Merged Gen. McChrystal summoned to Washington over Rolling Stone profile

[geni]

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

 

[geni]

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]

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

 

[DavidJames]

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]

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.

 

[Meed]

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.

 

[Meed]

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]

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]

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 ...

 

[Meed]

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]

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/_new...e-house-summons-general-over-remarks#comments

Give 'em hell, Stanley!

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

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)

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]

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:

"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:

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."

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]

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.

 

[Meed]

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

But honestly who cares what they think?

 

[Cain]

But honestly who cares what they think?

Tens of millions of chuckleheads.

 

[Gangularis]

But honestly who cares what they think?

Too many people...

 

[cienaños]

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]

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]

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]

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

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.