Colonels and Generals

I had a friend--I've lost touch with him--who was a police lieutenant in a small city down state. Every night he'd put out the troops. Sometimes he'd ride himself. I asked him once if he ever applied for a job as chief. He hesitated for a second, but then he said "Nah, I like being a cop. A chief is about politics. I'd rather be a cop."

The other day I noodled around with the question as to why Muammar Khaddafi wanted to be colonel rather than general (link). I suggested that in his day, colonels were the real power in the Army, and generals were exhausted volcanoes.

But it maybe it is more, um, general than that. I've heard people say that in the American Army, there is no real shame in retiring as a colonel, because everybody knows that in order to be as general, you have to be a careerism and you have to get into politics. Colonel is the last rank that allows independent thought.

I first heard about David Petraeus in Thomas Rick's Fiasco (link), a fascinating account of the "major combat operations" phase of the current uproar. I carried away a lot from Rick's book, including a question: what did Petraeus do for Rick to get this kind of wet kiss? But I may I should restrain myself: indeed I am pretty much willing to accept the conventional wisdom that Petraeus is bright and imaginative, one of the few who really tried to learn the lessons of Viet Nam and to apply them in Iraq. On the whole, I suspect he still may be about the best we're likely to get for his difficult and important job.

Right now as I write, General Petraeus is enjoying an hour of kissyface with Brit Hume on Fox.

Welcome to politics, general.

Update: And now I hear General Petraeus being interrogated by every liberal's (and my) favorite conservative, Chuck Hagel. Hagel was a sergeant.