American Mob Generals

David Petraeus, U.S. troop commander in the Middle East and Central Asia, recently resorted to using harsh words against our statesmen. This kind of rhetoric has a precedent. Following their defeat on two warfronts in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. army officials apparently had no choice but to express their concealed outrage in the shape of such vicious literature.

Petraeus is a descendant of junior Bush’s legacy in Afghanistan and Iraq. Petraeus is the same non-commissioned general who never decided to understand the current events of world order. It is still widely known how Petraeus, aided by the former U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Cracker, submitted his unfounded reports to Congress. This led him, as a matter of fact, to be ridiculed by the American media.

Petraeus has not changed since Bush’s presidency, and Barack Obama does not differ much from his former counterpart!

Like all U.S. officials, Petraeus is well aware of the consequences of direct confrontation with Tehran. But he prefers to act as the one element of psychological war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. At times, he makes slanderous speeches behind the Islamic Republic, but such verbal attacks have no effect upon Iran, which keeps on its course of action in world order. He should be admitted as agent of the West, someone whose motion or demotion is well illustrated by invisible threads! The geopolitical situation of Iran among the Persian Gulf states and the Middle East, Iran’s large-scale population, its geographical expanse, along with Islamic ideology and independent foreign policy have strengthened Iran’s strategic position.

Under such circumstances, neither praise nor invective from people like Petraeus can affect our country! Petraeus still imagines he is the symbol of American authority but he can vaguely speak of such power! If he is so confident of U.S. military force, why has he failed to inhibit the Taliban and al-Qaida for eight years? This has gone so far to compel Obama to deploy 30,000 additional troops in Afghanistan.

He may be ignorant of what power means! The fact is that the U.S. inevitably resorts to maximum change in line with “minimum stability.” Yet, the Democrats, who are now in disagreement, cannot define and lead this change. Clearly, Washington currently is wrestling with the lack of mid-range strategies. Petraeus remains in suspense in such an illusive climate. Nowadays, America’s puzzle revolves around the young, crisis-affected president who is trying to come to grips with ever-growing speculation in the “multi-polar world.” We should concede that the young president and his aides have not fundamentally defined any cycle in U.S. foreign policy.

It seems Petraeus has been infected by such contagious perplexity! Finally, this non-commissioned general stands nowhere in the world order! He knows well who the real bullish men of the world are: They have been his leaders for the past eight years!