http://www.politico.com/static/PPM130_r1109mcchrystal.html

6/22/2010 9:19:23 AM

I love it.... Looking forward to finding out whether Obama will fire him or not. Normally, I would say he would but lately Obama has been such a lilly liver, I can't really say with any certainty that he will.

Either way this is really bad for Obama, because McChrystal was his choice as general over there.

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 9:49 AM. Reason : ]

6/22/2010 9:49:12 AM

6/22/2010 9:49:59 AM

text:

Quote :

" The top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has been summoned to the White House to explain biting and unflattering remarks he made to a freelance writer about President Barack Obama and others in the Obama administration. The face-to-face comes as pundits are already calling for McChrystal to resign for insubordination. McChrystal has been instructed to fly from Kabul to Washington today to attend Obama’s regular monthly security team meeting tomorrow at the White House. An administration official says McChrystal was asked to attend in person rather than by secure video teleconference, “where he will have to explain to the Pentagon and the commander in chief his quotes about his colleagues in the piece.” Both Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have spoken with McChrystal. Capt. John Kirby, a spokesman for Mullen, said “the chairman spoke to General McChrystal last night and expressed his deep disappointment with the article and with the comments expressed therein.” McChrystal and his top aides appeared to let their guard down during a series of interviews and visits with Michael Hastings, a freelance writer for the magazine Rolling Stone. The article, titled “The Runaway General,” appears in the magazine later this week. It contains a number of jabs by McChrystal and his staff aimed not only at the President but at Vice President Biden, special envoy Richard Holbrooke, Karl Eikenberry, the ambassador to Afghanistan, and others. McChrystal described his first meeting with Obama as disappointing and said that Obama was unprepared for the meeting. National Security Advisor Jim Jones is described by a McChrystal aide as a “clown” stuck in 1985. Others aides joked about Biden’s last name as sounding like “Bite me” since Biden opposed the surge. McChrystal issued an immediate apology for the profile, advance copies of which were sent to news organizations last night. “It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened,” McChrystal said. “Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard. I have enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his national security team, and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting this war and I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome.” NATO issued a statement overnight indicating continued support for McChrystal despite the “unfortunate article.” It will be hard for the White House to get past this since the remarks appear to amount to some level of insubordination. “This general has to be fired, he has to be gone by the end of the day,” said Joe Scarborough, on “Morning Joe” on MSNBC. “Gates and Petraeus have to come out and fire McChrystal.” They should have already done it - Petreaus and Gates should have already fired McChrystal.” But analysts who are close to the situation and know McChrystal well believe that while the remarks were wrong, it would be a bigger mistake to let McChrystal go at such a critical time in the war. “He made a big mistake, but he is a fantastic general, and not only that but a modest man who is respectful of others,” says Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at Brookings. “That makes these comments even more uncharacteristic and unfortunate," he said. "We need him, and Ambassador Eikenberry, for this effort, and I am confident knowing both men well that they can put these issues behind them for the greater good.” McChrystal, an expert on counter-terrorism and counterinsurgency, has long been thought to be uniquely qualified to lead in Afghanistan. But he is not known for being media savvy. Hastings, who has covered the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for two years, according to the magazine, is not well known within the Defense Department. And as a freelance reporter, Hastings would be considered a bigger risk to be given unfettered access compared to a beat reporter who would risk burning bridges by publishing many of McChrystal’s remarks."

6/22/2010 11:02:29 AM

Quote :

"McChrystal does not directly criticize President Barack Obama in the article, but Hastings writes that the general and Obama "failed to connect" from the outset after the president took office. Sources familiar with the meeting said McChrystal thought Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the room full of top military officials, according to the article. Later, McChrystal's first one-on-one meeting with Obama "was a 10-minute photo op," Hastings writes, quoting an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run his f---ing war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss (McChrystal) was disappointed.""

From CNN article

6/22/2010 11:12:42 AM

What's the big deal here?
They want him fired because he had the nerve to critizice some people?
What?

6/22/2010 11:16:30 AM

It looks like one person has already lost their job over this:

Quote :

"McChrystal fires press aide over controversial comments in article"

Quote :

"Two defense officials said the general has also fired a press aide over the article, set to appear in Friday's edition of Rolling Stone magazine."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/22/general.mcchrystal.obama.apology/index.html?hpt=T1

6/22/2010 11:29:09 AM

Rolling Stone + McChrystal = Heavy Metal

6/22/2010 11:30:47 AM

Man I really hope that Obama keeps McChrystal...

6/22/2010 11:31:35 AM

This really does put Pres. Obama in a tough spot. You just can't tolerate a top general ridiculing his president and commander in public. On the other hand, Obama needs McChrystal to carry out the McChrystal game-plan.

If he accepts an apology and keeps the general, Obama risks looking like even more of a spineless weenie. If he fires him, who's gonna run the war for him?

I'm guessing Obama will go with the spineless weenie option.

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 11:34 AM. Reason : .]

6/22/2010 11:32:19 AM

There's no risk in it... He will look like a spineless weenie.

6/22/2010 11:34:26 AM

Quote :

"What's the big deal here? They want him fired because he had the nerve to critizice some people? What?"

jesus, dude, are you seriously that dense?

Do you just see the world the way you want it to be, or what?

6/22/2010 11:56:55 AM

^
What?

I just don't see the big deal in criticizing people.
I mean, what do we want -- a bunch of "yes men"?

6/22/2010 12:44:05 PM

Truman/MacArthur did it.

6/22/2010 12:53:48 PM

And Truman "faded away" MacArthur

6/22/2010 1:03:10 PM

Quote :

"In congressional hearings during May 1951 Secretary of Defense, George Marshall, testified for seven days. MacArthur's removal, he stated, stemmed from "the wholly unprecedented position of a local theater commander publicly expressing his displeasure at and his disagreement with the foreign and military policy of the United States.""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_General_Douglas_MacArthur

6/22/2010 1:06:07 PM

from what i understand in my limited military knowledge - criticizing a commander (whether it's personal or professional) is not appropriate

please to correct me if i'm wrong miltary dudes

(and really - making fun of the VP and president in front of reports - seriously bad taste - i feel like it's one thing to criticize the actual policy, but a whole different thing to make fun of them)

6/22/2010 1:06:10 PM

At least someone is trying to get shit done.

6/22/2010 1:22:37 PM

Quote :

"I mean, what do we want -- a bunch of "yes men"?"

1. Most of what he said wasn't policy or strategy related.

2. Obviously you don't want "yes men"--but you don't want someone who will publicly sell you out, either.


It's his job to fight for his case tooth and nail in private if he believes that higher is going down the wrong road, but what he did is neither permissible nor advisable. if he felt that he really MUST publicly dissent with his superiors (which is probably grey area at best), he certainly should've gone about it a different way (and again, he wasn't really dissenting on policy, anyway, from what I can tell).

6/22/2010 1:44:00 PM

One of the most patriotic things one can do is to criticize your superiors; to question them and their policies.

I'm afraid that firing people over stuff like this will only lead to a bunch of "yes men". Who made Obama, Biden, Holbrooke, Eikenberry, Jones, etc. into untouchable gods? (how dare you question us? ) I mean, I just don't get it. What am i missing? Is he only "allowed" to talk about policy or strategy related things? He's a human with free speech rights. I just don't get it. (I could be wrong, I just don't understand the big deal.)

6/22/2010 2:14:24 PM

Quote :

"I just don't get it. What am i missing?"

It's not that he questioned his superiors. It's that he publicly bad-mouthed them.

Quote :

"with free speech rights"

nope

6/22/2010 2:19:56 PM

Quote :

"One of the most patriotic things one can do is to criticize your superiors"

someone has quite obviously never spent ANY time in the military...you have no idea what kind of shit you spew, do you? you just open your mouth and naive bullshit just falls out

but hey, i'm not sure why we don't just ask you about every decision, since you OBVIOUSLY know better than anyone else ever could

Quote :

"I could be wrong"

you are...in just about everything

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 2:23 PM. Reason : .]

6/22/2010 2:21:04 PM

Quote :

"you have no idea what kind of shit you spew, do you? you just open your mouth and naive bullshit just falls out"

Fuck you asshole. I said I could be wrong, and was asking what was up.
Fuck you for asking if I "have no idea", when I already disclosed that I may not.
What kind of fucking idiot are you? Somebody goes out of their way to make it clear that what they're saying may be wrong, inadequate, or naive, AND THEN YOU TURN AROUND AND INSULT THEM BY SAYING WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY ADMITTED? I mean, shit. Think before you troll next time.


Hey everyone! You wanna know why everyone in the Soap Box is so partisan and sure of themselves? It's because any honorable disclosure of not knowing something ("I could be wrong") is responded to by asshole trolls saying shit like, "you are...in just about everything". So next time, I'll be discouraged to ask innocent non-loaded questions. That way, only the know-it-all jerks will post. You can all thank quagmire02 for this.

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 2:54 PM. Reason : ]

6/22/2010 2:54:07 PM

^ haha, sand in your vagina much? are you admitting you "could be wrong" about "one of the most patriotic things one can do is to criticize your superiors"? because there is no "could" about it...your opinion is ignorant horseshit (though considering most of your opinions are ignorant horseshit, i'm not sure why i'm surprised)

i realize your reading comprehension is non-existent, but why don't you just STFU about things you have NO clue about? really, your whole "the gubment took our rights!" spiel is old...come up with something new or move off the continent in search of your fairyland, k?

6/22/2010 3:10:45 PM

Quote :

"you have no idea what kind of shit you spew, do you? you just open your mouth and naive bullshit just falls out"

Fuck you asshole. I said I could be wrong, and was asking what was up.
Fuck you for asking if I "have no idea", when I already disclosed that I may not.
What kind of fucking idiot are you? Somebody goes out of their way to make it clear that what they're saying may be wrong, inadequate, or naive, AND THEN YOU TURN AROUND AND INSULT THEM BY SAYING WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY ADMITTED? I mean, shit. Think before you troll next time.


Hey everyone! You wanna know why everyone in the Soap Box is so partisan and sure of themselves? It's because any honorable disclosure of not knowing something ("I could be wrong") is responded to by asshole trolls saying shit like, "you are...in just about everything". So next time, I'll be discouraged to ask innocent non-loaded questions. That way, only the know-it-all jerks will post. You can all thank quagmire02 for this.

6/22/2010 3:15:39 PM

^ haha, sand in your vagina much? are you admitting you "could be wrong" about "one of the most patriotic things one can do is to criticize your superiors"? because there is no "could" about it...your opinion is ignorant horseshit (though considering most of your opinions are ignorant horseshit, i'm not sure why i'm surprised)

i realize your reading comprehension is non-existent, but why don't you just STFU about things you have NO clue about? really, your whole "the gubment took our rights!" spiel is old...come up with something new or move off the continent in search of your fairyland, k?

6/22/2010 3:18:10 PM

Quote :

"you have no idea what kind of shit you spew, do you? you just open your mouth and naive bullshit just falls out"

Fuck you asshole. I said I could be wrong, and was asking what was up.
Fuck you for asking if I "have no idea", when I already disclosed that I may not.
What kind of fucking idiot are you? Somebody goes out of their way to make it clear that what they're saying may be wrong, inadequate, or naive, AND THEN YOU TURN AROUND AND INSULT THEM BY SAYING WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY ADMITTED? I mean, shit. Think before you troll next time.


Hey everyone! You wanna know why everyone in the Soap Box is so partisan and sure of themselves? It's because any honorable disclosure of not knowing something ("I could be wrong") is responded to by asshole trolls saying shit like, "you are...in just about everything". So next time, I'll be discouraged to ask innocent non-loaded questions. That way, only the know-it-all jerks will post. You can all thank quagmire02 for this.

6/22/2010 3:22:22 PM

wow... really guys?

6/22/2010 3:23:28 PM

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 3:29 PM. Reason : also, i wonder if there's any chance McChrystal had some underlying motive and did it on purpose?]

6/22/2010 3:26:02 PM

really, Duke?

6/22/2010 3:32:31 PM

Quote :

"i wonder if there's any chance McChrystal had some underlying motive and did it on purpose?"

GOP nomination in 2012?

haha

6/22/2010 3:33:01 PM

haha I lol'ed

6/22/2010 4:59:58 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/22/general.mcchrystal.obama.apology/index.html?hpt=T1

Quote :

"NEW: McChrystal has submitted resignation, Joe Klein says"

6/22/2010 5:12:43 PM

Just like MacArthur.

6/22/2010 5:33:58 PM

I just don't get why publicly bad-mouthing your superiors earns you a forced peer pressured resignation.
Why should it?

You might want to try either:
1) insulting me and not answering my question.
or
2) answering my question thoroughly and politely, like your grandmother asked it.

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 5:43 PM. Reason : \/]

6/22/2010 5:34:10 PM

Quote :

"forced resignation"

That's called firing. Resignation is option regardless of whatever peer pressure you feel.

6/22/2010 5:36:09 PM

Quote :

"I just don't get why publicly bad-mouthing your superiors earns you a forced peer pressured resignation. Why should it?"

It's part of the military ethos. If you let every smart-mouthed Private pop off at his Captain do you think we'd be known for the fiercest fucking fighting force in the world? Hell no. Sure, at the highest ranks politics starts to get sprinkled into the mix, but that doesn't imply undermining the mission.

6/22/2010 7:52:12 PM

Quote :

"I just don't get why publicly bad-mouthing your superiors earns you a forced peer pressured resignation. Why should it? "

Are you not familiar with how the military typically operates...?

6/22/2010 7:54:12 PM

There's a difference between a private mouthing off to his superiors and a general being critical of the administration. The Obama administration is incompetent on almost all fronts, including the military. I'm not surprised to see high level officials thumbing their nose at the administration.

6/22/2010 8:36:25 PM

Quote :

"There are two lessons here. For Mr. Obama it is the imperative of taking charge of this war and owning it—reshaping the team waging it, and communicating a resolve that, alas, one doubts he actually feels. Failing that, he owes it to the soldiers and civilians we have sent there to liquidate the war and accept the consequences for our country and the region. The president has not spoken publicly about Afghanistan in any serious way since December, and one wonders whether he has the nerve to act, in respect to Gen. McChrystal, like a serious commander in chief. If he leaves a wounded—and therefore more malleable—commander in place, he will have shown a calamitous weakness masquerading as political cleverness. "

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704853404575322800914018876.html

good article on this issue, i think

6/22/2010 8:50:18 PM

How is this a chance for Obama to own the war, didnt he pick McChrystal in the first place? This is his guy.

And Im not sure Obama can win on this one. If he is fired over an article, yet many feel he was the best for the job... it looks poorly. If he isnt fired, then people will question bringing in the commanding general while troops are fighting back to DC to discuss a fucking rolling stone article.

6/22/2010 9:07:22 PM

i'm not entirely sure why people are up in arms here over McChrystal. It doesn't look like he actually said anything to the reporters. read the article, people. The person doing the badmouthing is an aide. And he was fired almost immediately. At worst, Obama should go in there and say "hey, clean house, dude. straighten that shit up."

I really don't see where he did anything wrong. What's really wrong with commenting on Obama's demeanor in private with your colleagues by saying "he seemed nervous." That is hardly a horrible thing to say. Now, do you go up to a reporter and say it? Fuck no.

6/22/2010 9:07:44 PM

Keep in mind that Obama was the first president to relieve a general of command since the Korean war... Now he's going to relieve another one, in fact the one he hand-picked to replace the original guy he fired?

Oh man this is just a shitty situation for B. Hussein and I couldn't be happier

6/22/2010 9:11:23 PM

You misspelled Obama.

6/22/2010 9:12:53 PM

Quote :

"i'm not entirely sure why people are up in arms here over McChrystal. It doesn't look like he actually said anything to the reporters. read the article, people. The person doing the badmouthing is an aide. And he was fired almost immediately. At worst, Obama should go in there and say "hey, clean house, dude. straighten that shit up.""

is the article actually up? i thought it was only released to the press - and doesn't actually go public til the end of the week.

6/22/2010 9:17:43 PM

It's also been argued that LBJ asked McNamara to resign, though it's never been proven and McNamara would never confirm it.

6/22/2010 9:18:12 PM

Quote :

" Today, as McChrystal gears up for an offensive in southern Afghanistan, the prospects for any kind of success look bleak. In June, the death toll for U.S. troops passed 1,000, and the number of IEDs has doubled. Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on the fifth- poorest country on earth has failed to win over the civilian population, whose attitude toward U.S. troops ranges from intense- ly wary to openly hostile."

From the article

http://www.politico.com/pdf/PPM130_r1109mcchrystal.pdf

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 9:29 PM. Reason : ]

6/22/2010 9:27:48 PM

The article makes McChrystal seem like a total badass.

6/22/2010 9:32:24 PM

Quote :

" In pri- vate, Team McChrystal likes to talk shit about many of Obama’s top people on the diplomatic side. One aide calls Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and veteran of the Cold War, a “clown” who remains “stuck in 1985.” Politicians like McCain and Kerry, says another aide, “turn up, have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him at the airport press conference, then get back for the Sunday talk shows. Frankly, it’s not very helpful.” Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal’s inner circle. “Hillary had Stan’s back dur- ing the strategic review,” says an adviser. “She said, ‘If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.’ ” "

Quote :

" The relationship was further strained in January, when a classified cable that Eikenberry wrote was leaked to The New York Times. ... McChrystal and his team were blind- sided by the cable. “I like Karl, I’ve known him for years, but they’d never said anything like that to us before,” says McChrystal, who adds that he felt “be- trayed” by the leak. “Here’s one that cov- ers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, ‘I told you so.’ ” "

Another interesting item..

Quote :

" The most striking example of McChrys- tal’s usurpation of diplomatic policy is his handling of Karzai. It is McChrystal, not diplomats like Eikenberry or Holbrooke, who enjoys the best relationship with the man America is relying on to lead Af- ghanistan. The doctrine of counterinsur- gency requires a credible government, and since Karzai is not considered cred- ible by his own people, McChrystal has worked hard to make him so. Over the past few months, he has accompanied the president on more than 10 trips around the country, standing beside him at polit- ical meetings, or shuras, in Kandahar. In February, the day before the doomed of- fensive in Marja, McChrystal even drove over to the president’s palace to get him to sign off on what would be the largest mil- itary operation of the year."

The article seems to take a very negative view of the COIN strategy. And if the article is painting an accurate picture of what COIN is really about, it does seem like a terrible strategy.

[Edited on June 22, 2010 at 9:51 PM. Reason : ]

6/22/2010 9:44:35 PM

Beware the messenger... I don't know much about COIN, but Rolling Stone is notorious for its rabid anti-military stance.

6/22/2010 9:53:36 PM