It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Gen. McChrystal Called In to Explain His Anti-Administration Comments

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:27 AM
Sigh. All failing war efforts require a PR boost once in a while. Let the public think house is being cleaned, AGAIN, and that a new, "determined" commander will be put in place, reinvigorating the troops..blah, blah...thus assuring more years of needless death 'N' occupation. OOh..did summun find sum min-rals there? Can we stay longer, daddy?

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:28 AM

Originally posted by Styki
I'm not sure of what Obama should do to McChrystal.

Obama is not weak if he chooses to let things be. There are a few things which everyone who chooses to speak on the matter must take into account.

First, if Obama was to fire McChrystal then that would require a change of command. For anybody who has never served in the military, this is huge. I can't even begin to understand all the impacts that something like this would have, but I think I have a better understanding than most.

Second, this is now a political decision. The conservative media is going to side with McChrystal. We all know that anybody with conservative tendencies will fall in line on that side. This is the first decision that Obama is going to make which truly puts this war in his hands.

Third, if any demotion takes place that would destroy McChrystal's career/life. He is military and has been for most of his life, there are personal factors to take into consideration.

I will say that we can kind of see what's coming by looking at what has already taken place. By acknowledging the situation before the article is released the article is being downplayed a bit. Before this article hit's the shelve we can expect this situation to be resolved.

I heard a good solution last night:

McCrystal turns in his resignation. Obama says "Thank you" and puts it in his desk drawer. Then, if there's an issue in the future (for example, no progress in Afghanistan by certain date), he can take it out and say "OK, now I accept your resignation."

Even though the issue won't hit newsstands until Friday, the article actually went online yesterday morning. Here is the link.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:29 AM

Originally posted by mothershipzeta

I'm sure he'll have a job at Fox News lined up before the ink on his resignation is dry.

Yep, pretty much. I won't be shocked if he runs for President. People will just line up for him.

And Obama can't win in this situation - he either accepts his resignation and we hear the right-wing lose it, saying that "Obama's ego" is going to lose Afghanistan, or he allows him to stay and they say Obama is denigrating the position of Commander-in-Chief by allowing officers to question his judgment.

I can't believe how everyone is making this a political issue when it isn't one. He had no business doing what he did. He knows that. This isn't about politics at all. Most of the military people I know are saying he should be fired. If this was a Private talking crap about the general he'd be sacked without question. I guess West Point boys get a bit of leeway though. The guy was also involved in the Pat Tillman cover-up. Everyone is so hating Obama they will make friends with anyone who seems remotely against him these days. It's just dumb. The COIN strategy isn't working and it's ain't Obama who wrote it. It's McChrystal. He's just going to cut and run because he knows he's lost. Then he can just blame Obama when he is running for office. "Oh if you hadn't fired me we would have won the war!" This guy is just as hooked into the military-complex as anyone else in Washington. He isn't your friend. Of course, I'm sure everyone will just line up to vote for him considering how gullible the public is these days. Then you will just whine about his ass.

Perhaps Webster Tarpley was right and the Republicans will be running a general in 2012.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:41 AM
General Stanley McChrystal has been stitched up by Rolling Stone

There isn’t very much in the Rolling Stone article requiring an apology from General McChrystal, the man in charge in Afghanistan who has been summoned to the White House. If he does resign, it should not be because of perceived slurs against the White House. They’re not there.

There was a copy of the article available online until recently, which I’ve read, and some excerpts and a news report about it here and here. Basically, the general – or “THE RUNAWAY GENERAL” as he is hysterically referred to – has been the victim of journalist hype. It is the magazine’s editors that call the White House “wimps”, and it is the author that uses almost every f-word in the piece, gratuitously, gratingly, and not while quoting anyone. The only f-word used by someone else is a Brit saying how much some people love McChrystal’s habit of showing up on patrol.

Let’s be clear: Barack Obama may still want McChrystal to resign. The general gave long, close and after-hours access to a journalist and also apparently made no complaints when Rolling Stone sent him a pre-publication copy. That this represents poor judgment, and that this is not the first instance of his poor judgment, is indisputable.

But of the inflammatory quotations and asides, I think it is safe to say they’re mostly ill-judged wisecracks. One in particular from a McChrystal aide about Joe Biden is specifically meant to be a joke. McChrystal also laughs about not wanting to open an email from Richard Holbrooke, and exhibits a reluctance to have a posh dinner in France. Some aides need to wash their mouths out. That really is about it.

There is very little in the piece that would back up the “runaway” angle. There is almost no difference in policy mentioned between the army and the White House. McChrystal comes off as one of the few people actually building bridges properly with Afghanistan’s difficult government. And it would hardly be the first time that a general and a president have not got on like a house on fire.

If anything, the case for dismissing McChrystal is strengthened by what the article exposes as his failure to win over the hearts and minds of his own men. There is considerable doubt among ordinary soldiers that counterinsurgency is the right strategy, and their commander does not come out of confrontations with them very well. But for insulting behaviour towards the administration? Look elsewhere.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by Styki
I'm not sure of what Obama should do to McChrystal.

Coming from a person with 28 years in the military, Obama should fire him on the spot...any military person will understand why.

Have you read the article?

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:51 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

oh well if rolling stone said it's okay, it must be fine

I can go to my job and talk trash about my boss with my coworkers and if my boss finds out, I'll tell him Rolling Stone magazine said it wasn't a big deal

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:54 AM

Originally posted by piddles
reply to post by Stormdancer777

oh well if rolling stone said it's okay, it must be fine

I can go to my job and talk trash about my boss with my coworkers and if my boss finds out, I'll tell him Rolling Stone magazine said it wasn't a big deal

That wasn't the point.

This is much to do about nothing.

[edit on 093030p://bWednesday2010 by Stormdancer777]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 08:59 AM
reply to post by antonia

I was so happy to read what you wrote. I was in the Navy and to hear a high ranking officer speak about his superiors, whether he be right or wrong, sickens me.

He will walk into Obama's office monday and all Obama should say is, "General, I'll have your resignation on my desk by 0800 tomorrow. Dismissed."

These guys think their gods and they act like it. This one obviously doesn't know how to do his job. There are better ways to show unhappiness with your President then what this fool did.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 09:08 AM
This is my opinion why I believe McChryrstal agreed to The Rolling Stone

Magazine interview. McChrystal knew the consequences of his

statements and he knew he would probably have to resign after

giving this candid interview. McChrystal wins either way

because at this point obama is not going to give him what he needs to

win the War in Afghanistan. If obama lets McChrystal stay in this

position, obama would have to give him what he needs to stay the

course to try to win the war but this will never happen. When McChrystal

resigns command he saves face win or lose in Afghanistan and still

receives his pension as a 4 Star General and will not be blamed for losing

the War. After 10 years and the longest U.S. War in American history we

know how this ends.

Double edged sword when McChrystal resigns so goes Hamid Karza

with the Taliban because Hamid Karza and McChrystal have a good communicative

relationship. Hamid Karza knows if McChrystal leaves, the U.S. and Afghanistan will

never win this War. This is the War of Why and What. No one person

has given me a good enough reason of Why we are there in the first place

and What is in it for the U.S. Surely it is not over drug money or natural

resources or is it? ^Y^

[edit on 23-6-2010 by amari]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 09:11 AM

"I was selling an unsellable position." For the general, it was a crash course in Beltway politics – a battle that pitted him against experienced Washington insiders like Vice President Biden, who argued that a prolonged counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan would plunge America into a military quagmire without weakening international terrorist networks. "The entire COIN strategy is a fraud perpetuated on the American people," says Douglas Macgregor, a retired colonel and leading critic of counterinsurgency who attended West Point with McChrystal. "The idea that we are going to spend a trillion dollars to reshape the culture of the Islamic world is utter nonsense.

By midnight at Kitty O'Shea's, much of Team America is completely #faced. Two officers do an Irish jig mixed with steps from a traditional Afghan wedding dance, while McChrystal's top advisers lock arms and sing a slurred song of their own invention. "Afghanistan!" they bellow. "Afghanistan!" They call it their Afghanistan song.

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."

Whatever the nature of the new plan, the delay underscores the fundamental flaws of counterinsurgency. After nine years of war, the Taliban simply remains too strongly entrenched for the U.S. military to openly attack. The very people that COIN seeks to win over – the Afghan people – do not want us there. Our supposed ally, President Karzai, used his influence to delay the offensive, and the massive influx of aid championed by McChrystal is likely only to make things worse. "Throwing money at the problem exacerbates the problem," says Andrew Wilder, an expert at Tufts University who has studied the effect of aid in southern Afghanistan. "A tsunami of cash fuels corruption, delegitimizes the government and creates an environment where we're picking winners and losers" – a process that fuels resentment and hostility among the civilian population. So far, counterinsurgency has succeeded only in creating a never-ending demand for the primary product supplied by the military: perpetual war. There is a reason that President Obama studiously avoids using the word "victory" when he talks about Afghanistan. Winning, it would seem, is not really possible.

This is the first time I have got to read the full article.

For heaven sakes don't worry about insulting Obama, look at the mess they are creating in Afghanistan, according to this article,

I believe that is the bigger story.

Oh I get the picture,

Obama puts another nail in America's coffin.

[edit on 093030p://bWednesday2010 by Stormdancer777]

[edit on 093030p://bWednesday2010 by Stormdancer777]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 10:27 AM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

I read the article and I certainly think that this lame general mcchryster has done acts which deserves his unbecoming of a officer. He should have been fired during the cover up of his subordinate soldier during the Bush era but he was darling of bush and his administration.

After leaving Iraq in ruins which is still frequent point of attacks this same general was appointed by Obama with his failed operation and plan for COIN. As a matter of fact the OP of this thread don't probably know that the instructions was passed by him (general) not Obama under his COIN operation. I have sympathy for him.

I certainly pity the poor upbringing and possible lack of education and uncivil environment for the general who has to use offensive rhetoric words to make a point. It happens in old age.

The OP probably still thinks it was Obama who sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan and not the general mchyster which is also mentioned in Rolling Stone article.

By the way the general was called for questioning for derogatory comments about the President and his administration.

[edit on 23-6-2010 by Crimson_King]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:02 AM
McChrystal will accept the way he is handled by his Commander in Chief. He's a Soldier, and knows the score. I'm sure he will transition the outcome with as much class as he can muster.

Of course, if he drives a tank up the steps, runs in to the President's office and pinches out a dookie on his desk, I'd be happy to see that outcome as well.

Give em' hell, General.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:13 AM
reply to post by Xtrozero

That's true, Obama can't let McChrystal go back with his command. If he did, McChrystal would have the reputation defying the president and getting away with it. That wouldn't send a great message to the soldiers as far as discipline goes.

I read a good potion of that article and this is a prime example of why people need to be careful around reporters. If a general allows a journalist to get close enough to record himself and his aids in a relaxed state such as joking around; that journalist should have the decency to portray his comments in a positive light.

A General gets fired as a journalist gets a raise.

[edit on 23-6-2010 by Styki]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:21 AM
observe and report....


The good God fearing General who out grunts the grunts was a no show at the Security Meeting.

Implied actions.

Meanwhile spec opps crawling all over Iran like bedbugs at a Sally Ann Motel and...Iran who has been our thorn in the flesh is not going to play nice in the sandbox.

I wonder if somebody else has President Obama's ass besides Uncle Sam..I mean his

[edit on 23-6-2010 by whiteraven]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:23 AM
i'm military from vietnam....and i think the general is a man for doing, where can we find 12 more like him? and we need less of you idiots cutting on him....wipers of other peoples bott....never mind

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:26 AM

Originally posted by Helmkat
I must admit to confusion...


You have to ask yourself how exactly we were left like this, in debt up to our necks, faith shattered. Is it really Obama's issue? or is it Cheney's legacy? was this by accident or plan. Perhaps its the failing education system that has left America in ever growing ignorance, distracted and apathetic.

Maybe we are just reaping what we sow.

We are all to blame for this mess.

All of us.

Point a finger at yourself first before you blame another.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Helmkat]

Congratulation for pointing out the obvious!
The Afghan/Iraq war was a done deal long before the 911 event. 911 was, is and will remain an inside job. It is all about OIL! The Caspian sea via Afghanistan pipeline project was long in the making during the 90's already, all it needed was a "New Pearl Harbor"
Back in the days right after 911 I used to sign my comments in the various political news-groups with:
"Why does this 911 remind me of the Reichstag 1934?"
Unfortunately, as you pointed out on education, most respondents had no clue what I meant by this. Hitler had won a "Minority" government, - some 44% only if I recall correctly. So the German parliament got burned down and it was blamed on some "Anarchists" - So lo and behold in this panic and fear-mongering that followed, he got the sole power to run the country from a "security perspective" and the rest is history...

The question is not if the General is right or Obama is wrong, the main issue is to wake up that it is a "Corporate War" and the soldiers are nothing but cannon fodder for the CEO's of the various commercial interest groups.

And, as another poster had pointed out, it is Vietnam all over again. Well he too is right. Unless you "Nuke" the entire region so that not even a mouse is alive after, Afghanistan will break the backs of any empire, be it past, present or future.

This is their spirit and this is how they have lived for a long time! They finished the British off, they finished the USSR off and there will be no doubt they will finish the USA-NATO off as well.


posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:31 AM
The Sauds love MJ.

Of course they disdain Iran.

Behind close doors the Sauds breed Falcons and Arabians.

The President does not fit their idea of a good falcon or Arabian.

To the kings of Arabia he is a...... in order to save their own ass.

The # is gonna fly...mark my

Wheres Frankie when you need him.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 12:14 PM
reply to post by Crimson_King

If you actually read the article, you would have noted that the worst remarks were all made by General McChrystal's staff, not by General McChrystal himself.

You clearly have a bias against General McChrystal, especially by making absurd statements about General McChrystal's education and upbringing.

You apparently know nothing about him or his upbringing.

General McChrystal is the son of a General. He attended both West Point and Harvard.

Lastly, General McChrystal is not Commander in Chief, meaning Obama sent those 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. General McChrystal asked for 40,000. Obama sent 30,000.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 12:20 PM
Gen. McChrystal has been relieved of his command. Just reported on MSNBC.

I agree with this decision. There needs to be a professionalism and respect between the commanders and the CiC.

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 12:24 PM
AP is saying McChrystal will be relieved of command and General Petraeus will essentially be demoted from CENTCOM commander and take over command of Afghanistan.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in