More problems for Obama. McChrystal is going Rogue

[LeftyAndProud60]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100621/us-mcchrystal-enemies/

[Jennicut]

1. Biden wanted some of these miltary idiots fired. He was correct.

That is one snake in the grass, Mr. President. Get us out of Afghanistan ASAP.

[vaberella]

17. +1. n/t

[Mathilda]

2. Soldiers are angry that McChrystal wants to reduce the killing of civilians

According to the HuffPo article:

""Rolling Stone" interviewed troops frustrated by McChrystal's strict rules for combat that are intended to reduce the number of civilian casualties."

How dare he.

[EFerrari]

20. I don't believe that. McChrystal has a history of human rights abuses.

He's operating a black site at Bagram right now. I wonder what the real story is.

[hlthe2b]

3. from the article linked above:

An article out this week in "Rolling Stone" magazine depicts Gen. Stanley McChrystal as a lone wolf on the outs with many important figures in the Obama administration and unable to convince even some of his own soldiers that his strategy can win the war.

A band of McChrystal's profane, irreverent aides are quoted mocking Vice President Joe Biden and Richard Holbrooke, the special U.S. representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

McChrystal himself is described by an aide as "disappointed" in his first Oval Office meeting with an unprepared President Barack Obama. The article says that although McChrystal voted for Obama, the two failed to connect from the start. Obama called McChrystal on the carpet last fall for speaking too bluntly about his desire for more troops.

"I found that time painful," McChrystal said in the article, on newsstands Friday. "I was selling an unsellable position."



hmmmm.....

[LeftyAndProud60]

5. "Unprepared?" Wow. Obama was bullied into this. He didn't want to be viewed as weak. nt

[noamnety]

8. He sounds even more weak

if the excuse is that he let himself be bullied into it.

[vaberella]

22. Far from it. Obama made a compromise. That's established by McChrystal himself.

McChrystral, Gates, and HRC wanted the 30,000 troops and no deadline. Not even the arbitrary one given. So you're looking at limitless troops from those three cats. Biden wanted no more troops and a timeline to get out. What we got was a slight surge...with a strict timeline stating that troops will be coming out. So Obama said, I'll give you a try...you have a shot to do what you can with the increase in troop, fail or not...the troops are still going to come out. So do your best while we're there. In the end---this is not looking good for McChrystal's side.

[zipplewrath]

25. Slight?

He roughly tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan over the Bush commitment. What would constitute a "big" surge?

[vaberella]

26. Alright, big surge. n/t

[zipplewrath]

28. Escalation

With the associated escalation in violence and innocent death.

Wish he had "compromised" with Code Pink instead of the war mongers.

[vaberella]

36. I can respect that. I wish he did also. This wasn't a move I supported, well 100%, anyway.

It's iffy how I feel about this. I am definitely not liking the idea of us leaving Afghanistan and it ending up like Pakistan did during the 1980s and also the idea of AQ walking in there and basically making a new military strong hold and then moving to the neighboring "nuclear" owning nations with new army and causing us problems. This is not out of the realm of possibility.

For the former, we caused their problems and then we'll walk out like it didn't mean shit and leave it 20x worse than when we walked in. What was the damned point of that. What kind of human beings are we to think it's the right thing to leave these people like that without even trying. So when I read Obama would send it 30,000 troops as mainly back up for civilian forces that will aid the people----well I supported that measure. And the idea of pushing AQ out so they pose as little a threat as possible is also something I support. But on the flip-side I want my soldiers home. I'm tired, this is economically draining and unsustainable. So I was on the fence with this one.

[zipplewrath]

39. You keep doing that, minimizing

He sent in 30K ADDITIONAL troops, over the roughly 30K he had already added over BUSH. He has massively escalated this war.

I don't know what you think we're accomplishing by staying and killing innocent civilians, bribing security "contractors" connected to the taliban, and supporting a severely corrupt government, but I think regardless of what it is, you'd be hard pressed to show we are achieving it.

[vaberella]

44. I don't know how I'm minimizing it since I said the reasons why I gave my tentative support for it.

I listed the reasons...I already considered what you said and we'd do the same thing if we left it if not worse because it would fall into the hands of AQ for all we know and we have a bigger threat on our hands. You choose to ignore that very real possibility which will lead to more death and us probably forced back in there.

[zipplewrath]

48. you minimize the scope of the escalation

As for your fear that Al Queada would return, they are already in Pakistan, and are continuing to train. Why do you really care which side of the border they are on? And they are in Yemen and Somalia too. I'm not sure why the commitment of innocent lives, money and soldiers is important in Afghanistan, but not elsewhere.

[vaberella]

23. What's the "ummmm" about? n/t

[hlthe2b]

27. actually a "hmmmm"

just my disappointment in McChrystal for what I consider rather unprofessional behavior

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. Time to go home while we can

[Uzybone]

6. McChrystal was a mistake from the start

and ramping up in Afghanistan is a mistake that will be a thorn in our side for many years to come. President Obama should have gone with Bidens plan re: Afghanistan.

There is still time to change course.

[vaberella]

14. I think he made a compromise though.

HRC and Gates were pushing war without a date...so we'd be in an endless war. These were people backing McChrystal. While Biden was a lone gunman pushing for an end to this nonsense. Obama said, I'll give you a mini surge---no results and we'll be out. And it looks like we're coming out.

[Pirate Smile]

32. I think Rahm was on Biden's side.

:hide:

[Jennicut]

38. He was one of the few, ironically.

Which is why my hatred of Rahm is, well, kind of limited.

[Thrill]

7. People wanted here wanted him gone. He's likely to be gone

after that article

[jody]

9. The issue could be posed as whether Obama has a problem with McChrystal or McChrystal has a problem

with Obama.

One might consider which of the two has 30 plus years preparing for and leading troops in combat particularly asymmetric warfare and which has none.

One thing patients learn when visiting an MD is to let the MD treat the patient rather than the patient directing the MD on how to do her job.

If a patient wants a second opinion it's better to seek it from another MD rather than a politician or lawyer.

[Ikonoklast]

11. But one is The Boss.

And the other isn't.

Experience and planning all goes out the window after the first shots are fired.

[jody]

12. Do you mean that "Experience and planning goes out the window" when you have a serious accident? You

want the ambulance to carry you to the nearest mayor for treatment rather than an emergency room with an ER doctor?

[Ikonoklast]

18. Yes, if the ER doctor screwed up the first time you used him.

Why would you go back to him again, and take another crack at your life?


Maybe the Mayor just might remember his basic First Aid, and save your life.

[jody]

21. You, not I, stated "Experience and planning" don't matter when a need arises. Military commanders

are just as well trained as any other professional.

That is the sole difference between you and I.

I believe "Experience and planning" do count and you say they don't.

Have a great evening. :hi:

[Ikonoklast]

24. And many of the best laid plans go awry.

The difference between you and I is that I don't bow before presumed experience, especially after it has been shown to be valueless in regards to a changing metric that has no guideposts.

And I never stated 'they don't matter'.

Your words.

[vaberella]

15. McChrystal was pushing for more WAR! Biden wanted out and Obama looks like he wanted out.

I wouldn't listen to the man who wants to send our troops, even if he's a war hero, to a war that has no meaning. Based on your statement McCain would be the best Secretary of Defense.

[jody]

19. No, not at all. I respect the role of our president as commander in chief but the surgeon general

also works for our president.

I expect a president to make broad policy decisions that affect such things as funding and stem cell research.

I do not expect a president to make specific decisions on how to treat or fight a threat such as swine flu.

Those type decisions are best handled by professionals such as our surgeon general or military general.

[rury]

33. Generals always advocate for more war

because that's what they do.
McChrystal is not to be trutsted on this any more than any other member of the military-industrial complex.
He is an insubordinate professional warmonger who should have been canned.
BTW, Afghanistan is the ONLY decision by President Obama that I think he should have gone the other way on.

[jody]

41. Understand but we invaded and fight in Afghanistan because two presidents with funds from congress

ordered military commanders to invade and fight.

Under our Constitution elected civilians have 100% control on whether to fund and prosecute a military action.

The things that McChrystal and other senior commanders do or say IMO pale to insignificance in the presence of presidents and congresses who have failed.

[hedgehog]

45. If I may,

Winfield Scott

George B. McClellan

John Pope

Ambrose Burnside

Joseph Hooker

George G. Meade

[Ikonoklast]

49. Best to defer to their 'planning and experience'.

And add years to a war while they figure out that things just aren't going as planned.

[jody]

50. Commanders have authority to conduct military operations and are responsible for the outcome. That's

also true for Commanders in Chief.

[geek tragedy]

10. Why the hell is McChrystal discussing who he voted for?

Generals are all politicians, but this one is especially shameless.

[vaberella]

16. I figured he was drunk. n/t

[vaberella]

13. HRC pushed war and Biden said Hell No...

Lordy. Obama made a compromise and this cat is against it. People are harping on Obama...even his Admin is all over the place.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

30. Why bring HRC into it? I thought Obama was President. Isn't he the decider?

[vaberella]

35. Why bring in Biden or Gates? Did you read the article?! She was brought into it.

I notice you didn't ask me about Biden. They were in the article if you bothered to read it.

[karynnj]

43. Because she was an influencial voice allied with Gates

Imagine that Obama had nominated Senator Reed as Secretary of state - and think of how that would have changed the balance in the internal meetings. Reed and Kerry were both concerned with any expansion that moved beyond what the Afghan government had the ability to immediately provide security and good enough governance after the US cleared an area. Both came to this from their experiences in Vietnam where the US fought for and won areas over and over - always as a great costs to lives. I suggested thinking of Reed because that contrast might be sharper as he was a West Point graduate and served in Vietnam.

What happens is that Gates loses a strong ally and the more cautious approach gains an ally. (To be complete, neither Reed or Kerry were for Biden's just counterterrorism approach. There was great concern that the intelligence behind drone attacks would become even worse than it was.) Obama was said to have listened to Kerry and Reid, but it is hard not to believe that their insights would have had more weight if they were in the room.

[AtomicKitten]

46. Correct. From McChrystal's Rolling Stone interview:

The Secretary of State is the only member of Obama's staff to get good reviews from McChrystal's people:

"Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.' "

McChrystal wanted more, Clinton said give it to him.

[HCE1947]

29. We need a lesson from Harry S. Truman

When Truman had a general who refused to follow his instructions as commander-in-chief, he nailed MacArthur, and the general went off into the sunset and faded away. Obama was wrong on McCrystal from the start. Now, as this general starts badmouthing people in the administration, he is daring Obama to fire him.

McCrystal does not have MacArthur's pull. He has few friends in high places. Fire this idiot!

Biden was right. Let's get out of there before it becomes another Vietnam for us. Afghanistan brought down the Soviet Union, and it will bring us down if we do not get out of there.

[KoKo]

31. Good Point...Truman took heat for MacArthur and Righties never let him forget it..

but MacArthur was a Prima Dona..renegade. It was best that Truman fire him...even though the NeoCon Historians still love MacArthur...others who are more credible say it was one of his best decisions.

[impik]

34. If he said 1% of what's being quoted, he must go home today

[Skidmore]

37. McChrystal is a Cheney mole.

What purpose do these comments serve other than to try to blow up the current administration and the Dems before an election?

[NorthCarolina]

47. Exactly, this was certainly no accidental misspeak. There's absolutely some

premeditated thought behind this.

[jeanpalmer]

40. McChrystal can see the handwriting on the wall

This war is a loser. The Marja offensive taught him that. He's going to make a scene so he can get fired and then blame the politicians for the failure.

He has already postponed the much anticipated invasion of Kandahar because it will be a major fiasco. He's getting out while the getting's good.

And now Karzai is giving Japan priority on the mineral deposits. It's turning to ---- fast.

[Robert DAH Bruce]

42. But McChrystal is so NICE in Person!

Just like Westmoreland!