Bonam Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 (edited) Considering the kinds of moral and ethical decisions that a CIA director has to make, I'm guessing the morality of an affair, such a common thing in the course of human events, seems pretty much insignificant in comparison. When every day you order operations that cause the death of both desired targets but also civilians, when you partner with murderous savages to fight other murderous savages, when a typical moral dilemma you face is to decide who lives and who dies, what exactly would seem wrong in such a context about having consensual relations with a beautiful woman? Personally, I don't think having an affair should automatically trigger resignation from the post, just as it didn't force Bill Clinton from the office of president (even though he showed much worse judgment by lying about it for a long time after it came to light). In regards to the issue of blackmail, once the information is out in the open, it can no longer be used to blackmail someone. Of course, an investigation should be done to see if he already has been blackmailed and done anything incorrect as a result, but if the answer is no, I don't see why he shouldn't continue on with his post. Further, Petraeus has demonstrated remarkable success and ability in his handling of Iraq and other operations, and it is probably a considerable loss to the US to lose his leadership and military skills. I do agree with the idea that he "fell on his sword". But I don't think he did it because of the affair, I think the affair was just a convenient excuse, a good plausible public reason to give for resigning, while something of more considerable important to national security or, more likely, to political expediency is going on in the background. Edited November 11, 2012 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 It is now being reported what triggered the investigation in the first place was Broadwell Sent Emails To a Stat Dept. Official. So yes he kinda had to resign to prevent what would happen if he didn't and in the ensuing scandal possibly public investigations etc. We do not always live in the society we want to live in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 I do agree with the idea that he "fell on his sword". But I don't think he did it because of the affair, I think the affair was just a convenient excuse, a good plausible public reason to give for resigning, while something of more considerable important to national security or, more likely, to political expediency is going on in the background. That just sounds like tin foil hat stuff to me! Kidding aside, I agree with this. We have two important people going down at such a convenient time as more information about the real facts on the ground in Benghazi are coming out. How much do you believe in coincidences!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 How much do you believe in coincidences!? The same way I believe that resemblances among siblings or between parent and child are coincidences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I've said it before, and I hope that this thing doesn't turn into a Watergate for the sake of the nation. It needs to heal over that election and brace for the fiscal cliff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I am neither delusional nor am I a Republican. I have been a Democrat since that sunny day in May 1975 when I registered to vote. Well, I for one believe you. I know you're the young idealist jbg that always was, it's the Democrats who've lost your vote by changing too far to... somewhere. I mean look back at 75, the Democrats were so different. They believed in the importance of a strong federal government, equality, diplomacy.... Then have one look at Obama. He believes in a strong federal government, equality, diplomacy... You see through the charade though, you're the same man you were 40 years ago. It's definitely the party that's changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 You see through the charade though, you're the same man you were 40 years ago. It's definitely the party that's changed. The narrative has become entirely against growth. Every boutique cause in favor of unproductive policies and people has been adopted. That is the change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 The narrative has become entirely against growth. Every boutique cause in favor of unproductive policies and people has been adopted. That is the change. You're only talking about the current administration, I assume. There is this recession to deal with so you probably shouldn't be expecting the usual trajectory of tax cuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 ...In regards to the issue of blackmail, once the information is out in the open, it can no longer be used to blackmail someone. Of course, an investigation should be done to see if he already has been blackmailed and done anything incorrect as a result, but if the answer is no, I don't see why he shouldn't continue on with his post. Further, Petraeus has demonstrated remarkable success and ability in his handling of Iraq and other operations, and it is probably a considerable loss to the US to lose his leadership and military skills. I do agree with the idea that he "fell on his sword". But I don't think he did it because of the affair, I think the affair was just a convenient excuse, a good plausible public reason to give for resigning, while something of more considerable important to national security or, more likely, to political expediency is going on in the background. Over the weekend, it was reported that Hillary Clinton was asked to testify on the Benghazi attack by the House. She has declined, saying she has a scheduling conflict. The mind boggles. Another thing about Patraeus, he resigns on a Friday afternoon. Ever hear of the Friday afternoon dump? This whole thing is looking worse and worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 This whole thing is looking worse and worse. You forgot to add that you hope, for the country's sake, that it won't turn out to be a big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Over the weekend, it was reported that Hillary Clinton was asked to testify on the Benghazi attack by the House. She has declined, saying she has a scheduling conflict. The mind boggles. Another thing about Patraeus, he resigns on a Friday afternoon. Ever hear of the Friday afternoon dump? This whole thing is looking worse and worse. Just read that if the affair started before Petraeus left the military, he might face charges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I don't know why anyone should care about this guy's extramarital activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I don't know why anyone should care about this guy's extramarital activities. Because if the affair started before he left the military, he could face charges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Just read that if the affair started before Petraeus left the military, he might face charges. Yep...UCMJ Article 134.- Adultery Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 You forgot to add that you hope, for the country's sake, that it won't turn out to be a big deal. I just noticed what's in your photo. That's actually pretty funny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Because if the affair started before he left the military, he could face charges. I don't know why anyone should care about this guy's extramarital activities, including the military. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) I don't know why anyone should care about this guy's extramarital activities, including the military. Then you don't know about Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which bush_cheney already mentioned. Edited November 12, 2012 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) I don't know why anyone should care about this guy's extramarital activities, including the military. Correct...you don't know why. But the "military" (and Congress) have very good reasons why, including the impact on order and discipline in the U.S. armed forces. Adultery also remains illegal in at least 20 states. Edited November 12, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Adultery has an impact on order and discipline you say? That's the reason people should care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Whether people care or not is not the issue. When you join an organization(in this case, the military), you are agreeing to abide by their code of coduct. If you break the code, then you suffer the consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Whether people care or not is not the issue. When you join an organization(in this case, the military), you are agreeing to abide by their code of coduct. If you break the code, then you suffer the consequences. If it's strictly a legal reason, that's fine. However, as leader of the CIA, I'm not really sure why people should care. Just like Clinton with Lewinsky or Newt Gingrinch or any of the other dozens of examples. I never understood why people really cared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Just read that if the affair started before Petraeus left the military, he might face charges. I just heard detail on the third woman who contacted the FBI about threatening emails from Broadwell. This woman was Jill Kelly and was not in the CIA or military, except in an unpaid position. She served as an unpaid, unofficial social liaison for U.S. Central Command, which Petraeus led, and was reportedly a fixture at parties, along with her husband Scott, a prominent cancer surgeon. So she 'contacts' the FBI about threatening emails, and they care? It seems odd that they'd look into a random email threat from a jealous woman. Again, there is more here than meets the eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 If it's strictly a legal reason, that's fine. However, as leader of the CIA, I'm not really sure why people should care. Just like Clinton with Lewinsky or Newt Gingrinch or any of the other dozens of examples. I never understood why people really cared. Some people care, some people do not care. It has always been this way. It just is, like the sky is blue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I just heard detail on the third woman who contacted the FBIabout threatening emails from Broadwell. This woman was Jill Kelly and was not in the CIA or military, except in an unpaid position. So she 'contacts' the FBI about threatening emails, and they care? It seems odd that they'd look into a random email threat from a jealous woman. Again, there is more here than meets the eye. Interesting. I'm guessing more will likely come out too, but I suppose it depends on the content of the emails - if they cast any doubt at all on Petraeus, it makes sense that the FBI would investigate, given his current and past positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitsy Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 So she 'contacts' the FBI about threatening emails, and they care? It seems odd that they'd look into a random email threat from a jealous woman. Again, there is more here than meets the eye. So she 'contacts' the FBI about threatening emails, and they care? It seems odd that they'd look into a random email threat from a jealous woman. Again, there is more here than meets the eye. I agree, it appears she may have some political plus financial connections. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/petraeus-wife-holly-furious-affair-article-1.1200586 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.