McChrystal most likely on the way out..

[SteamWake]

How dare you express your feelings ! :stare:

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 Obama and others in the Obama administration.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38837.html#ixzz0rahznAQz (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38837.html#ixzz0rahznAQz)


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062200813_pf.html

[CCIP]

Well, in fairness, the president is still the commander in chief. I don't think it's customary for military officers to criticize their superiors - orders are orders. I really don't think it's appropriate to make these sorts of remarks on record while on duty.

Not that I disagree with his right as a private person to criticize the white house - but he should've waited until he's back home. You can't expect a commander to continue trusting his subordinates when they make these sorts of remarks on duty, simple as that. Hell, common sense - I know I wouldn't be surprised to get fired if I started talking this sort of thing about my boss and the managers while at my job.

[SteamWake]

The way I see it is the man is mad as hell and just couldent take it anymore.

He had to have known where this would lead.

The proper course of action would have been to resign then make the allegations but evidently something pushed him over the edge. Probably the policys that place our troops in un-necessary dangers.

But... I think if he had resigned we would have never heard of this story other than "McChrystil resigns".

The man is a carrier professional stratigist, trust me he did not speak off the cuff. He (at least in his mind) is doing what needs to be done.

[krashkart]

I think if I were in his position I would be wanting to say a few things, too. These wars amount to a near-total bureaucratic failure in my mind. (I gotta blame somebody, may as well be the stiffs in Washington ;))

One good thing about this is that he's not being given a nickname like "General Betray Us". :nope:

[OneToughHerring]

I think if I were in his position I would be wanting to say a few things, too. These wars amount to a near-total bureaucratic failure in my mind. (I gotta blame somebody, may as well be the stiffs in Washington ;))

One good thing about this is that he's not being given a nickname like "General Betray Us". :nope:

Oh I don't know if I'd call the whole thing just a "bureaucratic failure". It takes more then just bureaucrats to mess things up that badly. Who knows, maybe even McChrystal isn't perfect either?

[krashkart]

Good point.

[GoldenRivet]

Im torn between CCIPs argument and Steamwake's.

Something pushed this man over the edge.

on the other hand my civil air patrol cadet doesnt even talk trash about the president.

If i were in the General's position i probably would have made worse remarks.

you have a military trying to win a war - and an administration trying to lose it. A frustrating proposition for the men holding the rifles.

[SteamWake]

I think that whole thing about the medal for refraining from firing their weapons was close to the last straw.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/impact-of-war/2010/05/a_medal_for_holding_your_fire.html

I'm also pretty shure his frustration is due to being 'led' by a pack of rank idealistic amateurs.

On one hand its a bad thing to speak in public against your 'superior officers'.

On the other hand McChrystil puts the welfare of his charges ahead of his own carrier.

This will be a tough damage control issue for the white house. Its hard to fight the truth.

Have a look at McChrystil's service record.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/22/raw-data-mcchrystal-biography/

Compare that to our community activist in cheif.

[Zachstar]

He is toast because of precedent.

When the generals went against the Iraq war they got out of the military first. Why? Because the chain of command is that important.

When this bozo decided to speak while in command he basically told the soldiers to screw the chain of command and feel free to destroy morale by mocking superiors.

It's not going to be tough damage control. Nothing compared to BP that is.

[Bilge_Rat]

I would say it really depends on how Obama feels about keeping him on or replacing him. Obama picked him, but he does not appear to be as committed to him as say, Bush was with Petraeus.

If Obama does keep him, the general will have to do the obligatory public grovelling.

[August]

He is toast because of precedent.

When the generals went against the Iraq war they got out of the military first. Why? Because the chain of command is that important.

When this bozo decided to speak while in command he basically told the soldiers to screw the chain of command and feel free to destroy morale by mocking superiors.

You nailed it Zach.

A Sergeant doesn't bitch about the Captain to the Privates, a Captain doesn't complain about the Colonel to his Sergeants and a General damn sure shouldn't complain about the Commander in Chief, at least not publicly.

[SteamWake]

Obama picked him, but he does not appear to be as committed to him as say, Bush was with Petraeus.

LOL... understatement of the month...

I think that pretty much goes for the entire military services which Obama is rather only not comitted to but rather .. uhh... dislikes.

[thorn69]

Obama showed McChrystal about as much distrust as McChrystal has shown Obama. Remember, McChrystal asked for an additional 50,000 troops and Obama took his sweet f'n time and held about 6 to 7 meetings with his top political advisers over the course of several months to only give McChrystal half that many! :roll:

When your leaders don't give you the tools to do the job, then how can they expect you to get the job done or be grateful towards them for their lack of trust in you? McChrystal is a well trained war expert. Obama is not, so it's distrust to question your expert's request for additional aid when it's needed!

Obama's indecisiveness has cost Amercian soldiers and innocent civilians their lives and placed a huge hindrance on those that have remained. Obama should have been impeached for the dereliction of duty he displayed last year because we are at war and there's no time for leaders to "beat around the bush" when it comes time to making key decisions on the fly. Obama over the past several months has shown this same form of indecisiveness with the oil spill as well. It takes him a long time to make decisions and the decisions he makes are usually the wrong ones! :nope:

How this guy ever passed a multiple choice exam is beyond me? Usually you go with your first guess, or bubble-in letter 'c' if you're really stumped but Obama takes months and months to make a decision, usually erasing what he's first put down and then selecting something entirely off the wall. :down:

Bush may have taken 7 minutes to react to the 9-11 incident but Obama took over 40 days to react to the Gulf oil crisis. This is not the sort of "leader" we need during war time or when a crisis kicks off. It's costing people their lives and only buying our enemy time to plan out more damaging attacks on us. We need someone with some balls that goes in full force and destroys our enemies without mercy. Not someone that hands out medals to our troops for "not firing" at potential threats. WTF kind of BS is that?! This is war! Shoot first ask questions later! This pussy-footing around approach is definitely not working! :nope:

Remember back when Clinton was in power and when Al-qaeda attacked the world trade center the first time? All Clinton did in response was have a million dollar missile shot off into the desert (that didn't harm anyone) to warn the enemy that we meant business! :roll:

And looked what happened.... Al-qaeda admitted they planned out the 9-11 attack the day after their first attack on the world trade center wasn't a complete success for them. That means that they planned it all under Clinton's watch and no sooner did GWB take office they committed their attack and were successful. This should have never happened but since Clinton did absolutely nothing (because he's a pansy) we watched a lot of people lose their lives as two large buildings collapsed to the ground.

Clinton should be in prison for his 8 years of gross negligence that resulted in innocent lives being snuffed out and Obama should be in a cell right next to him.

And I sort of hope Obama fires McChrystal. More incentive for America to fire Obama after his term is up! ;)

[Zachstar]

thorn why don't you say the real reason you dislike Obama that much and be done with it. And Clinton while you are at it. And dont tell me its because of military.

80 days to react to oil spill? 7 mins for Bush? Both are beyond silly statements. To say the least.

[Tchocky]

It's been what, 60 days since the oil spill started?

[Weiss Pinguin]

It's been what, 60 days since the oil spill started?
Close to 70 now I think :hmmm:

[thorn69]

It's been what, 60 days since the oil spill started?

That was a typo. Meant 40. But it's still a lot longer than 7 minutes! ;)

[thorn69]

thorn why don't you say the real reason you dislike Obama that much and be done with it. And Clinton while you are at it. And dont tell me its because of military.

80 days to react to oil spill? 7 mins for Bush? Both are beyond silly statements. To say the least.

What other reason would you like me to give? I could call him a complete f'n idiot but that would be in poor form! :up:

[SteamWake]

thorn why don't you say the real reason you dislike Obama that much and be done with it.

I thought that he did. He had some valid points.

I guess its easier to just attack.

[Zachstar]

What other reason would you like me to give? I could call him a complete f'n idiot but that would be in poor form! :up:

With the post you made about his judge pick in the other topic you are not fooling me one bit.

As for McCrystal's sorry butt we spent a great deal of manpower and treasure in Iraq and frankly we just cant spare the manpower to fight another endless war in Afghanistan. On top of that the recently mineral desposits that had right wingers foaming at the mouth dreaming of extended war are now considered too costly to extract by international companies.

Therefore its not worth sending more troops to die for a country that is unlikely to stabilize for decades and likely can only be temporarily muzzled by having drones hovering like vultures all over the place. Troops don't mean a darn thing compared to a squad of drones in such a conflict.

[Bilge_Rat]

With the post you made about his judge pick in the other topic you are not fooling me one bit.

As for McCrystal's sorry butt we spent a great deal of manpower and treasure in Iraq and frankly we just cant spare the manpower to fight another endless war in Afghanistan. On top of that the recently mineral desposits that had right wingers foaming at the mouth dreaming of extended war are now considered too costly to extract by international companies.

Therefore its not worth sending more troops to die for a country that is unlikely to stabilize for decades and likely can only be temporarily muzzled by having drones hovering like vultures all over the place. Troops don't mean a darn thing compared to a squad of drones in such a conflict.

agreed. its unfortunate what is happening in Afghanistan, but the only way to really turn things around would be with a massive influx of troops and billions of dollar of aid, none of which is likely to happen. Better to cut our losses, pull out altogether, cross our fingers and hope for the best.

[thorn69]

With the post you made about his judge pick in the other topic you are not fooling me one bit.

As for McCrystal's sorry butt we spent a great deal of manpower and treasure in Iraq and frankly we just cant spare the manpower to fight another endless war in Afghanistan. On top of that the recently mineral desposits that had right wingers foaming at the mouth dreaming of extended war are now considered too costly to extract by international companies.

Therefore its not worth sending more troops to die for a country that is unlikely to stabilize for decades and likely can only be temporarily muzzled by having drones hovering like vultures all over the place. Troops don't mean a darn thing compared to a squad of drones in such a conflict.

Not fooling you? WTH do you mean by that? I thought I laid it out on the table pretty cut and paste! It's not my fault that you require assistance with reading and comprehension! I'm not playing any tricks here about how I feel about Obama. I would think most people could see that. What exactly do you want me to say about him that I haven't said already?

[thorn69]

With the post you made about his judge pick in the other topic you are not fooling me one bit.

As for McCrystal's sorry butt we spent a great deal of manpower and treasure in Iraq and frankly we just cant spare the manpower to fight another endless war in Afghanistan. On top of that the recently mineral desposits that had right wingers foaming at the mouth dreaming of extended war are now considered too costly to extract by international companies.

Therefore its not worth sending more troops to die for a country that is unlikely to stabilize for decades and likely can only be temporarily muzzled by having drones hovering like vultures all over the place. Troops don't mean a darn thing compared to a squad of drones in such a conflict.

Then tell me why Obama hasn't brought home the troops? If he feels that Afghanistan is a lost cause (like you seem to think) then why hasn't he brought them home? You don't know what you're talking about! The fact is, McChrystal is a "war expert". He's a 4-star general and you don't get any higher than that in his line of work. He requested 50,000 more troops a year ago and Obama only gave him half that many and it took Obama half a year almost to give him that half. Therefore, Obama set McChrystal up for failure and it has cost many American soldiers their lives as well as innocent civilians their lives as well. All Obama did his first year in office was sit on his own two hands and blame Bush for everything. He's still trying to blame Bush for everything yet America isn't buying that excuse anymore. Obama is a clueless moron that doesn't know how to lead. He's never had a legitimate job before in his life. He's never been a leader. He didn't even have enough time in the Senate to learn how to play politics. He depends on others to make decisions for him. All he is is a puppet! Why don't you see this? You're living in denial mate! Face it!

[Skybird]

Hard to imagine that a general talks like this to a freelance journalist without seeing the risk involved, and without knowing what now is coming to him. Not that I am a big fan of him, from the little I know aboput his Afghanistan strategy I am not, but I tend to assume he did his stunt intentionally, hoping to raise public attention that he would not have hpoped for if he had resigned first, and then made his statements.

In other words I think there are things going on regarding the war that make him both hopeless and desperate so that he chosed this PR Kamikaze stunt. This at least makes more sense to me than assuming he was acting mindlessly.

Trapped in the Afghan maze.

[SteamWake]

Hard to imagine that a general talks like this to a freelance journalist without seeing the risk involved,.

Exactly and the Rolling Stone.. I dont think you could pick a more liberal outlet save CNN.

No this is calculated trust me. Even the public apology.

[Skybird]

Just read a german news quoting the WP that the American milizary is paying bribery and protection money to warlods and even the Taleban to arrange safe travels for supply convoys of theirs. At the same time they make claims about how determined they are to fight a war, to defeat the enemy, and demand the Afghan president to battle corruption and a culture of bribery. :lol:

No wonder that the general "went mad" - at least as long as he has not ordered these practices. If he had ordered them, this would be an even more important reason to fire him.

A NATO supply convoy was recently attacked near Islamabad, capital of Pakistan. 140 vehicles were destroyed by - according to reports - just twelve attackers. This could not happen near the capital, in this way and style, without the Pakistani (military, ISI) knowing it. Absolutely impossible. Again: no wonder the general "went mad" - his boss is still paying Pakistan huge ammounts of money.

I wonder when they will start to airdrop weapons and ammo on Taliban camps.

[thorn69]

Just read a german news quoting the WP that the American milizary is paying bribery and protection money to warlods and even the Taleban to arrange safe travels for supply convoys of theirs. At the same time they make claims about how determined they are to fight a war, to defeat the enemy, and demand the Afghan president to battle corruption and a culture of bribery. :lol:

No wonder that the general "went mad" - at least as long as he has not ordered these practices. If he had ordered them, this would be an even more important reason to fire him.

A NATO supply convoy was recently attacked near Islamabad, capital of Pakistan. 140 vehicles were destroyed by - according to reports - just twelve attackers. This could not happen near the capital, in this way and style, without the Pakistani (military, ISI) knowing it. Absolutely impossible. Again: no wonder the general "went mad" - his boss is still paying Pakistan huge ammounts of money.

I wonder when they will start to airdrop weapons and ammo on Taliban camps.

Obama started paying off Taliban members the moment he took office. That's old news. Obama's answer to the war effort was to use tax payer dollars to pay off our enemy. Sort of like how a small kid will pay their milk money to a bully to save themselves from getting a knuckle-sandwich. Obama is a coward and his little "payoff" strategy is just downright embarrassing for the whole country.

[Platapus]

Do we have a link to exactly what McChrystal said? The articles I read are what the reporter from Rolling Stones said that McChrystal said.

Before I can opine whether McChrystal violated UCMJ Article 88, I would like to read what he actually said.

[SteamWake]

I wonder when they will start to airdrop weapons and ammo on Taliban camps.

LOL no need to worry about that. I heard a story the other day from a serviceman whom was in an engagement. They called for illumination flares but the request was denied due to concearns of the ordinance either starting a fire or landing on someone and injuring them.

They then called for smoke but again rules of engagement prevented the arty from laying down smoke where it was needed (too close to civvys) and the smoke was put some 100 yards off the target and did little but confuse the situation. Seems the offset was ordered at the last second at the guns themselves.

So yea no raining of weapons, they will have to get them just like they always have... but thats another topic.

[thorn69]

Do we have a link to exactly what McChrystal said? The articles I read are what the reporter from Rolling Stones said that McChrystal said.

Before I can opine whether McChrystal violated UCMJ Article 88, I would like to read what he actually said.

Couldn't be any worse than Obama calling that rap guy awhile back a "jackass" in the media behind his back or comparing his own bowling game to those of mentally retarded children in the Special Olympics - especially when it's not his bowling game that makes him look retarded. ;)

[Zachstar]

And if flares had started the smallest of fires somehow the Taliban would surely enhance to use to make it seem that the US is attacking civvies again. Because of the times we did so and tried to cover it up. Its very hard to trust...

That is why drones are SO SO SO much better for this role. They are so quiet and so long ranged that they can make ABSOLUTELY sure they are attacking a bad guy and have the whole thing on tape clear as day which wards off pressure and scares the hell out of the enemy.

[Zachstar]

Couldn't be any worse than Obama calling that rap guy awhile back a "jackass" in the media behind his back or comparing his own bowling game to those of mentally retarded children in the Special Olympics - especially when it's not his bowling game that makes him look retarded. ;)

What does that have anything to do with the comments a military general made?

Oh and careful about the "jackass" note. Almost everyone agreed with him and actually made him more popular for a time. The jackass deserved it and admitted he deserved the comment from the president.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Couldn't be any worse than Obama calling that rap guy awhile back a "jackass" in the media behind his back
Actually I agreed with him on that, Kanye West is a bit an arse. Also Kanye's not Obama's higher-up. ;)

[thorn69]

What does that have anything to do with the comments a military general made?

Oh and careful about the "jackass" note. Almost everyone agreed with him and actually made him more popular for a time. The jackass deserved it and admitted he deserved the comment from the president.

I agree the rapper was a jackass to that girl but I didn't need the president to slam him in the media for it. That was Obama just trying to gain some popularity amongst most people who felt the same way about the rapper. I'm not sure about you but I have a big problem with the president using his seat to throw around personal insults at common US citizens. Obama is in the job of public service. I find it far worse for people in positions of trust using their authority to go around attacking common citizens. He's certainly not a king and is certainly not a reincarnation of Christ. He's just a public servant that was elected by a bunch of misinformed sheeple.

[Skybird]

http://sundance.bside.com/2010/films/restrepo_sundance2010

http://festival.sundance.org/2010/blog/entry/a_doc_unlike_others_restrepo/

Der Spiegel had a German essay about it today, describing it as a very good but depressing movie showing the human suffering in the soldiers and contrasting that with the meaninglessness of their fight. If Spiegel International has it in English in the coming days, I'll ring the bell.

[SteamWake]

And if flares had started the smallest of fires somehow the Taliban would surely enhance to use to make it seem that the US is attacking civvies again. Because of the times we did so and tried to cover it up. Its very hard to trust...

That is why drones are SO SO SO much better for this role. They are so quiet and so long ranged that they can make ABSOLUTELY sure they are attacking a bad guy and have the whole thing on tape clear as day which wards off pressure and scares the hell out of the enemy.

Yea about those drones... last I heard they werent to fond of those either.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/17/cindy-sheehan-leads-drone-protest-va/

Woops .... heh link for LOL's :haha:

]This story first appeared at Inter Press Service (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=51706).[/I]
WASHINGTON, Jun 3, 2010 (IPS) - Some CIA officers involved in the agency's drone strikes programme in Pakistan and elsewhere are privately expressing their opposition to the programme within the agency, because it is helping al Qaeda and its allies recruit, according to a retired military officer in contact with them



Here is the right link

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0603/dissent-cia-officers-protest-harmful-drone-strikes/

[Zachstar]

I agree the rapper was a jackass to that girl but I didn't need the president to slam him in the media for it. That was Obama just trying to gain some popularity amongst most people who felt the same way about the rapper. I'm not sure about you but I have a big problem with the president using his seat to throw around personal insults at common US citizens. Obama is in the job of public service. I find it far worse for people in positions of trust using their authority to go around attacking common citizens. He's certainly not a king and is certainly not a reincarnation of Christ. He's just a public servant that was elected by a bunch of misinformed sheeple.


Have a read of the 1st Amendment and note Obama is a civilian.

The Obama christ thing again? So 2008

[Skybird]

Claims on mineral wealth a PR trick?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,701854,00.html


The announcement of huge mineral deposits in Afghanistan was a coup for both the US and the Afghan governments. But there are doubts about how realistic the estimates are, to what extent they can be developed commercially and, above all, whether mining companies will accept the security risks.

Was the "sensational find" of large natural mineral resources in Afghanistan reported (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html) by the New York Times last week a PR trick by the United States government? Or was it a clever chess move by Afghan Mining Minister Waheedullah Shahrani?



Both had good reason to announce the surprising news. US President Barack Obama is lobbying Congress for a further $33 billion for the military mission in Afghanistan, so the reference to Afghanistan's "stunning potential," as General David Petraeus, the head of US Central Command, put it, comes at a highly convenient time.


Shahrani had some time ago scheduled a meeting with around 200 foreign investors in London for this coming Friday to receive bids for the development of Afghan deposits. But most of the finds reported by the Americans have been known for decades.

The main news is that the deposits are significantly greater than had been thought to date. Shahrani last Thursday exceeded the Americans' claims, saying he thought their estimates were too conservative and trippling the value of the mineral deposits to $3 trillion.

Even if those close to President Hamid Karzai say the timing was pure coincidence, they are already beginning to assess the advantages the natural resources could bring to the region.

"The deposits could be the future negotiating asset with our neighbors," said one official, who declined to be named. "With these resources we can play diplomatic ping pong -- we must now divide up the huge opportunities between the Afghans and the neighbors."

Difficult Access



Still, Afghanistan won't grow into a world-leading raw materials exporter as quickly as Petraeus is claiming. For example, the Hajigak iron ore deposit in central Afghanistan -- supposedly the largest untapped reserve in Asia -- being discussed in London this week is located close to a pass with an altitude of 3,700 meters (12,139 feet), and so far no one knows how the ore could be transported from there.


China has promised to build a railway over the Hindu Kush mountain range, but has not yet laid out any firm plans to do so. And the development of the copper mine in Aynak, for which Chinese state company MCC acquired the rights in 2007, is progressing only slowly.

The issue of security is even more difficult. David Beatty, head of Canadian mining company Rio Novo Gold, said: "Would I send a team to Kandahar? And then call a guy's wife after he gets shot? No."

[Zachstar]

According to various rumors he has handed in his resignation. Good that ought to be minimal for destroying morale among his command by mocking a superior.

If he had just waited till he resigned he would be as free to do as he wants he could sit on fox news and whine all day.

Of course Fox will try to have him on day after day and of course job offerings but like Palin this will peter out as well.

[UnderseaLcpl]

According to various rumors he has handed in his resignation. Good that ought to be minimal for destroying morale among his command by mocking a superior.

And you assume that morale is derived from respect for the chain of command? In such a perfect world, I'd derive more morale from the approachable princesses riding unicorns.:DL

I'm joking, of course. Respect for the chain of command is essential, and it plays a very important part in morale, but it is very rare to see an officer who can manage respect, performance, and troop morale. Show of hands from the military guys here. How many of you had what you would consider "good" officers more than half of the time?
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know whether Gen. McChrystal is a good leader, but I can say for certain that his removal for political reasons will be bad for morale. If there's one thing that troops hate more than being led by an idiot, it's being led by an idiot who is led by an idiot. If what I've heard first-hand thus far is any basis, Obama is pretty unpopular amongst the troops anyway. Assuming that is true, most servicemembers would take offense at the General's removal.

Perhaps I can make the point more clear. The worst thing to happen in a combat situation is to be attacked from an unexpected direction. Even the most elite troops will rarely weather such a thing, hence the importance of flanking. If McChrystal is removed, the troops will feel both outflanked and unable to do anything about it. Worse, they will think (whatever the case may be) that it is for unrelated political reasons, and troops hate dying for unrelated political reasons.

The fact that this situation occurred is bad enough already. Let's hope that it does not become worse.

[OneToughHerring]

According to various rumors he has handed in his resignation. Good that ought to be minimal for destroying morale among his command by mocking a superior.

If he had just waited till he resigned he would be as free to do as he wants he could sit on fox news and whine all day.

Of course Fox will try to have him on day after day and of course job offerings but like Palin this will peter out as well.

Well that would be one pretty short reign. I remember reading McChrystal's introduction from Newsweek or Time just recently.

It was this one. (http://www.newsweek.com/2009/09/25/mcchrystal-s-war.html)

Oh well.

[Platapus]

I don't know whether Gen. McChrystal is a good leader, but I can say for certain that his removal for political reasons will be bad for morale.

When I was in the military, it was my observations that the workers in the military care little about Generals. One is about as good/bad as another. Managerially and from a leadership standpoint, Generals are fungible... they come and they go and the workers keep on working the mission. :salute:

[Aramike]

You nailed it Zach.

A Sergeant doesn't bitch about the Captain to the Privates, a Captain doesn't complain about the Colonel to his Sergeants and a General damn sure shouldn't complain about the Commander in Chief, at least not publicly.While I think you're right, I don't doubt that McChrystal was completely aware of that as well.

As has been stated, I think he's just fed up. I've worked for plenty of completely incompetent bosses in my life, and once I was resigned to my ultimate fate, I never once felt the need to restrain myself.

Obama's administration has been nothing but incompetent, and their decisions would ultimately reflect poorly on the general. So he essentially flipped them off on the way out the door to a nice pension and some lofty senior private position.

[thorn69]

Have a read of the 1st Amendment and note Obama is a civilian.

The Obama christ thing again? So 2008

He's still serving the people of this nation in a public office. He's a servant of the people, by the people, for the people just like a police officer is. He was on duty and talking bad about another citizen. If I did that (I'm a cop btw) what do you think would happen to me? Suspended for 30 days minimum, terminated maximum. Either way, I'd be at home more! :hmmm: Hmmm, I could use a little break to play SH5 some more! That settles it then... The next person I pull over, I'm calling them a "jackass"! :rotfl2:

[Ducimus]

When I was in the military, it was my observations that the workers in the military care little about Generals. One is about as good/bad as another. Managerially and from a leadership standpoint, Generals are fungible... they come and they go and the workers keep on working the mission. :salute:

Seriously. Generals are closer akin to politicians anyway for the most part. Just a whole lot of brass and hot air. They come, they go, like a breeze, and so far up the food chain, as to become meaningless in your day to day life.

I think the most meaning a general brought to my existance, was if they came up with a really stupid idea. I think "McPeak" should be entered into the USAF lexicon of unutterable profanity. The ideas that clown had for uniforms is a freaking joke.

edit:
BTW, i think this is the article in question, i'm not sure:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236

[SteamWake]

According to various rumors he has handed in his resignation. Good that ought to be minimal for destroying morale among his command by mocking a superior.

You do realize that alot of the enlisted agree with the General.

[thorn69]

Regardless, McChrystal has a future in 2012 and Obama doesn't. I bet a Republican president will be elected (THANK GOD) and former Gen. McChrystal will be appointed as Joint Chief of Staff.

[Zachstar]

Regardless, McChrystal has a future in 2012 and Obama doesn't. I bet a Republican president will be elected (THANK GOD) and former Gen. McChrystal will be appointed as Joint Chief of Staff.

Good please keep thinking that. What do you think is the ticket? Palin/Mcchrystal? :yeah:

[Torvald Von Mansee]

This...well, god, how could a 4 star be so stupid? You don't say this kind of thing anywhere it could come back to haunt you.

[OneToughHerring]

This...well, god, how could a 4 star be so stupid? You don't say this kind of thing anywhere it could come back to haunt you.

Could be on purpose. Maybe he wanted to get out of that post, it's not looking particularily bright in the horizon for the war, no big celebration expected at the end of it no matter what happens.

[krashkart]

Could be on purpose. Maybe he wanted to get out of that post, it's not looking particularily bright in the horizon for the war, no big celebration expected at the end of it no matter what happens.

Celebration or not, this time there won't be buckets of red paint being thrown on our troops when they disembark from the airplanes. (there better not be :shifty:)

[sidslotm]

I can't speak for Americans, but in the UK the British soldier has shown the finest qualities, while the British politician has shown the worste. My son has done two tours in Afganistan an two in Iraq, he speaks of the determined commitment of the American soldier as he stood shoulder to shoulder with these fine young men.

All that is needed for evil politicians to succeed is for good men to say nothing. It is in the political quagmire of pride we find the cause why these good men die.

"it is necessary to disagree with all who control your Spirit"

[Jimbuna]

You do realize that alot of the enlisted agree with the General.

I should imagine in many peoples eyes he's more popular than Obama right now.

[krashkart]

I can't speak for Americans, but in the UK the British soldier has shown the finest qualities, while the British politician has shown the worste. My son has done two tours in Afganistan an two in Iraq, he speaks of the determined commitment of the American soldier as he stood shoulder to shoulder with these fine young men.

All that is needed for evil politicians to succeed is for good men to say nothing. It is in the political quagmire of pride we find the cause why these good men die.

"it is necessary to disagree with all who control your Spirit"

My thanks to your son and his buddies, sir. Glad to see an English soldier's perspective about our own troopers, too. Bless 'em all. :salute:

[OneToughHerring]

I can't speak for Americans, but in the UK the British soldier has shown the finest qualities, while the British politician has shown the worste. My son has done two tours in Afganistan an two in Iraq, he speaks of the determined commitment of the American soldier as he stood shoulder to shoulder with these fine young men.

All that is needed for evil politicians to succeed is for good men to say nothing. It is in the political quagmire of pride we find the cause why these good men die.

"it is necessary to disagree with all who control your Spirit"

"Quagmire of pride"? What exactly does that mean in concrete terms? More napalm, less napalm, something else maybe?

[Platapus]

I think the most meaning a general brought to my existance, was if they came up with a really stupid idea. I think "McPeak" should be entered into the USAF lexicon of unutterable profanity. The ideas that clown had for uniforms is a freaking joke.




We do not speak his name! The sooner he-who-must-not-be-named is forgotten the better. Those were some dark times :yep:

Please, let us spare the younglings by not exposing them to HWMNBN! :yep:

[Platapus]

Could be on purpose. Maybe he wanted to get out of that post, it's not looking particularily bright in the horizon for the war, no big celebration expected at the end of it no matter what happens.

There may be truth in what you wrote.

If he resigns he can always justify, in his own mind anyway, "This was not my fault

[Platapus]

All that is needed for evil politicians to succeed is for good men to say nothing. It is in the political quagmire of pride we find the cause why these good men die.



Quagmire of Pride?

I like that. Let me apologize in advance to you, for I fully intend on stealing this for some of my briefings. :yeah:

[krashkart]

We do not speak his name! The sooner he-who-must-not-be-named is forgotten the better. Those were some dark times :yep:

Please, let us spare the younglings by not exposing them to HWMNBN! :yep:

Did that have something to do with designer uniforms, or was that... dang. I'm gonna have to re-read that book again because the name rings a bell and for the life of me I'm not recalling the story. :-?

[Platapus]

Did that have something to do with designer uniforms, or was that... dang. I'm gonna have to re-read that book again because the name rings a bell and for the life of me I'm not recalling the story. :-?

The uniforms were one big part of HWMNBN's problems, but I have never seen such a lowering of morale caused by one General in my entire military career.

It is too late for me, but spare yourself from learning more about HWMNBN.

Read about something more pleasant, say the genocide of the American Indian or something. Anything but HWMNBN

[krashkart]

The uniforms were one big part of HWMNBN's problems, but I have never seen such a lowering of morale caused by one General in my entire military career.

It is too late for me, but spare yourself from learning more about HWMNBN.

Read about something more pleasant, say the genocide of the American Indian or something. Anything but HWMNBN

Too late, I'm already on the hunt. :DL


EDIT:

The Composite Wing. Of all things I would forget... :damn:

[Tchocky]

And he's gone. Looks like it will be Petraeus again.

[OneToughHerring]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/yourefired.jpg

With this song in the background.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sVUvpdT-NY

[thorn69]

Well, we all saw that one coming. Typical tyrant practicing typical tyrannical rule. Petraeus should turn down the job and resign as well.

[AVGWarhawk]

The writing was on the walls.

[tater]

Well played by Obama, actually.

[Takeda Shingen]

Yes. I'm not a real Obama guy, but this was like Truman and MacArthur. Right or wrong, he can't publically ridicule the civilian leadership.

[AVGWarhawk]

Well played by Obama, actually.

I would have to agree. If BO let this slide it would really be open season.

[SteamWake]

Yes. I'm not a real Obama guy, but this was like Truman and MacArthur. Right or wrong, he can't publically ridicule the civilian leadership.

:haha: :har:

McArthur was a loose cannon openly trying to chang policy in the theater.

McChrystal (or rather his aides) made a few remarks....

But sure Obama is a stern taskmaster... right...

In the meantime .. Patraeus ????? you got to be kidding me.. Isnt he the guy they had lambasted and literally called a liar? Frankly I'm supprised he took the job.

My god you cant make this stuff up !!! Patraeus !!!! oh gawd my sides hurt from laughing.

[Takeda Shingen]

:haha: :har:

McArthur was a loose cannon openly trying to chang policy in the theater.

McChrystal (or rather his aides) made a few remarks....

But sure Obama is a stern taskmaster... right...

In the meantime .. Patraeus ????? you got to be kidding me.. Isnt he the guy they had lambasted and literally called a liar? Frankly I'm supprised he took the job.

My god you cant make this stuff up !!! Patraeus !!!! oh gawd my sides hurt from laughing.

Laugh all you like, but it was entirely inappropriate to make those remarks. Obama was right in this case. I know you really don't like Obama at all, but you are two-stepping around the central issue so that you can take shots at the guy.

[SteamWake]

Laugh all you like, but it was entirely inappropriate to make those remarks. Obama was right in this case. I know you really don't like Obama at all, but you are two-stepping around the central issue so that you can take shots at the guy.

No no not at all I felt McChrystal should have resigned... which is what he did.

If I recall correctly McCarther did not and was 'fired'.

Slight difference.

Furthermore it has come to light that there evidenlty nothing all that really subordinate was said by McChrystal.

I dont think we have heard the last of this.

[Platapus]

I read the Rolling Stone article, and frankly I did not see anything that I could see would violate Article 88.

The reporter is a douche and his career is over for I doubt anyone would ever trust him again. I was going to write about journalistic integrity but I could not stop giggling when I tried to use the world journalism and integrity in the same sentence.

I first served under Reagan and since Regan I heard high ranking military guys bitchin about the President. I am sure that the same happened to presidents before my military service. To me there is a huge difference between what happens behind the doors and a public statement. That's where the reporter failed to understand.

I think McChrystal needed to have his butt chewed and told to put his ego on hold and not to talk to the press (the press is no one's friend). I also think he should have been sent back to AF to fix his COIN problem.

This makes me more suspicious that McChrystal wanted to retire before he can be blamed for the COIN failures in AF. The second part of the Rolling Stone article was pretty interesting.

When stuff like this happens I am reminded of one of my favourite Truman quotes when he describes the firing of MacArthur.

I fired him because he wouldn't respect the authority of the president. That's the answer to that. I didn't fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail.

:D

[Jimbuna]

I'm pleased he jumped before he was pushed....wouldn't give him the public satisfaction I suspect :hmmm:

[Aramike]

My god you cant make this stuff up !!! Patraeus !!!! oh gawd my sides hurt from laughing. It's rich, isn't it? Obama now appoints a man who's plan he for the surge in Iraq he condemned to failure. A "Bush" guy. The same general that MoveOn.org stated should be tried for treason.

[Platapus]

It's rich, isn't it? Obama now appoints a man who's plan he for the surge in Iraq he condemned to failure. A "Bush" guy. The same general that MoveOn.org stated should be tried for treason.

Let's hope he can figure a way out of this mess.

Good luck to him :up:

[Dan D]

The Runaway General (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236)


That it is, the news?

[SteamWake]

Let's hope he can figure a way out of this mess.

Good luck to him :up:

Yes I also ultimatly hope things get better there.

Ultimatly McChrystil resigned beause Obama would not listen to him.

Will Obama listen to Patraeous? Will Patraeous toe the line?


Opposition to the war has already toppled the Dutch government, forced the resignation of Germany's president

WTH? I'm pretty sure there was other issues involved.

Honestly it was hard to get throught he first coupla paragraphs.





Egads whats with these names :doh: forgive me if I constantly misspell them.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by The rolling stone
Opposition to the war has already toppled the Dutch government, forced the resignation of Germany's president
WTH? I'm pretty sure there was other issues involved.



Indeed. former president Koehler resigned after he was viciously attacked over statements by him about the role of the German military, attacks that were carried out in a way that was meant to hurt him personally and to distort him beyond the matter itself. His formulations in an interview were chosen somewhat unlucky, giving the impression that he thinks it is okay to use the german military for economic interests only, which in Germany is - officially - not as acceptable as it is in for example America. However, Koehler was tired of office, and found himself being met with lacking respect for his office as president, which he also gave as a reason in his farewell speech. It was said there were many disputes in the presidential offices, with him not being able to bring order to it. If you look at how the parties - especially Merkel herself - already abuse the elections for the new president again to push their own power-interests, then you cannot escape that Koehler's claim that the institution of the president is met with lacking respect, is true.

There are political and lobbyistic hyenas in office everywhere, and they will not stop their biting and fighting before they have torn the country into pieces.

Koehler was popular with the people, but he acted without luck and realised that the president as an institution in germany is - meaningless, and purely ceremonial. This was tough for him to realise, since he expected quite some formal and ceremonial respect for himself indeed, that presidents before him did not demand.

The Rolling Stone puts it simply wrong - at least most extremely simplified - if it writes that Koehler quit over Afghanistan.

[TheSatyr]

What bothers me right now is that at the Nuremburg Trials, German Officers were imprisoned if not executed for "Only following orders" and not standing up to or criticizing their leaders.

Here we have a General who is pissed off about the way the government is handling the war in Afghanistan and is criticizing the Administration, and now he is being forced to resign because he isn't "Just following orders"

Seems rather hypocritical to me.

[August]

What bothers me right now is that at the Nuremburg Trials, German Officers were imprisoned if not executed for "Only following orders" and not standing up to or criticizing their leaders.

Here we have a General who is pissed off about the way the government is handling the war in Afghanistan and is criticizing the Administration, and now he is being forced to resign because he isn't "Just following orders"

Seems rather hypocritical to me.

Nobody is saying the General can't criticize his leaders, just that he shouldn't be doing it in uniform.

[nikimcbee]

Let's hope he can figure a way out of this mess.

Good luck to him :up:

Here's my trade-off: We stick to the timeline, in exchange, drop ALL rules for engagement. If it's armed or storing weapons, it's a target now.:D

[krashkart]

Nobody is saying the General can't criticize his leaders, just that he shouldn't be doing it in uniform.

And especially not a good idea to be saying it around a loose-lipped journalist. :-?

[Platapus]

What bothers me right now is that at the Nuremburg Trials, German Officers were imprisoned if not executed for "Only following orders" and not standing up to or criticizing their leaders.

Here we have a General who is pissed off about the way the government is handling the war in Afghanistan and is criticizing the Administration, and now he is being forced to resign because he isn't "Just following orders"

Seems rather hypocritical to me.

Nobody is saying the General can't criticize his leaders, just that he shouldn't be doing it in uniform.

Also there is the little fact that in one case we are talking about officers "following orders" that were illegal.

I do not believe anyone is claiming that McChrystal was fired for "only following orders" that were illegal.

But than my position is that it was unnecessary to fire McChrystal.

[Platapus]

Here's my trade-off: We stick to the timeline, in exchange, drop ALL rules for engagement. If it's armed or storing weapons, it's a target now.:D

My trade off is to get the hell out of AF!

What exactly is the mission in AF?

Kill UBL?
Exterminate the Taliban?
Contain the Taliban?
Convert the Taliban?
Bring "Democracy" to AF?
Drive Al Qaeda out of AF?
Destroy Al Qaeda?
Bring "peace" to AF?
Secure the Southern Pipeline?

What exactly is "victory" in AF? I wanted to ask Bush this question and I would like to ask Obama this question.

[SteamWake]

Also there is the little fact that in one case we are talking about officers "following orders" that were illegal.

I do not believe anyone is claiming that McChrystal was fired for "only following orders" that were illegal.

But than my position is that it was unnecessary to fire McChrystal.

Get it straight... he was not fired... he turned in his resignation :nope:

Honestly.

[August]

And especially not a good idea to be saying it around a loose-lipped journalist. :-?

That journalist is pretty perceptive:

...when the military said they wanted to do a counterinsurgency strategy that actually meant 150,000 troops. Obama thought he could get away with just sending 21,000 over and getting a new general.

Pretty much sums it up, doncha think?

[krashkart]

Yeah, sums it up pretty well indeed. That little snippet from the article joggled me a bit: pretty good evidence that politicians have no business conducting warfare... as if the conflict in SEA wasn't proof enough already. :doh:

[August]

Yeah, sums it up pretty well indeed. That little snippet from the article joggled me a bit: pretty good evidence that politicians have no business conducting warfare... as if the conflict in SEA wasn't proof enough already. :doh:


Funny you should mention that because I was just thinking of how as the civil war got going Abraham Lincoln spent hours pouring over military texts and studying maps in an attempt to understand the situation as best that he could. Then again he didn't have the heavy fund raiser event schedule that President Obama has.

[thorn69]

Yeah, sums it up pretty well indeed. That little snippet from the article joggled me a bit: pretty good evidence that politicians have no business conducting warfare... as if the conflict in SEA wasn't proof enough already. :doh:


It should be law that any presidential nominee has to have served in the US military as an officer to be considered for the presidency. I'm sick of all these bleeding heart hippies running the show.

It was never McChrystal's strategy in Afghanistan. It was Obama's. Obama seriously limited McChrystal from being able to have an effective strategy. Any military officer will agree that McChrystal had a solid plan for Afganistan but Obama was only giving him half the tools needed to be successful. Obama set the man up for failure and then relieved him when he got frustrated and told the press the truth about why he was having difficulty doing his job.

He told Obama what he needed to do the job and Obama turned him down by only giving him half of what he needed. So what was he supposed to do? Suck it up? We're talking life and death situations here. No General wants to see his men get killed off. I think he just couldn't stomach it anymore and got fed up with Obama.

In a way it serves him right. He supposedly voted for Obama and look where that got him. You reap what you sew!

[krashkart]

Funny you should mention that because I was just thinking of how as the civil war got going Abraham Lincoln spent hours pouring over military texts and studying maps in an attempt to understand the situation as best that he could. Then again he didn't have the heavy fund raiser event schedule that President Obama has.

Heh. I didn't know that about Abe. Or maybe I did and simply forgot. How big of a role did Lincoln play in the Civil War, as far as deciding where and how to employ the military?


It should be law that any presidential nominee has to have served in the US military as an officer to be considered for the presidency. I'm sick of all these bleeding heart hippies running the show.

Isn't it already a requirement that a candidate must have served in the military at some point? Or did that all change?

[August]

Heh. I didn't know that about Abe. Or maybe I did and simply forgot. How big of a role did Lincoln play in the Civil War, as far as deciding where and how to employ the military?

He left most of it to the Generals and his secretary of war just like every other successful wartime president.

[krashkart]

He left most of it to the Generals and his secretary of war just like every other successful wartime president.

Rgr :up:

[Zachstar]

There is a VAST VAST VAST difference between whistleblowing and mocking a superior.

First of all whistle blowing is usually done with name off the record. And evidence slowly provided to blow the cover once and for all. Whistleblowers want the activity stopped and not articles in a paper glorifying them.

Mocking a superior openly is arrogant and serves no real purpose other than to create a firestorm and destroy morale. Well that and try to end up an "adviser" to Fox or MSNBC...

The "Fired for speaking his mind" argument is completely bunk.

[Skybird]

Yeah, sums it up pretty well indeed. That little snippet from the article joggled me a bit: pretty good evidence that politicians have no business conducting warfare... as if the conflict in SEA wasn't proof enough already. :doh:

They have no special business in war indeed, for them it is just like any other part of the daily routine of theirs. The fundamental difference between a state of peace and a state of war is something that they are not really aware of, since they tend to translate everything into terms that they could grasp with their schemes of political, bureaucratic, PR daily work. That leads next to so serious distortions like trying to judge military needs by standards of peacetime, since war for them is just another aggregate phase of "peace".

That necessarily must end in foul compromises that then get sold as "success" by the PR experts that excel in spelling failure as victory and explain that by adding that precious special chnage of perspective to the story that before was sold as unshakable determination and non-negotiable demands. I totally object to that. Peace has it'S set of moral values and categories, and war has a cojmpeltely different one, dicated by very different needs and demands. messing both sets up means to mess up either "peace" (it'S possible freedom gets turned into a dictatorship), or "war " (by fighting it in an undetemrined, half-hearted way that makes sure that the objectives do not get acchieved while the enemy, if he does not make the same mistake, enforces his own objectives instead).

Platapus asked the right questions about Afghanistan. If you try to find answers to them, you realise soon how very much confused and disconnected from reality Western thinking about Afghanistan is.

Trapped in the Afghan maze.

[OneToughHerring]

My trade off is to get the hell out of AF!

What exactly is the mission in AF?

Kill UBL?
Exterminate the Taliban?
Contain the Taliban?
Convert the Taliban?
Bring "Democracy" to AF?
Drive Al Qaeda out of AF?
Destroy Al Qaeda?
Bring "peace" to AF?
Secure the Southern Pipeline?

What exactly is "victory" in AF? I wanted to ask Bush this question and I would like to ask Obama this question.

The thing is, they still don't think they have to define the goal of the war. The war IS the goal. After a decade of war it is kind of strange that there really is no clear goal outside the war itself, isn't it?

[Platapus]

Isn't it already a requirement that a candidate must have served in the military at some point? Or did that all change?

There has never been a requirement for a candidate for the office of President to have served in the military. Nothing has changed.

Article II, Section 1, paragraph 5 of the Constitution lists all the qualifications to be President. No mention of any military service.

[krashkart]

The thing is, they still don't think they have to define the goal of the war. The war IS the goal. After a decade of war it is kind of strange that there really is no clear goal outside the war itself, isn't it?

As far as I knew, before I gave up really caring about the war, the goal was to kill Bin Laden. At the time I think that was what a lot of Americans wanted (correct me if I'm wrong here, mates). He managed to slip away and since then there has been absolutely no goal that we can understand. What the Washington boneheads want out of the whole ordeal is certainly not being reported to us, and we are left with little more than to debate the possibilities.

There has never been a requirement for a candidate for the office of President to have served in the military. Nothing has changed.

Article II, Section 1, paragraph 5 of the Constitution lists all the qualifications to be President. No mention of any military service.

Ah great, thank you for clearing that up, Platapus. For some reason I thought there was a requirement. I should read up more. :up:

[Weiss Pinguin]

Now the goal seems to be (from what I gather) mostly cleaning up and trying to get things running before we leave. :hmmm: But that's just from what I know, which is even less than what I know about nuclear reactors. :shifty: Maybe someone more knowledgeable and with more experience can correct me...

[SteamWake]

Whatever the goal is (which is sad that they dont have a clear cut goal) things are not going well.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100624/wl_sthasia_afp/afghanistanunrestnatotoll_20100624111912

[Zachstar]

Time to get more drones in there then...

[SteamWake]

Oh lord you cant make this stuff up...

As the media gushes over what a brilliant appointment Patreous (a bush appointee) was...

Taliban endorses General Petraeus, say new US Afghanistan war chief 'not smarter' than McChrystal

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/24/2010-06-24_taliban_endorses_general_petraeus_say_new_us_af ghanistan_war_chief_not_smarter_t.html

[SteamWake]

One more bump with a little humor

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh312/UlteriorModem/botoldyaso.jpg

[gimpy117]

He got the can because you don't hold such a high rank and publicly criticize the Commander and Chief. When you reach such a high level you are held to a higher standard. A normal grunt may get a talking to...but a general? that's obviously a HUGE no-no.

[SteamWake]

He got the can because you don't hold such a high rank and publicly criticize the Commander and Chief. When you reach such a high level you are held to a higher standard. A normal grunt may get a talking to...but a general? that's obviously a HUGE no-no.

Once again he resigned.

Rumor has it he couldent keep from laughing while doing so.

[August]

Once again he resigned.

Rumor has it he couldent keep from laughing while doing so.

Well of course he resigned. Obama as the CiC could have convened a Courts Martial against him for insubordination and he would have had a case too.

Accepting his resignation allows McChrystal to keep his rank and retirement pay. It what is always done in such situations. Take Truman/MacArthur for example.

[Ducimus]

The "Fired for speaking his mind" argument is completely bunk.

I haven't been following this topic very closely for one simple reason. When you wear the uniform, you are never, at any time, allowed to make political statements in the public, or openly critcise the commander in chief, ragardless of rank. Pretty sure there's an article in the UCMJ on this. They beat you upside the head with this in basic training, a General should know better.

Not to mention another little tidbid.... you don't have to respect the man, but you do have to respect his rank. The president, any president, outranks everyone in every branch of the armed forces. As a General, he should have known to watch his P's and Q's because everything he says is repeated over a wide audience due to his rank.

So.. whatever... the General should have known better than to make a stupid E-1/ E-2 mistake of not knowing when to keep your mouth shut.

[gimpy117]

Rumor has it he couldent keep from laughing while doing so.

why? because it's not okay to disrespect you superiors because he's a democrat? we've been saying this since page one: Obama is the tippy top of the chain of command, and you DO NOT publicly speak ill of of you superiors and get away with it. Especially When it's the president, and you're a prominent general. This would have happened with any president and with any general. Heck it even happened with MacArthur in korea.

read Ducimis and August's posts. they've said basically everything i've just said and more.

[SteamWake]

why? because it's not okay to disrespect you superiors because he's a democrat? we've been saying this since page one: Obama is the tippy top of the chain of command, and you DO NOT publicly speak ill of of you superiors and get away with it. Especially When it's the president, and you're a prominent general. This would have happened with any president and with any general. Heck it even happened with MacArthur in korea.

read Ducimis and August's posts. they've said basically everything i've just said and more.

I figure its as simple as that he (McChrystal) had turned in his resignation and really had nothing to loose and found the petulant Commander in Chief an amusing amateur in way over
his head.

Sometimes all you can do is laugh.

[August]

Some people quit jobs by giving notice and resigning, other people quit jobs by making the boss fire them.

Personally I think McChrystal knew exactly what he was doing when he talked to that Rolling Stone reporter and he knew exactly what the outcome would be. You have to admit, it drew attention to the underlying problem far more effectively than just resigning.

[Tribesman]

Personally I think McChrystal knew exactly what he was doing when he talked to that Rolling Stone reporter and he knew exactly what the outcome would be.
Thats a good point, the new offensive was going tits up before it even started and McCrystals whole strategy was reliant on one thing he knows is not present in Afghanistan.
Which does raise the question of why Petreaus took the job as he must know it ain't there too, he won't even manage to get the short term boost to allow a drawdown before it goes backwards again like he did in Iraq.

[Platapus]

Some people quit jobs by giving notice and resigning, other people quit jobs by making the boss fire them.

Personally I think McChrystal knew exactly what he was doing when he talked to that Rolling Stone reporter and he knew exactly what the outcome would be. You have to admit, it drew attention to the underlying problem far more effectively than just resigning.


And, of course, not McChristal is absolved from any accountability for his COIN plan. He retires, gets a "consulting" job with fox news, writes a book, Profit.

3 star retirement pay (I don't think he can retire as a 4 star due to TIG), book deal, "consulting fees". He will have it made.

And best of all he can sit back and say "hey, it ain't my fault!".

I would not feel too bad about him. I think he knew exactly what he was doing.

[L.T]

I forsee that within the next 4 years all foreign troops are out. And afhanistan will end back in civil war.

Then the soldiers that have been rotating there will ask why was we there, why did we loose our friends? and the politicians will say....

Social wealthfare is important and tax deductions.....

What have we got so far...


Drug production increase

Taliban getting stronger

More and more IED attacks

Commanders crying for more soldiers, politicians that are working harder on getting soldiers home..

Soldiers caught in a war where its more about survival than getting the goals done..

This will end as any millitay action have gone the last 3000 years in afghanistan. No one have ever succeded breaking the afghans, Taliban is afghan, Many of there leaders are veterans from the time where the worlds greatest army tryed to fight them.....

When enough politicians whine, we will withdraw and with that asking our self...what the hell did we do there anyways....atleast it will have saved a few jobs in the weapon industry around the world.....

Taliban had to be removed, but you dont replace anything broken before you have something that works to take its place......They found goooold and ooooooil....who will get that when we westerners are out...the afghan people or the afghan politicians.....

sometimes you wonder why politicians dont get strategic traning them self, a requirement to be electet to any millitary office should be read Carl von Clauswitz atleast they have damn idea about how a war should be fought.....

You cant fight a war if the war have to run by a specific amount of money, cant affort it, dont go to war.....war is dynamic and a dynamic situation cant be run by a static plan....geez....freaking noob strategy knoledge....

[Platapus]

We could end this war immediately if we can only figure out who to bribe to provide protection to the TAP NG pipeline. :yep:

[L.T]

We could end this war immediately if we can only figure out who to bribe to provide protection to the TAP NG pipeline. :yep:

Well after 5 years where afghan goverment have exploitet the country its easy, we pay Taliban...