TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › "The Runaway General" - Enough to fire/step down for?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"The Runaway General" - Enough to fire/step down for?

post #1 of 28
6/23/10 at 12:29pm
Thread Starter 
I've been getting breaking news updates on my AP (Associated Press) app on my phone all morning about General McChrystal's meetings with Defense Secretary Gates and President Obama over the Rolling Stone article "Runaway General." (You'll have to do with my memory, since it only keeps the last one.)
  1. McChrystal meeting with Def. Sec. Gates (time)
  2. Obama will make announcement about McChrystal's fate at (time)
  3. WH Source: Obama to ask for McChrystal's resignation/Obama to fire McChrystal over Rolling Stone comments
  4. Petraus will be named Commander of Afghanistan war
  5. Obama accepts McChrystal's resignation 'with considerable regret'; Calls it the right step (that one is word for word)
If you haven't read the Rolling Stone article yet, link follows. WARNING: THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE! The only reason I'm posting the link here is because it is 1) a major news story; 2) printed/posted by a major media outlet; and 3) the link will be/has been posted by other major, mainstream news sources. link

Bill O'Reilly pointed out last night that McChrystal never says anything contrary about the President, and only one thing was said and that was by an unnamed staff member. He also said that this shows quite poorly on the President that this kind of overall criticism is being leveled against him/his policies by a man he personally appointed. Alan Colms (very liberal Fox News contributor) said that Obama would be lauded for being "proactive" by meeting with him and likely dismissing him on the same show.

I disagree with Colms' use of the word "proactive" which he used twice. Obama's actions are completely reactive. He isn't being proactive at all - he's simply reacting to the situation and bad press.

I haven't read the whole thing yet; just the first page. To me it sounds like military men talking. Nothing more. Probably not what most would expect from a General, but he's still a soldier IMO. Being a soldier like that would also allow him to relate to his troops in the field, however not being able to turn that "off" is what got him in trouble in Canada and here.

McChrystal isn't the first to criticize the Commander in Chief and direction of the war they were in charge of in the field. Think Gen. Patton, if nothing else.

Do you think that Gen. McChrystal should have been dismissed/fired/asked to resign? Do you think that he should have resigned? Do you think this is a good move for the war effort?

I also heard at least one person ponder if this situation is being blown up in order to divert attention away from what the BIG issue is - obviously the Gulf oil thing and BP. Kinda like - "OH look! A kitty! Don't look at that elephant in the corner...just look at that normal kitty cat...elephants are always in the living room!"
Reply
post #2 of 28
6/23/10 at 12:52pm
I replied in another that its sad in one way because under the military code, you are not supposed to say bad things. but if he feels that Obama is taking us down the wrong path, why shouldn't he be allowe to speak up against it?

IMO its just another way of Obama trying to silence those that oppose anything he does or says. Its his way or the highway.
Reply
post #3 of 28
6/23/10 at 1:02pm
I think it is deflection to a certain extent from the oil spill, Mexico's moronic Amicus brief supporting Barack lawsuit against Arizona for wanting to enforce laws that he won't, Cap & Trade and the fact that good conservative Republican's won their run-off races yesterday (you GO Nikki Haley) and who knows what else.

The left is trying to put it out there that Barack is the big hEro in this McChrystal thing when the General wrote up his resignation letter yesterday.

One has to wonder how much the White House is tying the hands of the military in Afghanistan.............(memories of Viet Nam)
Reply
post #4 of 28
6/23/10 at 1:51pm
I have a son joining the Marines. I don't care if some General is politically correct, I care that he gets the job done!
Reply
post #5 of 28
6/23/10 at 1:57pm
A lot of the more negative comments were made by members of McChrystals staff in private. Now that those comments were made public they reflect poorly on the general. I also have this question: If Obama and McChrystal didn't see eye to eye from day one, why did Obama give him command of Aghanistan?

As good of a battlefield commander that General Patton was, he was not only removed from command over the slapping incident, it almost ended his career.

I don't think Obama or this administration handles criticism very well, but McChrystal should have known better than to participate in the interview.

I have all the confidence in the world in the abilities of General Petraeus.
Reply
post #6 of 28
6/23/10 at 5:53pm
I think it was very generous of Obama to allow him to resign instead of just firing his a$$. This way he can collect his wonderful pension, write a book and make big profits, and do speaking engagements a la Clinton and end up making out like a bandit.
Reply
post #7 of 28
6/23/10 at 6:29pm
I wonder if General McChrystal will end up as a Fox New analyst?

I don't believe General Patton got relieved of his command for slapping that young man, but I believe he was required to publically apologize for the slap to the young man and his troops.
Reply
post #8 of 28
6/23/10 at 6:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I wonder if General McChrystal will end up as a Fox New analyst?
Nahhh I think he has too much integrity for that.
Reply
post #9 of 28
6/23/10 at 6:46pm
He was relieved of his command for it, and was placed into a background role as a decoy during the buildup, training, and invasion of Normandy. During this time Patton was in charge of a fictional army. He didn't take command of Third Army until after the invasion. Ike was so mad he almost sent Patton home for good after he slapped the soldier. Omar Bradley tried to hide the incident, but letters about it reached Eisenhower in England. Patton didn't lose his command over it until a few months after the incident occurred.
Reply
post #10 of 28
6/23/10 at 8:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dogmom View Post
Nahhh I think he has too much integrity for that.
He did vote for Barack.

Fox News has a few retired military, Colonel Oliver North and who is that other guy, Colonel Hunt, I think his name is.
Reply
post #11 of 28
6/24/10 at 9:18am
From what I can tell, the Rolling Stone reporter talked his way into an extended interview, and then ended up with the guys when they were all grounded due to the Icelandic volcano. Then he spent some time with them in the war theatre.

It was incautious of the General to make or allow his inferiors to make such comments, but they were made in an off-duty situation.

I suspect that if someone recorded the President (any President, probably, but specifically this one) shooting the bull with his friends and aides, they would find much worse comments about the generals.

But Petraeus may pull the President's fat out of the fire in Afghanistan, just as he did for Bush in Iraq (when the current President's supporters published a full-page ad in the New York Times, calling him "General Betray-Us.)"
Reply
post #12 of 28
6/24/10 at 10:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kluchetta View Post
I have a son joining the Marines. I don't care if some General is politically correct, I care that he gets the job done!

That is AWESOME, I bet you are sooooo proud of your son.
Reply
post #13 of 28
6/24/10 at 10:26am
Thread Starter 
I *still* haven't read the full article. I did watch quite a few interviews with people at varying levels - from current Senators from both parties, to a retired Secretary of Defense (under Clinton). The concensus was that Obama really had no choice in firing McChrystal and that Petraus is an outstanding choice to replace him.

It is interesting that every reference was to Obama firing McChrystal rather than McChrystal resigning. And this was on Fox, too.

I am going to make a jump here, though, in saying that the vetting process didn't go a whole lot further than, "Who did you vote for? Do you agree with the direction of the Afghan front at this time?" OK, I'm sure it did but whatever else was asked wasn't too darn important to whoever was pulling the finalists for Obama.

One of the people interviewed is retired Army. He said these guys are soldiers. They are Special Ops. I don't know how many of you know SpecOps guys. I do. Knowing little else, McChrystal was a good choice to lead the troops; a bad choice to be the mouthpiece of the Administration, to meet Diplomats, or deal with the Press. These guys are gritty, and with few exceptions they don't turn "off" soldier and turn "on" PR. I've met one that could, to a point. For the most part these are not guys you want to bring home to meet your mother. Father, maybe...if he's been deep in the military.

It was a monumentally stupid decision to let an independent writer basically live with them for a time and then choose what to pull for the story. The writer is now an icon in the journalism world, especially the anti-establishment portion. He brought down a 4-Star General Commander in the middle of a war! But McChrystal made the decision to let him into the fold.

Apparently no one from the Administration gave him even a hint of how to deal with the press when he was confirmed. Which is, generally, don't talk to them at all unless you have to. But then again, these were the same people who let Obama give the Queen of England an iPod.
Reply
post #14 of 28
6/24/10 at 10:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
One of the people interviewed is retired Army. He said these guys are soldiers. They are Special Ops. I don't know how many of you know SpecOps guys. I do. Knowing little else, McChrystal was a good choice to lead the troops; a bad choice to be the mouthpiece of the Administration, to meet Diplomats, or deal with the Press. These guys are gritty, and with few exceptions they don't turn "off" soldier and turn "on" PR. I've met one that could, to a point. For the most part these are not guys you want to bring home to meet your mother. Father, maybe...if he's been deep in the military.
Very true, these guys are kinda rough, but you trust them with your life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
That is AWESOME, I bet you are sooooo proud of your son.
INDEED!!! He's my hero!
Reply
post #15 of 28
6/24/10 at 10:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kluchetta View Post
Very true, these guys are kinda rough, but you trust them with your life.



INDEED!!! He's my hero!
Yes we do, they stand on that wall for us. Most soldiers are just no good at the political side of war. To tell the truth, that is what should have been vetted, but, well, you know................


Semper Fi!
Reply
post #16 of 28
6/24/10 at 10:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kluchetta View Post
Very true, these guys are kinda rough, but you trust them with your life.
The old quote:

"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

--George Orwell
Reply
post #17 of 28
6/24/10 at 11:07am
Whatever possessed McChrystal to give Rolling Stone an interview? It really makes one wonder if it was his version of "cutting and running".

How many people in the government or military are going to be crying their eyes out over his departure?

Troops in Afghanistan react to McChrystal's firing
Quote:
“I think it’s a good thing,” said Sgt. Shannon Grier, 24, of Augusta, Ga., who served in Zabul from August to December last year. “He may not have been a bad guy, but he was taking away things that gave infantrymen success, like night missions.”
Revolt of the Troops
Quote:
A number of troops and private contractors have told me what they think of the story. It’s small, informal, biased sample, for sure. But it's generally broken down into two categories of feeling: glee or relief.

McChrystal's new directives — from restricting U.S. forces ability to attack the enemy to banning Burger King — have a created a widespread backlash among the soldiers here.
Sacked McChrystal once thought indispensible

Quote:
The episode marks the fourth occasion, and the third in a little more than one year, in which McChrystal has caused media controversy for the White House.

The dismissal also delivers a blow to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who fired then-commander Gen. David McKiernan and handpicked McChrystal in May 2008 to lead the Obama administration’s renewed counterinsurgency focus on Afghanistan.

Billed as the next “Mr. Counterinsurgency” by a slew of pundits and observers, McChrystal was touted by the Pentagon as qualified like none other for the role. A West Point graduate and infantryman, McChrystal rose to be vice director of the Joint Staff in Washington. He then was commanding general of Joint Special Operations Command, at Fort Bragg, N.C., before returning to the inner circle of top Pentagon brass as director of the Joint Staff.

The only blip on his resume was his role as commander of the unit that tried to cover up the cause of death of Pat Tillman, the NFL player-turned-soldier who was gunned down by friendly fire. McChrystal signed the Silver Star citation that said Tillman was killed by enemy fire, only to send a memo up the chain the next day saying he may have died by friendly forces. McChrystal later acknowledged he suspected the truth days before signing the citation.

Last summer, McChrystal then led a 60-day strategy review of the war. But Gates held the report on his desk when it arrived at the Pentagon in September, sparking early speculation the White House was having reservations about McChrystal and his plan.
General Faces Unease Among His Own Troops, Too
Quote:
“I wish we had generals who remembered what it was like when they were down in a platoon,” he said to a reporter in the back. “Either they never have been in real fighting, or they forgot what it’s like.”

The sergeant was speaking of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and the circle of counterinsurgents who since last year have been running the Afghan war, and who have, as a matter of both policy and practice, made it much more difficult for troops to use airstrikes and artillery in the fight against the Taliban.

No matter the outcome of his meeting on Wednesday in Washington over caustic comments he and his staff made about President Obama and his national security team, the general, or his successor, faces problems from a constituency as important as his bosses and that no commander wants to lose: his own troops.
Reply
post #18 of 28
6/24/10 at 11:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Whatever possessed McChrystal to give Rolling Stone an interview? It really makes one wonder if it was his version of "cutting and running".

How many people in the government or military are going to be crying their eyes out over his departure?
My understanding is that it wasn't just an interview. He allowed Rolling Stone to embed with him. Bad judgment at best. I agree that Obama had no choice but to releave him.
Reply
post #19 of 28
6/24/10 at 3:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
My understanding is that it wasn't just an interview. He allowed Rolling Stone to embed with him. Bad judgment at best. I agree that Obama had no choice but to releave him.
Found it:
The McChrystal Rolling Stone article: the story behind the story

\t\t\t
Quote:
The McChrystal Rolling Stone article was written by a freelance reporter who ended up in an impromptu 'embed' with McChrystal because of the Iceland volcano.
Reply
post #20 of 28
6/24/10 at 3:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Whatever possessed McChrystal to give Rolling Stone an interview? It really makes one wonder if it was his version of "cutting and running".

How many people in the government or military are going to be crying their eyes out over his departure?

Troops in Afghanistan react to McChrystal's firing

Revolt of the Troops


Sacked McChrystal once thought indispensible


General Faces Unease Among His Own Troops, Too
Oh yeah, let's trash the dude that has served his country his entire life because he won't let us go to BK.
I don't put much stock in Rolling Stone and NY Times, two of your links.
Stars and Stripes were fair, although I am BETTING the lack of night missions is NOT the fault of McChrystal but the Obama administration trying to micromanage a war.
Reply
post #21 of 28
6/24/10 at 8:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kluchetta View Post
I have a son joining the Marines. I don't care if some General is politically correct, I care that he gets the job done!
It's not about being politically correct or not....any Army man, a General especially, knows better than to disrespect his superiors in any way, particularly to the media. It would have a bad effect on general discipline if he was allowed to get away with it.

I thought this article was good, because I didn't really understand the situation....apparently the president can't "fire" a general, he can only relieve him of his command. It would be up to the Army to court-martial him if they thought it was warranted, but they'll probably let him retire instead: http://www.slate.com/id/2257952/
Reply
post #22 of 28
6/25/10 at 12:00am
He would probably be better off retiring at this point, since it is doubtful he would ever hold any sort of meaningful command or position again.
Reply
post #23 of 28
6/27/10 at 1:43pm
Now you have the McChrystal camp, and Rolling Stone disagreeing over what the ground rules for the article were.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...T2010062504101

I still maintain that McChrystal has no one to blame but himself for his poor judgement and for not making sure his subordinates were reigned in with the press around. while free speech does exist in the military, the right is curbed by the need to maintain order and discipline. I've never trusted the media. It boggles my mind that he would.
Reply
post #24 of 28
6/27/10 at 2:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
McChrystal isn't the first to criticize the Commander in Chief and direction of the war they were in charge of in the field. Think Gen. Patton, if nothing else.

Do you think that Gen. McChrystal should have been dismissed/fired/asked to resign? Do you think that he should have resigned? Do you think this is a good move for the war effort?
As a general in the U.S. military, McChrystal isn't supposed to criticize the commander-in-chief to anyone, including his staff or to a magazine. That doesn't mean he doesn't have free speech, though, he just has to take the consequences.

My dad was a disabled veteran of WWII; he was a medical technician at Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower's Supreme Headquarters in England. He also had contact with General Patton and I can tell you with certainty that Patton did not care about the men who made up the troops. He was known for sending troops into suicide missions; he was intensely disliked because he had very little regard for the men's lives.

Eisenhower, on the other hand, felt very deeply the losses of the men under his command. My father regularly drew blood from Eisenhower, which he gave and donated to help the injured men. Patton's slap was simply the incident everyone was waiting for to finally get him out of command.
Reply
post #25 of 28
6/27/10 at 3:39pm
Wow, Swamp Witch, I bet your father has some stories to tell. I hope you have it all down for posterity, that is important stuff.

I bet you sat enthralled listening to him, I know I would have.
Reply
post #26 of 28
6/27/10 at 4:48pm
Not many WWII veterans left; my dad died in September at age 86, but maybe some of his experiences can live on.
Reply
post #27 of 28
6/27/10 at 5:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
I think it was very generous of Obama to allow him to resign instead of just firing his a$$. This way he can collect his wonderful pension, write a book and make big profits, and do speaking engagements a la Clinton and end up making out like a bandit.
Just so we're clear on this, the President "fires" an officer (any officer) by requesting his resignation. Short of a court martial (not gonna happen in this case), the President can't "fire" any military official.
Reply
post #28 of 28
6/27/10 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwampWitch View Post
Not many WWII veterans left; my dad died in September at age 86, but maybe some of his experiences can live on.
I'm so sorry SwampWitch.

My father started out in North Africa then was shipped to Naples Italy during WWII, he traveled just about the entire length of Italy during the winter and spring of 1944 by foot through the mountains. He told my brother more stories than he did me.

My Dad died at age 85 in September of '08. Our fathers were exactly the same age SwampWitch and died a year apart.

My brother has put some things together and scanned all my Dad's letters to his Mom during the war, here is an excerpt from a story my Dad told my brother.

Quote:
The stories he told me were mostly due to coercion on my part, after I
went into the Air Force, maybe he thought I should know a little. I could
Usually get 1 story out of him when we were alone together before he
Stopped and changed the subject.

I heard a few of the easier ones
more than once, but the “Fox hole” story was a single event that
I could tell bothered him very much, I was unable to get very much from
Him other than he was in a cold muddy hole during the winter and they were
Getting pounded by German artillery.. Dad was
administering first aid to a guy that didn’t have a chance of making it as his leg was almost
completely blown off his body by artillery shrapnel. Dad kept telling
him he would be OK, and that the medic was on his way.

There was another guy in the fox hole with them that had already died of injuries.
Dad saw the medic running toward them to help, when an enemy shell blew up and the medic
was killed a few feet from Dad’s fox hole. He was pinned down in that foxhole for
another full day and night. He heard men screaming for help all night, but one
by one the screaming stopped until there was total silence.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › "The Runaway General" - Enough to fire/step down for?