“THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned that General Petraeus is planning on delivering the commencement address at the University of Iowa in 2010.” reports Michael Goldfarb.
But everyone knows that the only reason to go to Iowa for anything ever is to run for President…right? How likely is it?
Petraeus going to Iowa, a state he doesn’t have previous ties to, is going to create a huge amount of buzz about his presidential ambitions because the Iowa Caucuses kick off the whole presidential nomination process. If he does, deliver the address—and Petraeus must know this—it will be seen as a sign that he is thinking about running in 2012.
Previously, it has been thought that Petraeus would not run against a president who had been his Commander in Chief. But there are reports of tension between Petraeus and Obama over both Iraq and Afghan strategy.
Very little is known about Petraues’s politics and no one knows how he would make the transition from soldier to politician. But if he did enter the race, it would shake things up dramatically. He would instantly become a top tier candidate and the most serious threat to Obama’s chances of winning a second term.
He’d certainly have a case to make in the Foreign Policy arena, besides his obvious credentials, there is the matter of Iraq policy specifically that led ForeignPolicy.com to ask: Is it the Obama plan of 2009, or the Petraeus plan of 2007?
Is there any difference between the plan for U.S. troops levels in Iraq that President Obama unveiled recently and this plan that General Petraeus presented to Congress back in 2007? My guess, looking at the general’s envisioned drawdown, is: A little, but not much. (Remember that the plan for a post-2010 “non-combat mission” calls for two combat brigades, re-named advisory units.)