And they were even angrier when you were indeed able to force Assad to relinquish his chemical weapons without even firing a shot. This was hard to accept:
The Joint Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the United Nations (OPCW-UN) announced today that the removal of Syria’s chemical weapons material is now complete.
The removal of the most critical material for destruction began in early January, in line with an agreement brokered by Russia and the United States, by which Syria renounced its chemical weapons material and joined 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention.
The focus in recent weeks had been on the removal of the remaining 7.2 per cent of the declared chemical weapons material which had been difficult owing to volatile security conditions.
“With this last movement, the total of declared chemical weapons materials destroyed or removed from Syria has reached 100 per cent,” the Joint Mission stated in a news release. “The most operationally challenging task within the effort to eliminate the Syrian chemical weapons programme has come to an end.”
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the announcement and congratulated the Joint Mission for completing “this most challenging of tasks” in an active war zone, according to a statement issued by his spokesperson.
It has also been published, Mr. President, that you have not had a close relationship with the Pentagon and the military industrial complex as a whole. This is problematic, because, you see, through the media, the military has always been viewed as the province of Conservatives and this false belief has brainwashed the American public into believing that only Republicans possess the strength to preside over an effective military.
That is why some might hold the opinion that it was callous of you to have shocked the American body politic when, for almost a decade after a terrorist organization known as Al-Qaeda struck America on its own soil, and killed thousands, you presided over a mission and gave the command to stop and eliminate the group’s leader and the nation’s number one nemesis, Osama bin Laden. I know that if this were done by your predecessor there would be coins minted with his likeness today. But this is beside the point.
Over recent days, spurred by your refusal to buy into the groupthink of Republican hawks, most specifically to engage in an all out ground war against Islamic militant group ISIS in Iraq and Syria and by the termination of Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, the military, through the media, has been publicly attacking your refusing to acquiesce to its exclusive “collective wisdom” and “guidance” over military policy.
Mr. President, to some, this kind of behavior is shameful…. To illustrate your meddling, the AP has recounted an incident through former Defense Secretary Robert Gates in his recent book:
On a trip to Afghanistan during President Barack Obama's first term, Defense Secretary Robert Gates was stunned to find a telephone line at the military's special operations headquarters that linked directly back to a top White House national security official.
"I had them tear it out while I was standing there," Gates said earlier this month as he recounted his discovery. "I told the commanders, 'If you get a call from the White House, you tell them to go to hell and call me.'"
Tisk, tisk, tisk, Mr. President. What reasons would you or your administration have for wanting to monitor the military? According to the AP:
To Gates, the phone in Kabul came to symbolize Obama's efforts to micromanage the Pentagon and centralize decision-making in the White House. That criticism later would be echoed publicly and pointedly by Gates' successor, Leon Panetta.
The president's third Pentagon chief, Chuck Hagel, was picked partly because he was thought to be more deferential to Obama's close circle of White House advisers. But over time, Hagel also grew frustrated with what he saw as the West Wing's insularity.
The article suggested that your distrust of the military has interfered with your ability to find a replacement for Hagel. It even claimed that realizing she might be considered your next choice:
Michele Flournoy called Obama to take herself out of consideration, even though she was widely seen as his top choice and would have been the first woman to hold the post.
What is it with your mistrust of the military, Mr. President? Don’t you realize that there could be all out full scale wars being fought right now if not for your meddling? Are you under some unfortunate misconception concerning civilian leadership of the military?
Obama has been seen in the Pentagon as being overly suspicious of the military and its inclination to use force to address problems. To some in the Pentagon, the president's approach to the military seems particularly cool and detached when compared with that of his predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, who was more eager to embrace the military and accept its judgments.
Well all I can say Mr. President is...thanks! And, if you would allow me, sir, “Thanks Obama!”