AFGHANISTAN
On the generals and the commander-in-chief ...
President Obama responded swiftly, decisively and correctly ("Obama taps Petraeus, stays course on war," June 24). What will the critics say now -- that Gen. David Petraeus is not qualified to lead? Why can't Republican leaders give the president credit for a sound decision?
Just once, I'd love to hear bipartisan support for our commander-in-chief. In his address, Obama also reminded all of us that the military chain of command falls under civilian leadership in our democracy. Perhaps Republican leaders across the nation can learn something here -- that we are a federal system of government. Governors and local officials must respect the decisions of the federal government, even when the people elect a president the opposition deems undesirable.
Ever since the 2008 elections, we have heard nothing but the shrill voices of the opposition hoping, and in some cases praying, that the president fails. Well, this president is looking more like other great leaders, such as Presidents Ronald Reagan and Franklin Roosevelt, in that he is able to handle a crisis with a calm and measured approach.
How about it, Republicans? Can you give Obama a thumbs-up just this once?
ERICK HIGHUM, FRIDLEY
• • •
President Obama clearly does not have the same temperament or understanding that President Abraham Lincoln had. Gen. Stanley McChrystal was still useful to the war effort in Afghanistan despite his statements about the Obama administration in general and the president in particular.
Obama should have channeled Lincoln and his ability to ignore personal slights in this important decision. I fear that Obama's decision to fire McChrystal will only harm the war effort.