THE SPLIT – AT 10:14 A.M. ET:  We've wondered here for some time why no military leaders were splitting with Field Marshal Obama over the field marshal's confused, often discouraging foreign and defense policies.  How could any military leader support the devastating cuts to defense, or the "lead from behind" mentality of the Obama White House?  Now we are seeing signs of an active split, although active-duty officers must be discreet in their comments.  It's the leaks that count.  From WaPo: 

The White House and Pentagon have scurried this week to insist there is no hint of dissent in the ranks, though in some cases their efforts have focused only more attention on the issue.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel tried to reassure the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday that civilian and military leaders at the Pentagon were in “full alignment” and in “complete agreement with every component of the president’s strategy.”

Some lawmakers were skeptical. Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, suggested that Obama should listen more closely to his commanders. “I think it’s very important that he does follow the advice and counsel that he receives, the professional advice of the military. They are the ones best suited to do that.”

“I realize he’s commander in chief, he has the final say and the final obligation and responsibility,” McKeon added. “I would also request that he not take options off the table.”

COMMENT:  McKeon is right.  Obama has a nasty tendency to telegraph to an enemy what he will and won't do, a recipe for disaster. 

You don't get the impression that Obama has any enthusiasm for what he's doing to fight the Islamic State.  He may well be driven by public anger and the need to appear "tough" right before a midterm election.  I'd love to know what he'll do after the election, and how Hillary Clinton will play it.

September 19, 2014