Victorious in two wars but crushed by the scorned woman?!

It was with more than a little incredulity that I heard of the stepping down of former four star general and CIA director David Petraeus, last Friday. As much as I felt that it was immediately newsworthy, I also was sure more details would emerge over the weekend to help explain what has turned out to be an extraordinary fall from grace for one of the most esteemed military figures in modern history. In the case of Paula Broadwell, the contrast couldn't be more clear - she suddenly became news, from being a relatively obscure biographer that few had any interest in. 

General Petraeus is something of a legend in the military world, often referred to (both sarcastically as well as in admiration) as "King David" in recognition for leading the surge which helped resolve the war in Iraq, and later replacing the deposed (by Obama) General Stanley McChrystal, while making the bigger impact on the war in Afghanistan.  He has been married for as long as he has been in public service, a hefty 37 years.

Quite what would drive a man of his impeachable record to take a dive onto the wild side is far from clear, but one cannot only look at such heroic figures as the clean cut and polished personas we see on our screens. You don't get to be a four star general who has been a darling of two different presidents from each side of the political divide without being driven by a forest fire of ambition. 

In many cases, that ambition is at the expense of almost anything else - such people go out and take what they want, they don't necessarily wait for someone to give it to them. There are big egos involved in military hierarchy and being a nice guy is not exactly the priority when it comes to rapidly rising through the ranks. Kicking some ass (not kissing some ass, like in Washington) and leading by ruthless example might be more accurate. Fighting wars is serious business, after all.

Then along comes the reasonably pretty Broadwell, all big eyes and in awe of this legend of a military figure, she expressing an interest in military history and education, who could learn so much from the General. They met in 2006 at Harvard where he was giving a speech, and I dare say that the moment he decided to leave her his card so that he might be able to "help in her studies"....well, they both probably knew right then that there was an affair on the cards. I don't know if there is more than coincidence in the fact that Petraeus waited until he became a civilian in 2011, to commence that affair. But it surely isn't a coincidence that he would assert nothing happened until he became a civilian, to avoid charges the military could potentially lay against him. 

Let's cut to the chase, shall we? She was appointed, as a total unknown in biography circles, to be the general's biographer. It started out that he was to be in part the subject of her dissertation but then it somehow turned into a book, and suddenly she had an unusual level of access to the man for someone who had few credentials to warrant it. Don't get me wrong, she seems to be a tough cookie, apparently wears the pants at home, and has academic credentials as well as being a reserve counter-intelligence specialist, but would never have been the obvious choice to have the access and security clearance as official biographer of a four star general on active duty. 

What broke the story open, and remains a focal point for intelligence committees in both Congress and the Senate, is what were the FBI doing spying on the CIA Director in the first place?! How come Obama did not know of it? When did Obama become aware of it? Was it kept quiet until after Obama got reelected, a move that would surprise few? At first glance, the FBI interest was  reportedly due to incriminating emails that had been detected between the CIA Director and Broadwell, but sadly the story got even seedier as the weekend progressed. It appears that the affair, in and of itself, was not what brought Petraeus down, but rather it was the almost incomprehensible actions of his mistress after he broke it off. 

It transpired that Broadwell sent threatening emails to another woman, Jill Kelley, who is a civilian that organizes military parties and who had become (along with her husband) friends with the Petraeus clan. In a staggeringly unsophisticated move, Broadwell apparently warned Kelley to "stay away from my guy" and included "I know what you did......back off!" and so on. Kelley, a shocked mother of three, went to the FBI who began an investigation of the situation. It was not long after that when the whole affair became stage center and the house of cards came crashing down. 

Quite what made Broadwell return to her high school days and act like a jealous, scorned 14-year-old schoolgirl rather than a mature woman, wife and mother of two is beyond me. Especially given her knowledge of intelligence matters, she simply had to know that such threatening emails to do with the Director of the CIA had to lead to trouble - primarily for him. He ended the affair, so she would put an end to him?

It's a story as old as us all. Public, powerful man has affair with unknown woman in awe of him or his stature or his money, or all three, then when he has to go back to reality, he flushes her, she is furious, and at the very least wants the world to know that she had him, in this case apparently out of pure ego and jealousy. What do you mean? You get to stay on as a famous person with a great reputation, and I go back to deeper obscurity?!  No!!!

"What? I won't be ignored, Dan!". Err, sorry, I mean David. Think I was channeling a little Fatal Attraction there, but you get my drift! It's all lovey dovey and hunky dory, until your ties to CIA Director level glamour and secrecy are cut, presumably unceremoniously. 

It's truly ironic that nothing in the rough and tough world of climbing military command hierarchy, nor during fighting two vicious wars, could tumble the force that was General David Petraeus. It was an extramarital affair that did it. Or more accurately, it was the reaction of the (now) clearly unstable mistress upon being exited that did it. Had she never sent the threatening emails to Jill Kelley, the FBI would probably never have stumbled upon what appeared at first to be some kind of love triangle involving the Director of the CIA.

Even more ironically but perhaps not totally undesirably, Broadwell's (and Loeb's) book "All in: The education of General David Petraeus" was not even in the top 100,000 books on Amazon's best seller list last Thursday. Today? Inside the top 100! So she even gets to financially benefit from the affair and her ultimate exposure of it. Sex sells, and it seems human nature cannot avoid either the pursuit of it or reading about another's pursuit of it, even if in this case, the book is the total opposite of a "Fifty Shades of the General" affair! Well, in the actual text it's not, at least. But now people get to read something entirely different and way more titillating between the lines!

I don't believe that his "resignation" is some kind of move to avoid testifying at the inquiry into events in Benghazi that resulted in the death of four Americans. It was the last trip that Petraeus took in fact, to look into what happened over there, and he is much too honorable a man to not show up if asked, especially as he is the only man who can really answer certain questions to do with CIA knowledge/strategy at that time. It is pretty certain that DNI James Clapper forced his hand and his exit, as sources reported.  

I can't think of a more outrageous fall from grace for a man who is still widely respected and admired by many in Washington and beyond. The crash is reminiscent of another recent story involving a certain Lance Armstrong.  I guess the message is rather clear in both cases - cheating just doesn't pay, in the long term! - Kevin Mc