Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

McChrystal should be sacked for insubordination.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
denem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:10 PM
Original message
McChrystal should be sacked for insubordination.
Edited on Sun Dec-06-09 05:52 PM by denem
Whatever you might think of his conduct of, or advice on, the Afghanistan War, or even the leak of his assessment on troop number, a report in the New York Times makes it pretty clearly he ignored, or 'misinterpreted' the orders given in March by the President, including the exit strategy. The troops were being prepared for a more permanent presence, and the Comander in Cheif's strategy was being renounced in the field.

How Obama Came to Plan for Surge in Afghanistan
... (McChrystal's) request outlined three options for different missions: sending 80,000 more troops to conduct a robust counterinsurgency campaign throughout the country; 40,000 troops to reinforce the southern and eastern areas where the Taliban are strongest; or 10,000 to 15,000 troops mainly to train Afghan forces.

Mr. Obama was focused on another report. At 10 p.m. on Sept. 29, he called over from the White House residence to the West Wing to ask for a copy of the first Afghanistan strategy he approved in March to ramp up the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban while increasing civilian assistance. A deputy national security adviser, Denis McDonough, brought him a copy to reread overnight. When his national security team met the next day, Mr. Obama complained that elements of that plan had never been enacted.

The group went over the McChrystal assessment and drilled in on what the core goal should be. Some thought that General McChrystal interpreted the March strategy more ambitiously than it was intended to be. Mr. Biden asked tough questions about whether there was any intelligence showing that the Taliban posed a threat to American territory... (Obama decided against immediate withdrawal).

Tension with the military had been simmering since the leak of the McChrystal report, which some in the White House took as an attempt to box in the president. The friction intensified on Oct. 1 when the general was asked after a speech in London whether a narrower mission, like the one Mr. Biden proposed, would succeed. The short answer is no, he said.

White House officials were furious, and Mr. Gates publicly scolded advisers who did not keep their advice to the president private. The furor rattled General McChrystal, who, unlike General Petraeus, was not a savvy Washington operator. And it stunned others in the military, who were at first bewildered by how over the top the reaction was from the White House, as one military official put it. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/world/asia/06reconstr...


'Bewildered' my ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Correction:
Should have been fired already

But we do know he was a buddy of Cheney's, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. I agree apparently McCrystal needs to be reminded that the military
Does not make policy for the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. "elements of (The President's) plan had never been enacted...
Seems pretty open and shut to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garam_Masala Donating Member (711 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I think McCrystal was responding to a request from the president
to give the president the general's assessment of situation on ground
in Afghanistan and make recommendation. This general was a hand pick
by the president.

Somehow, the report was leaked by some one in Pentagon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. The only ones sacked are people like Van Jones, who are targeted by the right. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. Since McChrystal covered up Pat Tillman getting fragged, how can he even be trusted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Fuck Trust: It's black and white. Whether a strategy is being implemented or
Edited on Sun Dec-06-09 11:48 PM by denem
subverted is a Yes or No question. Trust has nothing to do with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. ugh.. the Tillman frag is so frustrating!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
8. it would be very good if he was! but he won't. the president seems very confident about his choice
I hope Congress won't let this happen, regardless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
10. Did anybody keep track of how many generals leaked reports when Cheney was Preznit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
11. McChrystal is most likely being watched VERY closely now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Probably...his removal may be immenent. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
12. McCrystal is certifiably nuts and has no business in charge of anything.
Taking advice from psychos like him is always a bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
13. McChrystal's biggest supporter in Obama's cabinet is Hillary. She favored his 80K troops/10 yr. plan
Edited on Mon Dec-07-09 11:34 AM by ClarkUSA
She'd probably oppose any move to remove him. Remember that her military mentor last year was neocon Gen. Keane.
I'll bet both McChrystal and Hillary are being watched closely, kept busy following Pres. Obama's directives (her many
gaffes aside) while their warmongering "advice" was duly ignored. Thankfully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I believe Obama welcomes Hawkish advice, stongly put,
that's not the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. He welcomes it right before he ignores it. Thankfully.
I agree with your viewpoint, but I still believe that Hillary would put up a huge stink if McChrystal got canned over this
because of her affinity for his perspective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
16. LoL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Oct 23rd 2017, 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC