everytime general petraeus appears on a news broadcast, writes an op-ed piece about the US’s foreign policy or testifies before the US congress, a piece of america dies. the reality is that he should have been the next US president. could the US electorate find it in their hearts to forgive a man who made the mistake of getting involved with his biographer given that loads of americans voted for a man wonder woman would beat to a pulp? or would someone call this white male privilege? given that petraeus is clearly a greek name, is he even white really? his balkan heritage (whose history is tied to turkey) could be why he seemingly has a grasp on the chaos of the near east. or are we just reaching?
in the video below petraeus talks about the US’s ongoing presence in Afghanistan. more recently he chastised the current US administration for cutting its state department budget as the trump administration favors more boots on the ground as opposed to preventative measures. who gains from the US putting more troops in subsaharan africa? if the administration fears corruption, nepotism, cronyism and clientelism well then maybe they have a point. but the bush journey into nation building did not make the US more safe. and a greater presence of US military will only aid those who work in the service sectors catering to the military. long-term investment in developing countries is a win-win situation for US businesses and the US and the western world’s longterm security. loads of men in their 20s with no hope and nothing to do surrounding by well armed foreigners doesn’t really seem like either a good short-term or long term solution. it looks more like occupying forces.