Should Sec of Def. Carter reduce GEN Petraeus back to LTG after he has retired?

If Petreaus is going to be handled in this manner then the same standard should apply to the White House and the former Secretary of State.

Okay...if you are going to handle General Petraeus in this manner, then the White House and the former Secretary of State deserve similar if not more severe punishment given the gravity of the information that has been released. I, for one, am sick of the military being painted as "unethical" when even more grave offenses have been committed by civilians with little or no repercussions.

Dave Petraeus is a good man and has done great things for this country. I have known him for over 40+ years since we were cadets and he has only wanted to do the best job for the good of this country. He made a mistake and admitted to his mistake and took his punishment legally and personally. Enough is enough. This country is considering Hillary Clinton for President. A woman that is dishonest and unethical in every sense of the word: emails, foreign monies for her foundation and the Bengazzi cover-up. When will she be held accountable by this weak administration? The answer is Never because Obama is too worried about his legacy. He will go down in history as the worst President - weak, arrogant, uninformed, etc. The one thing this President could do is to hold Hillary Clinton accountable for her actions or lack of actions. Dave Petraeus paid his dues.

Y'all are all racist bigots who couldn't possibly think career ending bullshit like this would end Obama's term in office on a high note... (sarcasm). Dunno about anyone else, but there is no fucking possible way I'd ever stay in with this shitbag in chief fucking over my commanders like this. I understand my unit roles are different and have no major concern at the D.C. level... Except leadership from the top shows what kinda shit we do in the field. Leave the general alone!

Going back to original question- should the SecDef reduce the General in rank. I say "no". He was judged and sentenced per law. At that time the court may have had the authority to take a star, perhaps not. That's a legal issue I don't have an answer to but IF this is for his "crimes" then it should have been addressed in his sentencing. If not for a convicted offense, and he is retired then I don't believe there is legal grounds to demote him. Think of ramifications if anyone can be demoted after retirement or separation apparently for political reasons. These issues are supposed to be beyond "command interest", including that of SecDef. Changing a legal decision except for commuting sentence just seems wrong, morally and legally.

Then they should reduce Hillary to Civilian for mishandling of classified material...

No. His merits speak louder then anything. He wouldn't be a 4 star general for nothing! Politics is part of the reason this country is going to the dogs.

Short answer ... No! If you didn't include it as part of the original punishment, the only motivation I can see now would be political.

SFC Dave Wynn
Only if Hillary gets punished. Otherwise, I think Petraeus should have his probation terminated and be given his $100,000 back.

Its all about politics. They shut him up before, because if he had been honest, a lie that would have lost an election would have been exposed. So they throw a guy in jail and blame it on a youtube video, and they sack the general so he shuts up. No one cared about his affair, until they wanted to slap him around and tell him to shut up. I am not saying he was not wrong for having an affair, but to me, this is all payback for him not behaving. I am sure they were perfectly happy he was having an affair, because it gave them control over him.