Gen. McChrystal Called In to Explain His Anti-Administration Comments, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 75 times


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 03:52 PM by seeashrink
reply to post by antonia


Well antonia, your opinion will not be popular, but it is correct.
Having said that, there is obviously a problem with this "war". When I was a Staff Sgt. in the military, I felt that two of my responsibilities where one; take care of my troops and two; follow the orders of my superiors. At times these two priorities clashed. If an order was given that was not in the best interest of those under me, which was seldom, I went to bat for my troops. But there is a correct way to do that using the chain of command and proper courtesy.
Now I was not in a war zone and I have not had that experience. I honestly think that I would not have done well because I was so protective of the men and women under me.
There are many problems in the Army. Most of the officers I knew were so concerned with padding their jackets for their career goals that they considered very little the troops that were under them. Well, I'm starting to ramble.
Seeashrink


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:15 PM by MikeboydUS
I highly recommend people read the Rolling Stone article and get an objective view of the matter.

Here are some very interesting quotes from it:

The general's staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs. There's a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority.


McChrystal steps away from the circle, observing his team. "All these men," he tells me. "I'd die for them. And they'd die for me."


Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal's inner circle. "Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said, 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.' "


He went out on dozens of nighttime raids during his time in Iraq, unprecedented for a top commander, and turned up on missions unannounced, with almost no entourage.


It doesn't hurt that McChrystal was also extremely successful as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, the elite forces that carry out the government's darkest ops. During the Iraq surge, his team killed and captured thousands of insurgents, including Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. "JSOC was a killing machine," says Maj. Gen. Mayville, his chief of operations. McChrystal was also open to new ways of killing. He systematically mapped out terrorist networks, targeting specific insurgents and hunting them down – often with the help of cyberfreaks traditionally shunned by the military.


The article is here:
The Runaway General
www.rollingstone.com...

There is nothing insubordinate in the article. There is nothing violating OPSEC.

After finishing it, I realized a number of people on ATS have not read it at all, making subjective BS comments.

So I ask everyone who comments on this issue: Read the Article!!!



reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:31 PM by MikeboydUS
reply to post by josheboyxiii



We have fungus taking care of the poppy fields right now. The stuff is fairly effective and wiping large swaths of it out in a number of the provinces.


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:32 PM by cheddartoes
news.yahoo.com...

As I was looking at this article on Yahoo! News, I came across this...
June 22, 2010: A congressional report finds that the U.S. is paying millions of dollars in protection money to Afghan warlords — and potentially to the Taliban — to provide security for convoys. The U.S. practice of outsourcing supply transports has "fueled a vast protection racket run by a shadowy network of warlords, strongmen, commanders, corrupt Afghan officials," and provided "a significant potential source of funding for the Taliban," the report said.


Does anyone else find this slightly mad?
I mean, from what Ive been told over and over again by mass media, we we're fighting the taliban insurgents, and now all of a sudden it's "Oh yeah, by the way, we were possibly funding them.".

And sorry if this seems alil off subject, Im new to this, and happen to come across the same article as the OP posted, yet from Yahoo!, and felt the need to share, and being as I cannot yet post my own thread, I felt this was the best way to spread knowledge.


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:41 PM by MikeboydUS
reply to post by 1curious1



I ask everyone to read the article before making judgement.

The article is here:
www.rollingstone.com...

I saw no violations of OPSEC or UCMJ. There is some seriously dirty maneuvering going on here, especially if the General has been forced to resign over it.

[edit on 22/6/10 by MikeboydUS]


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:52 PM by hangedman13
reply to post by antonia



AHH yes the general should have known better, BUT wars are not the perview of politicians. Especially one that is being fought for appearance. The "rules" of engagement are a handicap and the military leaders know it. They have to follow the directives of the nice comfy politicians back in the US. Hell all that the pc crap they have put our troops through has prolonged this war. McChrystal will be a casualty of the administrations desire for a pretty face.


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:52 PM by Janky Red
Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to
post by AllIsOne



Aw come on! To be fair not one single North Vietnamese aircraft ever penetrated Texas airspace!


Neither did common sense, that shiz just flops dead ten meters pre border, catches fire or gets shot post boarder, praise the lord.


reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 05:05 PM by Masterjaden
reply to post by antonia



I'm sorry because there's also a certain level of competancy expected out of the CIC... and those he appoints.

If you think that "Avoid going into areas where you aren't nearly certain that you won't have to ue deadly force" is any way to competently run a war, then you really have no business commentating on it. That is the most asinine thing I have ever heard of.

"Ummm. Yeah, we're going to war.... Kill anybody???? no.... what if they shoot at us???? hmmm, well we're going to try to go places where no one will shoot at us...."

Well then why don't you just stay HOME!!!!!!

JAden
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



While we were Distracted with Gay Marriage news This happend today
  Posted 18 days ago with 81 member flags
People are marching in the streets all over Quebec
  Posted 4 days ago with 72 member flags
Breaking: Ron Paul to end active campaigning - cnn
  Posted 14 days ago with 26 member flags
President Obama Affirms His Support for Same Sex Marriage
  Posted 19 days ago with 24 member flags
Anon has released 1.7 GB of files....
  Posted 6 days ago with 24 member flags
Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality
  Posted 12 days ago with 23 member flags
US judge blocks indefinite detention of Americans
  Posted 12 days ago with 21 member flags