Retired Four-Stars Leading Candidates for Obama's National Security Team

GK's post of 11/24 is an excellent summation and analysis of General James Jones. Anyone on this blog who has not yet read GK's post should do so, followed up by General Jones' biographicals. I am so hopeful that the press is correct that General Jones will be our next National Security Advisor. He is a man of strong intellect, politically acute (but politically unpolluted), and pragmatic. Neither we nor the President will hear double-talk or misleading statements from his mouth. Obama continues to pursue the formation of a team with excellent credentials. I have great hope for progress in the most difficult years that our nation now faces.

Obama's choice of General Jones will be fine as this guy has been in combat and knows the system. we do not need Wesley Clark, a worthless Clinton hack.

Clinton's inactions in Bosnia and the Balkans, allowed at least 100,000 people to be killed. He mulled around and finally sent in some jets to do something way late in the game..

Clinton was directly responsible for 9/11 as he did nothing to attack the camps in Afghanistan after the first WTC bombing in 1993. At least 100,000 Islam fanatic Taliban/ Al Qaeda types were trained unimpeded. thank you bill clinton,,,

I really do not want Hilliary / Bill Clinton to run our foreign affairs. She should be home making toast for him,,Besides he has made millions doing influence peddling stuff anyway so this is a problem anyway.

The comments about OBAMA during the campaign by both Clinton's shows their inner racism towards Obama . He can find someone else and appoint Hilliary to some lesser visible position (Dept of Counting Pencils) ,,,,

As far as the other appointments, I have no negative comments and do think that GOV Napitalino will be fine

First we had Conan da Republican in Ca.

Now we have the Obama-man da Republic-he-can as commander and Chief !!!

Goes to show you ... even a former community organizer, who we right wingers where sure was an old fashioned Lilly liver liberal has the common sense to put the big bad mean republicans in charge of foreign policy.

Even scary than war mongering Republican in charge of the nukes is our fearless leader and defender of freedom Hillary ... now with her in charger the terrorist have someone to fear ...

Any Marine will tell you Jones is a politican having spent the large majority of his career trying to get inside the beltway or back to the beltway. Guess he made it back inside.

I'm no military person but from what I've read about the backgrounds of these men, they appear to have the "right stuff". So far as I read daily about the choices Obama is making for his Cabinet, he seems to know what he's doing and surrounding himself with intelligent people.
Hope I'm right as he's got the job from h--l in front of him.

Hmmmm now, I wonder why the new president would surround himself with four star generals, even to the extent of placing one in charge of homeland security? He must be concidering some sort of mass round up to the vilent response that will certianly occur when the system fails and his programs are just not enough in due time to prevent it. what do you think?

I did not vote for our current President elect, but I am gratified and impressed with his selection of General Jones as candidate for his National Security Advisor. General Jones constitutes a superb choice as National Security Advisor. His experience as a military leader, combat veteran, international leader as the Supreme Allied Commander, Commandant of the Marine Corps, and as director of the Chamber of Commerce Institute for 21st Century Energy, round out a pedigree that also includes undergraduate studies at Georgetown and a degree in National Security Strategy from the National War College. I doubt one would find someone whose credentials include the breadth and depth of his practical and academic experience that exist with this fine man. Unlike some of the others mentioned within this blog, General Jones also exhibits the qualities of a true gentlemen and diplomat whose ability to "gracefully wear power" place him squarely at the forefront among leaders the nation requires to restore its international standing while maintaining its influence. I personally watched General Jones in multiple venues develop instant rapport with every person he dealt with regardless of station or nationality and take complex decisions that proved visionary in retrospect. He is one the people I've found most "comfortable in his skin" regardless of his position. He is a man of integrity, unimpeachable intellect, and possesses moral courage that finds its foundation in a well developed ethical compass that served this country in multiple capacities for more than four decades. I challenge anyone to find the level of experience, measured intellect, and statesmanship resident in this man among the partisan politicals that typically find themselves asked to serve in such positions of responsibility. General Jones earned the confidence of a nation through action and steady application of excellence….not partisanship. He will do magnificently. I wish him fair winds and following seas.

The Pentagon needs serious management and the injection of competency. The problems are more than just political appointments, the other career staff have been consumed with mindless management initiatives of no substance. Contract and cost management has been at best lax resulting in billions of dollars of waste, beyond that which is to be expected in a huge organization. The management problems extend way beyond the Pentagon proper to within the Service elements where management has become a care taker function and worse, no accountability for performance. Far too many Generals and Colonels sitting behind desks, more concerned about civilian jobs than doing their jobs.

Helllo ArcAngel. About war over commodities...none of the US oil companies are in the top world petroleum providers. The US is not in OPEC. Look a bit a history, not just yesterday. The Great War (WWI) had numerous "control of oil" moves in its duration. WWII was cored around Germany getting to the Middle East and Japan getting to the oil fields in Java. And by the way it was the US and its intervention that prevented Australia from now having Japanese as its national language. Who led against world communism? The "Empire's" socialists? The US is the only reason a UN of individual nations even exists.

you all need to remember that your problems in the world stem from the fact that your government has intrusive foriegn policies.who gave you the right to be the sheriff of the world.my biggest regret is that i voted for john howard who went on to become george w bush's puppet and send innocent australians to fight a battle your government started.wake up and smell the roses america your little war on terrorism has more to do with oil and making oil barons richer.lets just hope your president elect pulls all of your troops out of iraq and afghanistan in a timely manner before more innocent people die over a commodity.

And, to Jean: buzziea’s point was that the attacks on 9/11 occurred during Bush’s term in office. At that point, Bush had been in office for nearly eight months, and he and his administration, including National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, had ignored a very pointed August 2001 National Intelligence Estimate that warned of an upcoming attack. In order to be able to correctly assess the intelligence that is gathered by experts in the field, it is necessary to have “intelligence” in the Executive Branch, especially in the Commander-in-Chief. It has been sorely lacking during the last eight years.

And, really, can you stop blaming Clinton for everything that has happened since he left office?

George W Bush did not have anything to do With 9/11 bombing you idiot he had just got elected. you need to put blame on Bill Clinton who just left office.

Sooo better than Bush to get the retired military experts to keep us safe. Under Bush appointed his personal pals and many college Republicans who couldn't keep us safe from 9-11. Unqualified nincompoops under Bush and ACTUALLY qualified people to fill appointed posts under Obama. Been a lonnng 8 years of buffoonery. I was worried we'd never see an efficient, statesmanlike USA again. :)

If Obama wants a successful administration, he will get Gen. Wesley Clark as NSA. Clark is the only Democrat with the knowledge and experience needed to tackle the horrible crises that we are facing. Gen. Jones (whoever he is) does not have the experience needed to help with foreign policy, as well as economic crises, all of which we now face. National Security is NOT just about the military or terrorism. It is about any situation or occurrence that would hurt national security. Clark has expertise in the areas of foreign policy, global warming/energy independence, military, economics, etc. He has the kind of well-rounded knowledge that Obama will need. Gen. Jones has ONLY military experience. So, if Obama is looking for excellence, as he claims, how can he pass up Gen. Wesley Clark? If he does, it is because he does not like Clark, or is still holding a grudge because Clark endorsed Hillary Clinton over him. I would also think that Hillary Clinton would have the decency to go to bat for Clark, as well, since he helped her so much during the primaries. And, finally, since the National Security Adviser does not have to be confirmed by the Senate, there is no excuse for not picking him, except maliciousness. My family and I did not vote in the general election, because I did not like the pick of Joe Biden for VP, but my family and I were also angry about the way Obama and his campaign dissed Clark during the convention. We lost respect for Obama after that. And even though we gave hundreds of dollars to his campaign and even registered voters for him, we stayed home on election day. He had better be glad that the Republicans had McCain, because had it been Romney and Palin, we would have voted for their ticket in a heart beat!
And, as I said in an earlier post, I am an African-American Independent voter.

Wes Clark for NS Advisor? No Way!!! He angered every NATO allie we had, oversaw the Bosnia fiasco where it took months to move a small force into a tiny country, and is so partisan no Republican would ever support him. If you want true "cooperation" within the U.S. and with our allies, pick Jones.

I cant agree with all these comments, i voted independant,not for O" or mccain i have a problem with trust,i did not want O' in there to be honest,but it happened. you can bet i will watch every move he makes,and be critical when i see wrong directions being taken.

Jones has a few written articles about his views on his strategic stances of the Iraq war. He does not advocate a withdrawal from Iraq any time soon, so maybe he'll educate pres-elect on the dangers Iraq will face if we pull out when Obama promised.

I served in the military[marines] under "JFK and he was a great leader as well as president and the next president that i had greatly admired was president Ronald Reagan who also had great leadership abilities,these men along with "FDR" 'Truman None of these men were liberals ,they defended the country,and took care of the people. thats why they go down in history as some of the greatest presidents of our time.

There is a very wide difference between O" and the men he tries to compare himself to: for the facts "FDR was no a Liberal,Truman" was not a liberal,JFK was not a liberal,eisenhour was not a liberal. and lincoln defiantly was not a liberal.so anyone who remotely thinks thereis some coparison,guess agin. O" does not fit the mould of any of these past presidents. they were leaders in extreme hard times.each demonstrated leadership in their own way .

Martin Young

Semper Fi" what years did you serve? were you stationed at lejeune? I served from "61 to 67" vietnam era vet