General McChrystal relieved

Thoughts on General McChrystal

www.cbsnews.com

McChrystal said that he was "disappointed" after first meeting the president, made glib remarks about Vice President Joe Biden's counterinsurgency strategy, and derided other top officials.

Calm and introspective in public, the lanky four-star general, 55, has never been one to suffer fools gladly.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.huffingtonpost.com
abcnews.go.com
www.msnbc.msn.com
news.yahoo.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Gen. David Petraeus to replace Gen. Stanley McChrystal as commander of forces in Afghanistan
Should Gen. McChrystal Arrest Obama For Violation Of USA Constitution.
Obama and McChrystal, diametrically opposed and passing the baton.
Gen. McChrystal Called In to Explain His Anti-Administration Comments

[edit on 23-6-2010 by Captain Dave]

Just asking all your thoughts on this . . . i think it's pretty outrageous that Obama just blew off McChrystal for a couple comments that all of us make every day. The President of Afghanistan even begged Obama to let the General stay.

Many people are angry at 'PresBo' after all the recent events, just give me some of your thoughts.

www.cbsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't need war mongers running our military..

President Barack Obama announced his choice of Gen. David Petraeus to replace Gen. Stanley McChrystal as the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, saying he made the decision with regret but “with the certainly that it’s the right thing for the mission in Afghanistan, for our military and for our country.” He said he made the decision not out of a sense of “personal insult” over comments by McChrystal and his aides published in Rolling Stone, but said, “The conduct does not meet the standards that should be set by a commanding general.”

www.politico.com...

Originally posted by Aquarius1
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't need war mongers running our military..

President Barack Obama announced his choice of Gen. David Petraeus to replace Gen. Stanley McChrystal as the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, saying he made the decision with regret but “with the certainly that it’s the right thing for the mission in Afghanistan, for our military and for our country.” He said he made the decision not out of a sense of “personal insult” over comments by McChrystal and his aides published in Rolling Stone, but said, “The conduct does not meet the standards that should be set by a commanding general.”

www.politico.com...

As if Gen. Petraeus is any less a part of the problem..

Originally posted by Captain Dave


Just asking all your thoughts on this . . . i think it's pretty outrageous that Obama just blew off McChrystal for a couple comments that all of us make every day. The President of Afghanistan even begged Obama to let the General stay.

I think the bottom line is the commanding officer in a war zone who is also in the public eye falls under the same rules as a politician. It doesn't matter if what he said was right or wrong, he made inappropriate comments about the President to the media so basically he got himself fired.

Already posted...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

~Keeper

Here's the thing about war. If you don't plan and strategize to win, you lose. If you have a half assed plan where the aim is to "win the hearts and minds" you lose. If you don't go to war fully prepared to dominate, you lose. You go into war expecting blood shed and the loss of life, but to go into war half assed will always take a higher number than would have been lost if you had aimed to fully conquer your enemy to start with.

Originally posted by Aquarius1

“The conduct does not meet the standards that should be set by a commanding general.”

www.politico.com...

So the people in his cabinet like Emanuel can make all the snide remarks they want, but the second someone outside of his inner circle voices their OPINION, they are out of a job? Its good to hear that people defending the constitution across the world cant use it themselves.

Freedom of speech

(Well it looks like rahm is head out after midterms, So I guess no one can say what they think anymore)

reply to post by Captain Dave


The problem is of course General McChrystal did not follow proper protocol.

Plain and simple.

Whether he agrees, likes, or even respects Obama, is irrelevant.

He was a General in a combat zone, someone who is responsible for inspiring his troops, responsible for morale, and over all command of troops in war.

Whether you or anyone agrees with our being in Afghanistan now for nine years, or not, is irrelevant, he is under a chain of command, and thereby needs to respect it, knowing full and well that Rolling Stone would publish his comments, it shocks me that he did that to begin with.

While he may in fact have been correct, or not, in his thoughts, he was incorrect in sharing them in the fashion that he did, because morale can and will be affected both because of his comment, or that of his staff, and now as well because of McChrystal's choice to resign.

On top of this with Petraeus taking over, now his troops are susceptible to a morale issue, as well as the transition of change of leadership.

McChrystal was wrong, Obama was wrong, and Petraeus will now be leading troops, in a tough change of leadership, and many more troops may die.

Something non-military people do not seem to understand, is there is always some sort of dissent within the inside of a chain of command, however it is how it is handled, mis-handled, and or used as sabotage.

It is human nature to disagree with leadership, due to differences of opinion, experience, and over all people skills between those cooperating together.

Leadership is knowing not just when to speak but when to shut the Hell up and lead.

i would be relieved too if i didn't have to deal with this cluster-eff of a situation - but i do not feel sorry for black hitler - you dug your grave, now lie in it.......

Originally posted by drsmooth23

Originally posted by Aquarius1

“The conduct does not meet the standards that should be set by a commanding general.”

www.politico.com...

So the people in his cabinet like Emanuel can make all the snide remarks they want, but the second someone outside of his inner circle voices their OPINION, they are out of a job? Its good to hear that people defending the constitution across the world cant use it themselves.

Freedom of speech

(Well it looks like rahm is head out after midterms, So I guess no one can say what they think anymore)

The Freedom of Speech doesn't protect your job.....If I go up to my boss and tell him to "F off" I can't then claim I have the Freedom of Speech to say that and not be fired.....It just means I have the Freedom of Speech to NOT be jailed.....

As for those questioning Obama's appointment of Patreus....I think it's quite clear....He needs a solid general and he KNOWS Patreus will FLY through the confirmations...

Originally posted by Aquarius1
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't need war mongers running our military..

We don't need cowards and turncoats leading us either. I'd rather a coup were mounted with McCrystal taking the reigns than this administration. And sorry about us being war mongers, but that comes with the job because when we're given orders, we carry them out and don't give up.

On a side note of where this controversy came from, try looking at the USA's Ambassador to Afghanistan. Many of the difficulties come from that man, who was a general leading our troops there before being made the main diplomat. Ask people who served under him at that time and you find he has no concern for the troops and still doesn't. He is the one we need to change out if anything is to be salvaged from Afghanistan.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


SKL is correct. Military discipline is one of the pillars that allow it to function. Right, wrong, or indifferent, McChrystal allowed the press in for happy hour, and that is a no-no.

Especially in time of war.

He wasn't relieved.

He offered his resignation of command of Afghanistan as soon as he came in the Oval office. Obama didn't argue and accepted it.

He didn't resign from service, just command of forces in Afghanistan. He will be reassigned to another command.

He's lucky he wasn't court martialed. Insubordination and demoralizing the troops with his view of the war as 'unwinnable'. He should be in a brig somewhere right now.

Wonder if he thinks the white house is full of wimps, NOW?

Bite me.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


You nailed it, SKL.

I have never served, but i am accustomed to being in upper management. A rule that you have to follow is, no one who reports to you can ever hear your real opinion on any person. To criticize those above you is insubordination. To publicly criticize those below you is violating trust. On a ship i am running, both will get you fired.

reply to post by mishigas


Yes, I agree with SKL, too. Hey!

We agree on something! Shouldn't we celebrate or something?

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
He wasn't relieved.

He offered his resignation of command of Afghanistan as soon as he came in the Oval office. Obama didn't argue and accepted it.

Do you have a source on that? Because when I first heard it, they were saying that he was relieved of command.

Source

President Obama on Wednesday relieved Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal of his duties as commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, a White House official said.

[edit on 6/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I watched Obama's press conference live and he did say that the General resigned. However, the reports prior to that said that he was being relieved of his duties.

ETA:

President Barack Obama accepted the resignation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal "with considerable regret" and nominated Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the U.S. Central Command.

www.cnn.com...

[edit on 23-6-2010 by Aggie Man]

McChrystal fell on the sword just as he was asked to do. Make of that statement whatever you will, but remember that this is a man who served as a fellow in the JFK School of Government at Harvard... there is no possible way he did not know the outcome of any statement well before making it, nor is it likely that the adminsitration didn't know beforehand what was to be said to Rolling Stone.

The magician has two tricks he uses to wow the crowd. One trick is to distract the audience's attention away from the right hand (whose activities you don't wish the crowd to see) by doing something dramatic with the left hand. The other trick is to pull off something spectacular to wow the crowd and draw them into the sphere of confidence in your abilities. The question, in my mind, is only which of those two tricks was the adminsitration pulling on the crowd here?