[Merged] Gen. McChrystal summoned to Washington over Rolling Stone profile

Puppycow · 22nd June 2010, 05:07 AM

The war in Afghanistan doesn't seem to be going very well, and now this:

Gen. Stanley McChrystal summoned to Washington following magazine profile

Quote:

KABUL -- The top U.S. general in Afghanistan was headed to Washington early Tuesday for an impromptu White House meeting, after apologizing for an upcoming magazine article that portrays him and his staff as flippant and dismissive of top Obama administration officials involved in Afghanistan policy.

The profile in Rolling Stone magazine, titled the "Runaway General," is certain to increase tension between the White House and Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

It also raises fresh questions about the judgment and leadership style of the commander Obama appointed last year in an effort to turn around a worsening conflict.

McChrystal and some of his senior advisors are quoted criticizing top administration officials, at times in starkly derisive terms. An anonymous McChrystal aide is quoted calling national security adviser James Jones a "clown," who remains "stuck in 1985."

Referring to Richard Holbrooke, Obama's senior envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, one McChrystal aide is quoted saying: "The Boss says he's like a wounded animal. Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous."

On one occasion, McChrystal appears to react with exasperation when he receives an e-mail from Holbrooke, saying, "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke. I don't even want to read it."

U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, a retired three-star general, isn't spared. Referring to a leaked cable from Eikenberry that expressed concerns about the trustworthiness of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, McChrystal is quoted as having said: "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.'"

A U.S. embassy spokeswoman said she had no immediate comment on the piece.

The story also features an exchange in which McChrystal and some of his aides appear to mock Vice President Biden, who opposed McChrystal's troop surge recommendation last year and instead urged instead for a more focused emphasis on counter-terrorism operations.

"Are you asking me about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal asks the profile's reporter a at one point, laughing. "Who's that?"

"Biden?" an unnamed aide is quoted as saying. "Did you say Bite me?"
. . .
The timing of the piece could hardly be worse. Amid a flurry of bad news in Afghanistan and a sharp rise in NATO casualties, U.S. lawmakers and senior officials from NATO allied countries are asking increasingly sharp questions about the U.S.-led war strategy.

Who hasn't badmouthed their boss behind his back? In front of a reporter though?

I hate to bring up Vietnam again, but it seems like we have the same kind of problem. Our so-called "allies" in Afghanistan are basically corrupt and no match for the bad guys. Or is this just a "darkest before the dawn" moment? Things seemed to be pretty bad in 2006 and 2007 in Iraq before they started to get better.

Cleon · 22nd June 2010, 05:12 AM

Bad-mouthing your boss is one thing, but bad-mouthing your boss in the military is a bit of a no-no.

And doing it in front of a reporter, when you're a publicly known high-ranking official, is really just stupid.

leftysergeant · 22nd June 2010, 05:22 AM

Hand him his blue card and tear up his weapons card.

Puppycow · 22nd June 2010, 09:11 AM

Here is the profile

Gangularis · 22nd June 2010, 09:34 AM

Obama haters are gonna love this!

Augustine · 22nd June 2010, 09:42 AM

Meh. Tempest in a teacup. This might be great for RS's lagging sales, but I didn't see anything to justify the outcry from the pundit class. I wonder how many read the article?

Malerin · 22nd June 2010, 10:00 AM

We put up with way worse than this from Patton. Of course, Patton was a legend in his own time. I don't know much about McChrystal.

Metullus · 22nd June 2010, 10:10 AM

I am neither surprised nor offended by the sentiments expressed in the article; that a theater commander would permit such talk with outsiders present is a another matter. At the very least it betrays an astounding level of naiveté on the part of command and senior staff.

Ziggurat · 22nd June 2010, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by Gangularis

Obama haters are gonna love this!

You might be surprised.

"So far, McChrystal hasn’t earned enough leash by winning anything. Regardless of what one thinks of the current C-in-C [the author doesn't like him], Obama is still the man elected by the people to run the executive branch and the military. The picture this article paints is one of a lack of discipline and respect, and the White House has every right to demand an apology and replace McChrystal with someone who understands better the subtleties of overall command and its politics."

Brainster · 22nd June 2010, 10:45 AM

McChrystal sounds like he knows his subject; his opinion of Biden strikes me as right on the money. Not very smart to reveal this to a reporter from Rotting Stump, of course.

EvilSmurf · 22nd June 2010, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Augustine

This might be great for RS's lagging sales

RS has actually been doing some amazing political journalism of late. They had one guy reporter who basically broke the Goldman Sachs stuff.

theprestige · 22nd June 2010, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by Gangularis

Obama haters are gonna love this!

Why?

theprestige · 22nd June 2010, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by Gangularis

Obama haters are gonna love this!

Why?

ETA: I mean, I'm genuinely curious to learn your reasoning as to why I--an avowed Obama hater--would love this.

dtugg · 22nd June 2010, 03:42 PM

This is certainly a fireable offense. But unless there is somebody who is up to speed right now, it would probably be a mistake to fire him.

leftysergeant · 22nd June 2010, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Why?

ETA: I mean, I'm genuinely curious to learn your reasoning as to why I--an avowed Obama hater--would love this.

You have reason to be concerned. That the moron mouthed off about the president sort of supports the left's position that the extreme right knows nothing about the military and is destructive to proper morale, an example of that being this ranting, self-righteous poppinjaay talking smack in public about his superiors.

The Obama-basher give aid and comfort to loose cannons like McChrystal. So far, the only general I have heard defend McChrystal is that jerk McCaffery. Figures.

Cain · 22nd June 2010, 03:53 PM

I don't know much about McChrystal, but it sounds like he has a titanic ego. Also, I'd like to know how journalists go about ingratiating themselves with their subjects.

dudalb · 22nd June 2010, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You might be surprised.

"So far, McChrystal hasn’t earned enough leash by winning anything. Regardless of what one thinks of the current C-in-C [the author doesn't like him], Obama is still the man elected by the people to run the executive branch and the military. The picture this article paints is one of a lack of discipline and respect, and the White House has every right to demand an apology and replace McChrystal with someone who understands better the subtleties of overall command and its politics."

Shades of Truman/MacArthur...except that McChrystal is no Mac Arthur,and the GOP will have a hard time making him a Matyr.

Cleon · 22nd June 2010, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by Cain

I don't know much about McChrystal, but it sounds like he has a titanic ego.

I would think it remarkable if someone could rise to one of the highest ranks in the US military and not develop a bit of an ego.

leftysergeant · 22nd June 2010, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Cleon

I would think it remarkable if someone could rise to one of the highest ranks in the US military and not develop a bit of an ego.

I never had a problem with Eisenhower's attitude.

ravdin · 22nd June 2010, 06:58 PM

I doubt that McChrystal, like any other general, would tolerate that kind of insubordination from anyone under his own command.

The president needs to send a clear reminder to the top brass that they have the privilege to command at his pleasure. I won't think much of him if McChrystal still has a job tomorrow.

geni · 22nd June 2010, 06:59 PM

Given his background I feel this falls within what is to be expected.

geni · 22nd June 2010, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by ravdin

I doubt that McChrystal, like any other general, would tolerate that kind of insubordination from anyone under his own command.

Former special forces. If that has ever included delta force he probably has.

Cleon · 22nd June 2010, 07:11 PM

Prediction: Within a year he shows up as a FOX News analyst.

DavidJames · 22nd June 2010, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by Cleon

Prediction: Within a year he shows up as a FOX News analyst.

Maybe sooner. If he's let go he will immediately become a Republican hero. His name will be tossed about as VP material if not a presidential candidate.

Yes, the Republicans are that desperate and shallow.

JoeTheJuggler · 22nd June 2010, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You might be surprised.

"So far, McChrystal hasn’t earned enough leash by winning anything. Regardless of what one thinks of the current C-in-C [the author doesn't like him], Obama is still the man elected by the people to run the executive branch and the military. The picture this article paints is one of a lack of discipline and respect, and the White House has every right to demand an apology and replace McChrystal with someone who understands better the subtleties of overall command and its politics."

Yeah, that's what I would've thought.

The chain of command up to the Commander in Chief is a pretty big deal in the military. They always say to leave politics out of it. There's a very important constitutional basis for this too. If the general were militarily superior to the president, we could easily head to a military dictatorship. But luckily, when someone even talks this way, the military (and the rest of us) take it pretty seriously.

I can see honest Obama opponents being very critical of McChrystal on this.

cornsail · 22nd June 2010, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by Cleon

Prediction: Within a year he shows up as a FOX News analyst.

McChrystal voted for Obama and his strategy is largely focused on minimizing civilian casualties. I can't see Fox viewers having much respect for him.

I'm liberal as hell and I think he's a great general. I was sad to see the article though. Even though the negative comments about the WH were pretty much all given to the journalist by McChrystal's aides, rather than McChrystal himself, he does bear some responsibility. But I don't think he engaged intentional insubordination, nor do I think he should be fired.

cornsail · 22nd June 2010, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

You have reason to be concerned. That the moron mouthed off about the president sort of supports the left's position that the extreme right knows nothing about the military and is destructive to proper morale, an example of that being this ranting, self-righteous poppinjaay talking smack in public about his superiors.

He didn't "mouth off" about the president publically as far as I can see, he mouthed off to his aides who then passed it on to a journalist.

leftysergeant · 22nd June 2010, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by cornsail

He didn't "mouth off" about the president publically as far as I can see, he mouthed off to his aides who then passed it on to a journalist.

He also conducted himself in a particularly loutish manner around the reporter.

Darth Rotor · 22nd June 2010, 08:27 PM

UCMJ Article 88. It is pretty simple in terms of guidance and concrete "thou shalt not" regarding who and what.

If he lets his staff get away with that kind of mouthing off, in his presence, that's not setting the proper command climate.

I don't see this going well for the General. At his level, you can't ignore politics. It comes with the badge. I don't think Obama wants to fire this man, as he picked him over the other guy he fired, but he too has political issues to consider in his decision.

As to loose talk around reporters, the senior officers and staff weenies in all four services know good and damned well the price for that. There seems to be a bit of stupid in the water at the HQ in Afghanistan ...

Admiral Mack got relieved as CINCPACFLT (or was it US CINC PAC?) for a hell of a lot less than this ...

cornsail · 22nd June 2010, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

He also conducted himself in a particularly loutish manner around the reporter.

I wouldn't say that's apparent. But even if somewhat true, not that big of a deal.

Gangularis · 22nd June 2010, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Why?

ETA: I mean, I'm genuinely curious to learn your reasoning as to why I--an avowed Obama hater--would love this.

The reason I believe Obama haters will love this, is simple. Much the same as they take any other thing that has to do with Obama, in their partisanship, they will spin it according to their agenda. The angle I see most likely to be played is something of the lines of; "Obama doesn't know how to lead the military... He's lost control of his generals.. He doesn't listen to his ground forces... He's weak.. etc.."

From what I've seen, their hatred of the president is more than enough to rally behind crazy ideas of birtherism.. In fact, it seems some of them are willing to rally behind anyone that hates the president, regardless of the reason.. So why wouldn't they rally behind high level military that disrespect the president? Has the vehemently anti-Obama crowd really shown themselves to be that fair and rational in your mind? If so, you're watching an entirely different crowd of people than I am.. I am NOT talking about level headed moderates that disagree with the president.. I'm talking about the same types that adore Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.. Do you consider yourself one of them?

ETA: Perfect example of what I'm talking about:

http://world-news.newsvine.com/_news...marks#comments

Originally Posted by J*68728

Give 'em hell, Stanley!

Originally Posted by biznine

Brave man. Now that we have identified the enemy (girly men in the WH) they need be fired! Wait! that would have to include Obama.

BO if full of BS

Originally Posted by Mixman34

SAGG it's cause the pres has no idea what he's doing and the majority of the people would side with McChrystal hands down. Barry knows NOT how to run a war.

(BTW, Bush has been out of office for 1.5 years, move on brotha)

Originally Posted by BobInFL

This is unf_ckingbelievable! President Urkel has now alienated his top generals and he is losing the war. When GWB was in charge, the taliban and al qaeda were in disarray and hundreds of thousands were killed. And US military deaths were almost down to nothing. Now we are losing dozens of sooldiers a week, the taliban and al qaeda are again flourishing, and obama has lost control of the top brass.

Don't blame me. I didn't vote for this community organizer / worst president in US history.

Cain · 22nd June 2010, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by Cleon

I would think it remarkable if someone could rise to one of the highest ranks in the US military and not develop a bit of an ego.

Which is probably true for most people who become top dog in their field. Still, from the article this guy says:

Quote:

"I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says.

He pauses a beat.

"Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it."

Also:

Quote:

He prefers Bud Light Lime (his favorite beer) to Bordeaux, Talladega Nights (his favorite movie) to Jean-Luc Godard.

Unless he's lying, he should be fired from the planet for criminally poor taste. A Will Ferrel movie?

Re: "Becoming a Fox News Analyst"

According to the article, he voted for Obama, but said 44 appeared "intimidated" when meeting with the military. The writer gave the sense that McChrystal thought Obama was a lightweight. If this guy gets fired for "taking a stand," so be it. I'm reasonably confident Democrats would have cheered if a General had unkind words for the Bush administration while in office. Obama never got enough **** for framing Afghanistan as the "good war."

Quote:

The general's staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs. There's a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority.

That's funny. I gotta say, as much as I loathe the military, those guys have a sense of humor, as well as a way with words. Sort of like rappers.

Puppycow · 22nd June 2010, 11:32 PM

Dana Milbank stirs the pot. Summary: "Are you going to let him talk smack about you?" Basically just calling Obama's manhood into question.

John Dickerson makes the opposite case, pointing out that McChrystal himself didn't actually say anything insubordinate, and pointing out his centrality to the strategy.

cornsail · 22nd June 2010, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by Gangularis

I'm talking about the same types that adore Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc..

But honestly who cares what they think?

Cain · 23rd June 2010, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by cornsail

But honestly who cares what they think?

Tens of millions of chuckleheads.

Gangularis · 23rd June 2010, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by cornsail

But honestly who cares what they think?

Too many people...

cienaños · 23rd June 2010, 02:12 AM

It might be part of a larger strategy. I mean, it's pulling some attention toward the war, isn't it? Maybe the general just needs a few more grenades to finish the job.

Obama has some at his pad.

leftysergeant · 23rd June 2010, 04:11 AM

There is no way you can be an effective commander and let a subordinate tell you that he is going to do things his way because he knows everything. Obama gave the whackjob most of what he wanted and this is the way he wants to act? He is surrounded by the sort who think that the military should set policies as well as develop strategies. This is how barbariabn empires work, not modern democracies.

Fire the jerk.

NoZed Avenger · 23rd June 2010, 04:54 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

UCMJ Article 88. It is pretty simple in terms of guidance and concrete "thou shalt not" regarding who and what.

Wait. I thought military leaders making public statements critical of the Administration and its policies were brave whistleblowers who, despite the military code, are worried enough to bring attention to serious proble-

Whoops. Sorry. Had my watch set for 2004.

Augustine · 23rd June 2010, 05:44 AM

I think violations of UCMJ Article 88 are a stretch. A really big stretch.

I don't see any insubordination. Any comparison to MacArthur is overblown; that was insubordination, i.e. deliberately undermining and subverting the intent and policy of the administration.

To me, the biggest problem I have with the article is the issue of judgment. Strategic communication, getting your message out, countering the opposition message, staying on message - these are all critical to the success of COIN. To relinquish control of your message to a reporter from RS of all places is mind-boggling.

Surely these guys know that there is the domestic message, the international message, and the Afghanistan message, and ALL have to be on target.

O/T

Quote:

RS has actually been doing some amazing political journalism of late. They had one guy reporter who basically broke the Goldman Sachs stuff.

I hope you're not talking about Taibbi.

22nd June 2010, 05:07 AM	#1
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 15,780	Gen. McChrystal summoned to Washington over Rolling Stone profile The war in Afghanistan doesn't seem to be going very well, and now this: Gen. Stanley McChrystal summoned to Washington following magazine profile Quote: KABUL -- The top U.S. general in Afghanistan was headed to Washington early Tuesday for an impromptu White House meeting, after apologizing for an upcoming magazine article that portrays him and his staff as flippant and dismissive of top Obama administration officials involved in Afghanistan policy. The profile in Rolling Stone magazine, titled the "Runaway General," is certain to increase tension between the White House and Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It also raises fresh questions about the judgment and leadership style of the commander Obama appointed last year in an effort to turn around a worsening conflict. McChrystal and some of his senior advisors are quoted criticizing top administration officials, at times in starkly derisive terms. An anonymous McChrystal aide is quoted calling national security adviser James Jones a "clown," who remains "stuck in 1985." Referring to Richard Holbrooke, Obama's senior envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, one McChrystal aide is quoted saying: "The Boss says he's like a wounded animal. Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous." On one occasion, McChrystal appears to react with exasperation when he receives an e-mail from Holbrooke, saying, "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke. I don't even want to read it." U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, a retired three-star general, isn't spared. Referring to a leaked cable from Eikenberry that expressed concerns about the trustworthiness of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, McChrystal is quoted as having said: "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.'" A U.S. embassy spokeswoman said she had no immediate comment on the piece. The story also features an exchange in which McChrystal and some of his aides appear to mock Vice President Biden, who opposed McChrystal's troop surge recommendation last year and instead urged instead for a more focused emphasis on counter-terrorism operations. "Are you asking me about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal asks the profile's reporter a at one point, laughing. "Who's that?" "Biden?" an unnamed aide is quoted as saying. "Did you say Bite me?" . . . The timing of the piece could hardly be worse. Amid a flurry of bad news in Afghanistan and a sharp rise in NATO casualties, U.S. lawmakers and senior officials from NATO allied countries are asking increasingly sharp questions about the U.S.-led war strategy. Who hasn't badmouthed their boss behind his back? In front of a reporter though? I hate to bring up Vietnam again, but it seems like we have the same kind of problem. Our so-called "allies" in Afghanistan are basically corrupt and no match for the bad guys. Or is this just a "darkest before the dawn" moment? Things seemed to be pretty bad in 2006 and 2007 in Iraq before they started to get better.
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

22nd June 2010, 05:12 AM	#2
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,534	Bad-mouthing your boss is one thing, but bad-mouthing your boss in the military is a bit of a no-no. And doing it in front of a reporter, when you're a publicly known high-ranking official, is really just stupid.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

22nd June 2010, 09:11 AM	#4
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 15,780	Here is the profile
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

22nd June 2010, 09:42 AM	#6
Augustine Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 893	Meh. Tempest in a teacup. This might be great for RS's lagging sales, but I didn't see anything to justify the outcry from the pundit class. I wonder how many read the article?
Augustine Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 893

22nd June 2010, 10:00 AM	#7
Malerin Banned Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 3,341	We put up with way worse than this from Patton. Of course, Patton was a legend in his own time. I don't know much about McChrystal.
Malerin Banned Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 3,341

22nd June 2010, 05:22 AM	#3
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Hand him his blue card and tear up his weapons card.

22nd June 2010, 09:34 AM	#5
Gangularis Muse Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Barberton, Ohio Posts: 985	Obama haters are gonna love this!

22nd June 2010, 10:10 AM	#8
Metullus Forum ¾-Wit Pro Tem Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Waldo's Pond Posts: 3,966	I am neither surprised nor offended by the sentiments expressed in the article; that a theater commander would permit such talk with outsiders present is a another matter. At the very least it betrays an astounding level of naiveté on the part of command and senior staff.
	__________________ I have met Tim at TAM. He is of sufficient height to piss on your leg. - Doubt 10/7/2005 Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons. - Will Cuppy

22nd June 2010, 10:35 AM	#9
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,203	Originally Posted by Gangularis Obama haters are gonna love this! You might be surprised. "So far, McChrystal hasn’t earned enough leash by winning anything. Regardless of what one thinks of the current C-in-C [the author doesn't like him], Obama is still the man elected by the people to run the executive branch and the military. The picture this article paints is one of a lack of discipline and respect, and the White House has every right to demand an apology and replace McChrystal with someone who understands better the subtleties of overall command and its politics."
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

22nd June 2010, 10:45 AM	#10
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,434	McChrystal sounds like he knows his subject; his opinion of Biden strikes me as right on the money. Not very smart to reveal this to a reporter from Rotting Stump, of course.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

22nd June 2010, 03:30 PM	#11
EvilSmurf JREF Bowl Pool Champion Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: The USA Posts: 1,551	Originally Posted by Augustine This might be great for RS's lagging sales RS has actually been doing some amazing political journalism of late. They had one guy reporter who basically broke the Goldman Sachs stuff.
	__________________ Ah, Australian animals. If it isn't venomous, carnivorous, or has foot-long claws, it's a tourist.

22nd June 2010, 03:37 PM	#12
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,628	Originally Posted by Gangularis Obama haters are gonna love this! Why?
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,628

22nd June 2010, 03:38 PM	#13
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,628	Originally Posted by Gangularis Obama haters are gonna love this! Why? ETA: I mean, I'm genuinely curious to learn your reasoning as to why I--an avowed Obama hater--would love this.
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,628

22nd June 2010, 03:42 PM	#14
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	This is certainly a fireable offense. But unless there is somebody who is up to speed right now, it would probably be a mistake to fire him.

22nd June 2010, 03:45 PM	#15
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by theprestige Why? ETA: I mean, I'm genuinely curious to learn your reasoning as to why I--an avowed Obama hater--would love this. You have reason to be concerned. That the moron mouthed off about the president sort of supports the left's position that the extreme right knows nothing about the military and is destructive to proper morale, an example of that being this ranting, self-righteous poppinjaay talking smack in public about his superiors. The Obama-basher give aid and comfort to loose cannons like McChrystal. So far, the only general I have heard defend McChrystal is that jerk McCaffery. Figures.

22nd June 2010, 03:53 PM	#16
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,939	I don't know much about McChrystal, but it sounds like he has a titanic ego. Also, I'd like to know how journalists go about ingratiating themselves with their subjects.
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

22nd June 2010, 04:10 PM	#17
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,836	Originally Posted by Ziggurat You might be surprised. "So far, McChrystal hasn’t earned enough leash by winning anything. Regardless of what one thinks of the current C-in-C [the author doesn't like him], Obama is still the man elected by the people to run the executive branch and the military. The picture this article paints is one of a lack of discipline and respect, and the White House has every right to demand an apology and replace McChrystal with someone who understands better the subtleties of overall command and its politics." Shades of Truman/MacArthur...except that McChrystal is no Mac Arthur,and the GOP will have a hard time making him a Matyr.

22nd June 2010, 05:28 PM	#18
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,534	Originally Posted by Cain I don't know much about McChrystal, but it sounds like he has a titanic ego. I would think it remarkable if someone could rise to one of the highest ranks in the US military and not develop a bit of an ego.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

22nd June 2010, 06:49 PM	#19
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by Cleon I would think it remarkable if someone could rise to one of the highest ranks in the US military and not develop a bit of an ego. I never had a problem with Eisenhower's attitude.

22nd June 2010, 06:58 PM	#20
ravdin Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,566	I doubt that McChrystal, like any other general, would tolerate that kind of insubordination from anyone under his own command. The president needs to send a clear reminder to the top brass that they have the privilege to command at his pleasure. I won't think much of him if McChrystal still has a job tomorrow.
	__________________ If wishes were horses, we'd all be eating steak. -Jayne Cobb Believe what you're told. There would be chaos if everyone thought for themselves. -Top Dog slogan

22nd June 2010, 06:59 PM	#21
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,575	Given his background I feel this falls within what is to be expected.

22nd June 2010, 07:01 PM	#22
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,575	Originally Posted by ravdin I doubt that McChrystal, like any other general, would tolerate that kind of insubordination from anyone under his own command. Former special forces. If that has ever included delta force he probably has.

22nd June 2010, 07:11 PM	#23
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,534	Prediction: Within a year he shows up as a FOX News analyst.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

22nd June 2010, 07:55 PM	#24
DavidJames Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 7,088	Originally Posted by Cleon Prediction: Within a year he shows up as a FOX News analyst. Maybe sooner. If he's let go he will immediately become a Republican hero. His name will be tossed about as VP material if not a presidential candidate. Yes, the Republicans are that desperate and shallow.
	__________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.

22nd June 2010, 07:57 PM	#25
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,819	Originally Posted by Ziggurat You might be surprised. "So far, McChrystal hasn’t earned enough leash by winning anything. Regardless of what one thinks of the current C-in-C [the author doesn't like him], Obama is still the man elected by the people to run the executive branch and the military. The picture this article paints is one of a lack of discipline and respect, and the White House has every right to demand an apology and replace McChrystal with someone who understands better the subtleties of overall command and its politics." Yeah, that's what I would've thought. The chain of command up to the Commander in Chief is a pretty big deal in the military. They always say to leave politics out of it. There's a very important constitutional basis for this too. If the general were militarily superior to the president, we could easily head to a military dictatorship. But luckily, when someone even talks this way, the military (and the rest of us) take it pretty seriously. I can see honest Obama opponents being very critical of McChrystal on this.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

22nd June 2010, 08:09 PM	#26
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	Originally Posted by Cleon Prediction: Within a year he shows up as a FOX News analyst. McChrystal voted for Obama and his strategy is largely focused on minimizing civilian casualties. I can't see Fox viewers having much respect for him. I'm liberal as hell and I think he's a great general. I was sad to see the article though. Even though the negative comments about the WH were pretty much all given to the journalist by McChrystal's aides, rather than McChrystal himself, he does bear some responsibility. But I don't think he engaged intentional insubordination, nor do I think he should be fired.

22nd June 2010, 08:13 PM	#27
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	Originally Posted by leftysergeant You have reason to be concerned. That the moron mouthed off about the president sort of supports the left's position that the extreme right knows nothing about the military and is destructive to proper morale, an example of that being this ranting, self-righteous poppinjaay talking smack in public about his superiors. He didn't "mouth off" about the president publically as far as I can see, he mouthed off to his aides who then passed it on to a journalist.

22nd June 2010, 08:19 PM	#28
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by cornsail He didn't "mouth off" about the president publically as far as I can see, he mouthed off to his aides who then passed it on to a journalist. He also conducted himself in a particularly loutish manner around the reporter.

22nd June 2010, 08:27 PM	#29
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,265	UCMJ Article 88. It is pretty simple in terms of guidance and concrete "thou shalt not" regarding who and what. If he lets his staff get away with that kind of mouthing off, in his presence, that's not setting the proper command climate. I don't see this going well for the General. At his level, you can't ignore politics. It comes with the badge. I don't think Obama wants to fire this man, as he picked him over the other guy he fired, but he too has political issues to consider in his decision. As to loose talk around reporters, the senior officers and staff weenies in all four services know good and damned well the price for that. There seems to be a bit of stupid in the water at the HQ in Afghanistan ... Admiral Mack got relieved as CINCPACFLT (or was it US CINC PAC?) for a hell of a lot less than this ...
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 22nd June 2010 at 08:28 PM.

22nd June 2010, 08:33 PM	#30
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	Originally Posted by leftysergeant He also conducted himself in a particularly loutish manner around the reporter. I wouldn't say that's apparent. But even if somewhat true, not that big of a deal.

22nd June 2010, 10:19 PM	#31
Gangularis Muse Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Barberton, Ohio Posts: 985	Originally Posted by theprestige Why? ETA: I mean, I'm genuinely curious to learn your reasoning as to why I--an avowed Obama hater--would love this. The reason I believe Obama haters will love this, is simple. Much the same as they take any other thing that has to do with Obama, in their partisanship, they will spin it according to their agenda. The angle I see most likely to be played is something of the lines of; "Obama doesn't know how to lead the military... He's lost control of his generals.. He doesn't listen to his ground forces... He's weak.. etc.." From what I've seen, their hatred of the president is more than enough to rally behind crazy ideas of birtherism.. In fact, it seems some of them are willing to rally behind anyone that hates the president, regardless of the reason.. So why wouldn't they rally behind high level military that disrespect the president? Has the vehemently anti-Obama crowd really shown themselves to be that fair and rational in your mind? If so, you're watching an entirely different crowd of people than I am.. I am NOT talking about level headed moderates that disagree with the president.. I'm talking about the same types that adore Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.. Do you consider yourself one of them? ETA: Perfect example of what I'm talking about: http://world-news.newsvine.com/_news...marks#comments Originally Posted by *J68728 Give 'em hell, Stanley! Originally Posted by biznine Brave man. Now that we have identified the enemy (girly men in the WH) they need be fired! Wait! that would have to include Obama. BO if full of BS Originally Posted by Mixman34 SAGG it's cause the pres has no idea what he's doing and the majority of the people would side with McChrystal hands down. Barry knows NOT how to run a war. (BTW, Bush has been out of office for 1.5 years, move on brotha) Originally Posted by BobInFL** This is unf_ckingbelievable! President Urkel has now alienated his top generals and he is losing the war. When GWB was in charge, the taliban and al qaeda were in disarray and hundreds of thousands were killed. And US military deaths were almost down to nothing. Now we are losing dozens of sooldiers a week, the taliban and al qaeda are again flourishing, and obama has lost control of the top brass. Don't blame me. I didn't vote for this community organizer / worst president in US history.
	Last edited by Gangularis; 22nd June 2010 at 10:44 PM.

22nd June 2010, 10:41 PM	#32
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,939	Originally Posted by Cleon I would think it remarkable if someone could rise to one of the highest ranks in the US military and not develop a bit of an ego. Which is probably true for most people who become top dog in their field. Still, from the article this guy says: Quote: "I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says. He pauses a beat. "Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it." Also: Quote: He prefers Bud Light Lime (his favorite beer) to Bordeaux, Talladega Nights (his favorite movie) to Jean-Luc Godard. Unless he's lying, he should be fired from the planet for criminally poor taste. A Will Ferrel movie? Re: "Becoming a Fox News Analyst" According to the article, he voted for Obama, but said 44 appeared "intimidated" when meeting with the military. The writer gave the sense that McChrystal thought Obama was a lightweight. If this guy gets fired for "taking a stand," so be it. I'm reasonably confident Democrats would have cheered if a General had unkind words for the Bush administration while in office. Obama never got enough **** for framing Afghanistan as the "good war." Quote: The general's staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs. There's a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority. That's funny. I gotta say, as much as I loathe the military, those guys have a sense of humor, as well as a way with words. Sort of like rappers.
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

22nd June 2010, 11:32 PM	#33
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 15,780	Dana Milbank stirs the pot. Summary: "Are you going to let him talk smack about you?" Basically just calling Obama's manhood into question. John Dickerson makes the opposite case, pointing out that McChrystal himself didn't actually say anything insubordinate, and pointing out his centrality to the strategy.
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

22nd June 2010, 11:34 PM	#34
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	Originally Posted by Gangularis I'm talking about the same types that adore Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.. But honestly who cares what they think?

23rd June 2010, 12:05 AM	#35
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,939	Originally Posted by cornsail But honestly who cares what they think? Tens of millions of chuckleheads.
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.