Tuesday, June 22, 2010
McChrystal has to go
His behavior is unprofessional, and last I checked he ultimately reports to the CiC. McChrystal doesn't have the option to criticize his superiors while he's serving in the US Army. It doesn't matter if he's right and the President is an asshat. It's not his job to publicly criticize the decisions or capabilities of his superiors.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
True....but why did he do it...he is not stupid...spent a long time in black ops, and understands how to use the press...the way he handled his request for additional troops...perhaps he wanted this response/result.
He probably decided enough was enough, and rather than suffer fools gladly, he makes a ruckus that ends with either him getting at least some of what he wants or ends up getting him fired -- thus losing his own job and career but making a point that desperately needs to be made for the men serving under him.
NoVa, I think you may be right.
The man has spent a life time of understanding people and tatics, even the selection of the news organization which goes to BO's base.
He is right, just can't say it.
As a talking head last night said (on PBS!), the administration is running the Afghan war like a bunch of feuding 9 year olds.
I'm sure we'll get some gung-ho McNamara type for a replacement, who will manage to screw up the coming 'surge' and get several thousand soldiers killed.
Then write a book 30 years from now tearfully taking responsibility.
What he said or inferred was not inadvertant. I think, in fact it was highly calculated and will force the issues to the surface. And of course, he has to go. He knew that's the way it was going to play and he just took one for the team (or fell on his sword, as it were).
He's gone.
Replaced by Gen. Petraeus.
It is one giant Greek tragedy.
Well, Stanley, this is another fine mess you've gotten us in to.
Sorry. I've been waiting all day to say that.
But, yes, he had to go even if the CiC is a doofus.
Actually, I'm surprised the announcement wasn't that General McChrystal was retiring. Because, clearly, his career is over.
i just read the RS article and I didn't see much if anything that Mccrystal said against obama.
there's a few snide asides made to the reporter, and the general says "whos that?" about biden, but nothing too bad that deserves this uproar or him getting fired.
...gung-ho McNamara type for a replacement, who will manage to screw up the coming 'surge' and get several thousand soldiers killed.
Worrisome, that. Fortunately, perhaps, Petraeus doesn't (yet) seem like McNamara, so perhaps there is hope.
Then again, Petraeus at the time of the Iraq surge had the Commander in Chief behind the decision to press for at least as much victory as politics would allow. I'm not sure how much victory this Commander in Chief actually wants. To quote:
"I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur."
Cripes, I'm glad that Truman didn't feel that way when my father was positioned in the Pacific off the coast of Japan. And I know in no uncertain terms how Dad felt about it as well!
Post a Comment