Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Stanley McChrystal to retire with four-star rank

By Ed O'Keefe

Gen. Stanley McChrystal will retain his four-star rank when he retires from the military, the White House said Tuesday. The decision means the general will earn about $149,700 per year before taxes in military retirement pay.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal

President Obama dismissed McChrystal last week after he and members of his staff made disparaging comments about Vice President Biden and other officials in a Rolling Stone magazine article.

McChrystal, 55, was promoted to four stars last year when he assumed control of military operations in Afghanistan. He announced plans Monday to retire from the military after 34 years, a process that's expected to take a few months.

Army rules state a four-star general must serve three years before they can retain the rank in retirement. But the president can bypass the rule if he chooses to do so. McChrystal would have earned about $140,832 annually as a three-star retiree, meaning Obama's decision nets him another $8,868 annually, according to military retirement figures compiled by the Pentagon.

As a retired general McChrystal will have access to military bases around the world and can access retail outlets, medical doctors and other services on base, according to the Pentagon. All retiring officers meet with Defense Department officials to review their retirement package, which normally includes access to the military's TRICARE health care system, a group life insurance plan and survivor benefits.

Some retiring officers are given post-retirement employment restrictions, especially officers involved with military procurement, the Pentagon said. Honorably discharged members of the military, their spouses and dependents are eligible for military burial and cemetery benefits provided free of charge by the government.

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below

By Ed O'Keefe  | June 29, 2010; 3:56 PM ET
Categories:  Military, Workplace Issues  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Elena Kagan: Cameras at the Supreme Court 'a terrific thing'
Next: Report: Ex-Postal Service official violated policies


While I admire the president's magnanimity, I still wish he had not made an exception for McChrystal. He set a truly deplorable example both in terms of leadership and judgment--not only in terms of the magazine interview but also his coverup of the Pat Tillman debacle.

Posted by: DCSteve1 | June 29, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

We should all consider the responsibility in lives and assets that these men shoulder and wonder in amazement that they do it at such low pay. I, for one, will never begrudge any of these service heros the incredibly small retirement benefits they receive.

Thanks to every one of you.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | June 29, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely bgreen: For the level of responsibility he held, that's a fairly modest retirement. Military retirement packages are already paltry.

California has over 5000 retirees that make over 100k. Most were nothing more than desk jockeys who risked nothing more than paper cuts.

Yet, federal civil employees routinely get pension benefits that easily triple what the average military member gets for the same amount of time of service.

Go figure... Gotta love unions...

Posted by: fritz101 | June 29, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Just the fact that General McChrystal voted for Obama in 2008, he should be denied his pension. But the very fact that he put up with our 'courageous community organizer in chief' President Obama and our wonderful blabbermouth Vice President 'Bite-me' Biden - he should be given another star with a 5-star retirement benefit!

Posted by: CJ123 | June 29, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

DCSteve1: I agree that this was a deplorable situation in basically every way. But I don't think Obama had any choice on whether or not to fire him. It just should never have happened--Rolling Stone shouldn't have published a story like that. There's a great piece that analyzes this aspect here:

Posted by: BryceCovert | June 29, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Yes, of course he should be retired at the 4 Star Rank.

Good job to DOD mgt there in D.C -- civilian and military for smoothing the way.

CJ123 makes a good point above. I too suggest a 5th Star for haveing to listen to "pontificate" V.P. "Bite-Me" as he tells us how the war should be conducted.

How on earth did someone of so little experience like Joe "Bite-Me" ever get to be V.P.?

It must have been because he was selected by someone of even lessor experience.

I don't know.

Posted by: CommonSense12 | June 29, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

It becomes more obvious every day that you 'patriots' never served. There's a word for pro-war people who don't serve:


Posted by: frankdiscussion1 | June 29, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

All of us should always remember THAT FREEDOM IS NOT FREE AND WE HAVE THE MILITARY TO THANK FOR THAT and not the president or congress. These men sacrifice their lives for us ... some come home in whole, some come home with body parts missing or mentally suffering, and some never come home to their families. Their families suffer and are town apart. We owe these men and women of the armed forces more than just our thanks. Unfortunately some Americans are so anti-miitary I wonder if they even consider that not for the military they might be speaking German. The other day the checkout girls at the grocery store said she never heard of the U.S.O. and when I explained their purpose she said the schools should be teaching them this. An old man whom I assumed was a veteran looked at me and said "thank you" for my teach this young woman about this organization which I said I was sending a donation. SUPPORT THE MILITARY AND THE HELL WITH CONGRESS AND OBAMA.

Posted by: libertymeanslife | June 29, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

"How on earth did someone of so little experience like Joe "Bite-Me" ever get to be V.P.?"

30+ years as a senator plus serving as chairman on the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Sounds pretty qualified to me.

Posted by: Alittlemoconversation | June 29, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

I don't think McChrystal really cares about the extra $8,868 ... he just wants to get away from all the radical left wing politics that is slithering into the Pentagon and the war effort. Obama made a stupid move in firing McChrystal and time will prove it. This president is leading us down the path to destruction in so many ways.

Posted by: penniless_taxpayer | June 29, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

As I said before it doesn't take any skill to fire someone. It does take skill to make one productive and loyal.

If the CIC was doing a good job this would never have happened.

Posted by: carlossalazar | June 29, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"There's a word for pro-war people who don't serve:


frankdiscussion, There's another word: Chicken hawk. And I've noticed blogs are full of 'em.

Posted by: mypitts2 | June 29, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

for a man that has control over life and death decisions and is not allowed to blow off some steam and then to be jugded by some low life who thinks he is a leader what a bunch of b.s. boma would not make a hair on this general's ass

Posted by: sewallm60 | June 29, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

And if one of McChrystal's subordinates had "blown off some steam" in an interview in a national paper you really think the general would have looked the other way? By all accounts the guy is a great commanding officer, but there's no way that the president could let that stand. Whether or not you agree with his politics or even like him, he was elected to be the Commander in Chief.

All of you disparaging Obama for this firing would be the exact same ones claiming he is weak and indecisive if he hadn't fired him.

Posted by: Alittlemoconversation | June 29, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

in the last 34 years during the career of mcchrystal, patreaus, powell and everyone else... we haven't won a war... we dont know how to win a war anymore since we haven't had a win since WWII, so why is this guy is important? obama shouildnt have taken him out back and as the saying goes "given him a double tap" to the temple to keep patreaus and all the other so called "warriors w/o a win" in line...

Posted by: cwwalton | June 29, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

I was drafted in 1965, forced to go Viet Nam and was honorably discharged. I, and all like me, get no pension, nor are we welcome on any military base anywhere. The only way we get medical is if we are indigent. There is something seriously wrong with this system.

Posted by: SanCo | June 29, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I think that President Obama should have made more of an example of Gen. McChrystal, and should have reduced his rank. His disdain of the the civilian command of the armed forces demonstrate that he is a traitor to his country.
Additionally, it did not seem that he was very effective in conducting the war in Afghanistan. We already outnumber the enemy 12:1, but seem to be losing ground. Our troops on the ground are sub-standard (which is to be expected in an all volunteer army), but our officers are top notch and should exercise judgement and professionalism which is beyond reproach.

Posted by: sojournart | June 29, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse


Whether you like it or not...whether General McChrystal likes it or not...Obama is the President. That defines him as the "leader" in this scenario. He doesn't have to think it as you say.

General McChrystal had to have known it was a bad idea to have a Rolling Stone reporter around. And he had to have known that it was a bad idea not to watch what he was saying. But the chain of command requires subordination; every subordinate must be prepared to unfailingly carry out the orders of his or her superior in the chain of command. Blatant insubordination by the General in command in such a public manner could not go unchecked without the chain of command collapsing. Frankly, I suspect that McChrystal wanted to see what Obama would do in the face of McChrystal's actions. I suspect this wasn't the outcome he was expecting.

I am neither a coward nor a Chicken-Hawk, but I did not serve in the military, in large part due to my self-appraised difficulty with being subordinate. My Grandfather retired from the Air Force with one star, and despite his rock-ribbed conservatism, he would have been appalled by such public comments.

Posted by: noahkohn | June 29, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse


McChrystal should have been demoted.

Posted by: abbydelabbey | June 29, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse


McChrystal should have been demoted.

Posted by: abbydelabbey | June 29, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal and his successors should be allowed to do the job they were sent to do without their hands being tied. It is easy to understand his frustration and comments. BHO is incompetent and this event is a distraction to other events going on. If a businessman hires someone-they need experience and to be able to do their job. When they do not live up to those standards most are fired. The same should be true of politicians. It is disheartening to hear Biden swear at a manager of a small store in Wisconsin. Who and what do these politicians think they represent? They sure do not seem to be representing the interests of the American people. They need to be reminded that they should be. Save the bullying and childish behavior for the playground...

Posted by: Tinker4 | June 29, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

$150K for life--for being what---that is more than the President will receive. When this republic goes bankrupt--look to these kind of "union" pensions as the cause--then add all the entitlement programs like welfare, SS ETC. Freedom does have a cost both in blood and taxes. We are not a free republic any longer. To pay off the debt this administration is racking up is going to take decades. Unbelievable

Posted by: scottrmckinnon | June 29, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Not a bad give, retire at age 55 with $150,000 a year pension. The General probably has a million or two of investments tucked away too, if he was frugal while the Army was paying the bills.

Good for him.

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 29, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Alright, I created an account on here just to post these comments: First, to EVERYONE who has said the "President Obama dismissed/fired/relieved/etc General McChrystal" you are incorrect - the General voluntarily retired - his packet would have been on the Presidents desk prior to their meeting after the Rolling Stone article was fist published. Second, to sojournart, you have stated "Our troops on the ground are sub-standard (which is to be expected in an all volunteer army)" what is the basis to this argument? As a Staff Sergeant IN this Army you feel so free to insult, please provide evidence that a conscript army is better to a volunteer one - though I doubt you can show consistent hard evidence to that fact. The General is receiving $155,000 a year (before taxes) for loyally serving this Country for 34 years, leading more men than you could ever imagine in more countries than you could ever realize. He was overall responsible for tens of thousands of individuals, translated to the civilian sector and that is multi-million retirement package to any CEO. Now, to cwwalton - the current Military leadership is RESTRICTED by your beloved politicians. IF we could fight a war the way WE want to fight the war, Afghanistan would have been over years ago, sadly the reality is our ROE, and even mission objectives are made by civilian politicians in Washington who have never stepped foot NEAR an active battlefield. I welcome any retorts or comments to this, but please try to remain civil as I am certain I may have made some people upset.

Posted by: joseph221984 | June 29, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Give this man his money. He and his family have both given much to this country. I am not convinced we know the entire story on the Rolling Stone interview. I hope we can keep him around. This guy has a lot to offer this country in civilian life.

Thank you Stan !!

Posted by: gwolfe1 | June 29, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Stan! You did good...

Get back to your family, reconnect, and pass this mantle on.

God Bless !!

Posted by: gwolfe1 | June 29, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

To me it it is a shame when a man graduates from West Point, which is paid for by the people of the USA and then dedicates his life to the military and the defense of our country, goes that extra mile giving up on his own private life and family to do what he believes is keeping our country strong. Along comes some head line seeking self promoting "writer" who just has to put in his no nothing 2 cents and writes all the trash and BS he can not promoting this mans dedication and service but anything that could cause him some grief. This just shows what a midget minded person he is to stoop so low. Where do you live and what do you do in your off time when you poke fun at your bosses or editors. Or are you just busy kissing up to them? A group of men take you in and let you be one of the boys and your thanks is to stick them in the back. Talk about a JUDAS! Going one more step you have a man that is suppose to be VP and he cannot chew gum and talk without making a fool of himself. Then there is the President who can't make up his mind about getting supplies and equipment to the troops for several months but he can let go one of the top Generals with 34 years of dedication in a heart beat. Maybe he was intimadated or just felt threatened by his dedication. Who is going to take over when Petreaus has a heart attack and has to throw in the towel. I was a supporter of Obama but after this lame move and some of his other moves I have to find a new Party to support. Thank you General McChrystal for your dedication and hard work all these years defending our country.

Posted by: Duane5 | June 29, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

General McChrystal violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice for his disparaging remarks. A court martial is more in order and if I was POTUS, this general would have done the perp walk in cuffs with the media coverage at maximum. Other general officers and NCOs would get the message in no uncertain terms: insubordination will not be tolerated and will be severely punished.

Posted by: meldupree | June 29, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal God Bless you for saying the truth about Obama and Biden! You deserve a 5th STAR for that!
Thanks for your years of service and heart ache! Semper Fi

Posted by: usmc1969 | June 29, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

It's a small price to pay to be rid of McChrystal. He should have been fired years ago.

As Frank Rich wrote in the New York Times on Sunday:

The general’s significant role in the Pentagon’s politically motivated cover-up of Pat Tillman’s friendly-fire death in 2004 should have been disqualifying from the start. The official investigation into that scandal — finding that McChrystal peddled “inaccurate and misleading assertions” — was unambiguous and damning.

Once made the top commander in Afghanistan, the general was kept on long past his expiration date. He should have been cashiered after he took his first public shot at Joe Biden during a London speaking appearance last October. That’s when McChrystal said he would not support the vice president’s more limited war strategy, should the president choose it over his own. According to Jonathan Alter in his book “The Promise,” McChrystal’s London remarks also disclosed information from a C.I.A. report that the general “had no authority to declassify.” These weren’t his only offenses. McChrystal had gone on a showboating personal publicity tour that culminated with “60 Minutes” — even as his own histrionic Afghanistan recommendation somehow leaked to Bob Woodward, disrupting Obama’s war deliberations. The president was livid, Alter writes, but McChrystal was spared because of a White House consensus that he was naïve, not “out of control.”

We now know, thanks to Hastings, that the general was out of control and the White House was naïve. The price has been huge. The McChrystal cadre’s utter distaste for its civilian colleagues on the war team was an ipso facto death sentence for the general’s signature counterinsurgency strategy. You can’t engage in nation building without civilian partnership. As Rachel Maddow said last week of McChrystal, “the guy who was promoting and leading the counterinsurgency strategy has shown by his actions that even he doesn’t believe in it.”

This fundamental contradiction helps explain some of the war’s failures under McChrystal’s aborted command, including the inability to hold Marja (pop. 60,000), which he had vowed to secure in pure counterinsurgency fashion by rolling out a civilian “government in a box” after troops cleared it of the Taliban. Such is the general’s contempt for leadership outside his orbit that it extends even to our allies. The Hastings article opens with McChrystal mocking the French at a time when every ally’s every troop is a precious, dwindling commodity in Afghanistan.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | June 29, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Hummmm, I wonder whether any of his pension will be tax free because of 'disabilities' he may claim? We know about his mouth and brain problems, what else will he claim?

Posted by: rbsher | June 29, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Unless and until we have interagency cooperation and recognize the relation of security to development, we are doomed.

That is the point. Time to close the book on McChrystal. He is a symptom of a much larger problem.

Posted by: farnaz_mansouri2 | June 29, 2010 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Remember what cheney, rumsfeld, rice oh and bush did to General Eric Shinseki!

Posted by: knjincvc | June 29, 2010 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Biden sure proved he was a whole lot smarter than the sacked McChrystal and the rest of his drunken staff on how to conduct the war in Afghanistan. Biden is the one who really deserves a promotion out of all this for having to put up with that insubordinate and arrogant prima donna 4-star.

Posted by: vztownes | June 29, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Pat Tillman??
Who's he?
cheney/bush threw him under the bus a long time ago.

Posted by: knjincvc | June 29, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Hey, civil control of the military is how we've done it in this country for over 200 years and it's worked damned well. To you blowhards who'd like it otherwise, may I respectfully suggest that you move to some tinhorn military dictatorship of your choice and see how you like it. America, love it or leave it!

Posted by: HydeParker | June 29, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

I have read many of these comments and have been appalled at what I have read. President Obama was duly elected by the people of this country. He should be respected as the leader of this country. To have a general, or any soldier of any rank, under his command act in such a way that McChrystal acted should be considered as insubordination. It was magnanimous of President Obama to allow him to retire as a four-star general instead of demoting him to three-star status. When a soldier, one does as he is commanded. One always repects the commanding officer.

Posted by: petros2 | June 29, 2010 10:01 PM | Report abuse

I have read many of these comments and have been appalled at what I have read. President Obama was duly elected by the people of this country. He should be respected as the leader of this country. To have a general, or any soldier of any rank, under his command act in such a way that McChrystal acted should be considered as insubordination. It was magnanimous of President Obama to allow him to retire as a four-star general instead of demoting him to three-star status. When a soldier, one does as he is commanded. One always repects the commanding officer.

Posted by: petros2 | June 29, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Not too shabby....4 star.

Kudos to President Obama. Nice move. He has a heart even though some folks don't think he has.

Plus, there was controversy as to Hastings' reporting just in the last couple days.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | June 29, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Administrative legerdemain, full of sound and signifying nothing. McChrystal has earned his retirement; may he enjoy it in peace and relative seclusion.

Posted by: Apostrophe | June 29, 2010 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: SanCo I was drafted in 1965, forced to go Viet Nam and was honorably discharged. I, and all like me, get no pension, nor are we welcome on any military base anywhere. The only way we get medical is if we are indigent. There is something seriously wrong with this system.

Guess What Bud - You do get something for your service - You get to live in this country and enjoy freedoms and opportunities most of this world's inhabitants never enjoy. You served, you did your duty as many m,illions of other Americans have done before and after you did. Thanks to the efforts of millions Americans we no longer have to have a draft and forced military service. That's something we should be proud of but it seems you carry a big chip on your shoulder. Must make you miserable and I'm sorry you feel that way.

Many of us served and got no pension, medical or other benefits - it's part of the package and you knew about before you served if you read the papers you signed. You might have considered a career in the service and thereby earned a pension but apparently you chose to do the minimum so you get the minimum.

Cheers and enjoy your freedom.

Posted by: AmzgGrce | June 29, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Blindly following a politician because you have an antiquated idea of hierarchy is dangerous. Neither BHO or JRB have military experience. Despite being a half back/wide receiver in high school our current VP got a medical deferment from the military many times. So, one should be aware of the VP's, etc... limitations with regard to military strategy and policy. Just looking at the changing military positions that the vp, etc... in the past made makes one aware of how much vaciliation occurs with a politician.
It is commendable that McCrystal stood up for what he believed, supported his men and gave 34 years of service to his country particularly under less than ideal circumstances.
Respect is earned not given blindly.

Posted by: Tinker4 | June 29, 2010 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden has a pacemaker...

wait (slap, wake up) that's Cheney. oh yeah.

I believe Biden has an ear problem, slightly deaf. His son Beau served.
And the Vietnam nothing when they came home. And were NOT welcomed. Not even by housewives and kids. Like some dirty disease they were treated.
Don't give me this "you did your duty and be thankful you're alive and free stuff". Or read the fine print. The draft was done by a birthday lottery. If your birthday was put on the board, you were gone. And they were signing your death certificate the next day.

Today, we do not have the draft.

Agent Orange alone - and its effects should have the Feds paying for every one of the Vietnam Vets who came back alive..

Then the vets have to sit for hours in a VA Hospital in Anytown, USA for any type of healthcare. The medical/health services to the Nam Vets are horribly lacking. And the VA is the richest agency we have, don'tcha know. Always has been.

During Gulf War, the yellow ribbons flew all over the place. And we were defending Kuwait from Hussein's attack. TO quote 41 "we will not allow a country to invade another country". Yellow ribbons for our boys who were fighting for "Another country".

During Afghanistan, in the early part, hooded terrorists would have our guy(s) in front of the camera and behead them and people were outraged. But Afghanistan was a war brought about by a blatant attack from the Taliban. And we hail the soldiers from here to kingdom come for their tours of duty, but gripe when they have to go back for another year.

Nam vets got nothing. Post traumatic stress was born as a diagnosis because of Nam. And now, sadly, if they haven't taken their own life by suicide (lots of Nam vets commit suicide but you may not want to hear that statistic)....they are dying early because of Agent Orange. Or crippled for life.

We get all teary eyed when we see someone crippled by a suicide bomb that went off close to them. Heck, the Cong and Khmer Rouge were so ruthless and stealth in the jungle, legs and arms were flying all over the place...not to mention capture and torture. Even the Cong women and children killed our soldiers over there in that terrible place called Nam.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | June 30, 2010 12:17 AM | Report abuse

I'd encourage most of you to *read* the RS article for yourself.
Regardless, he didn't follow the rules, "resigned" under pressure (i.e., fired), and "because he served honorably" gets to keep something he didn't earn?
Sounds like politics to me.

Posted by: robjdisc | June 30, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

I'm no Obama fan, but I really do think that he had to fire McChrystal. While McChrystal's actions may not have been outright insubordination, it most certainly wasn't what one would expect from a senior officer. Regardless of personal feelings, lack of respect towards the Commander in Chief shouldn't be tolerated. (However, Joe Biden is NOT the Commander in Chief, for which we can all be grateful. We'd all be better served if he simply hushed and stopped displaying his colossal ignorance and the little mean streak that seems to run through him.) I think McChrystal has earned the right to keep his rank. I do have to wonder though, given the fact that as a senior officer he had to know the dangers of speaking candidly to anyone from the media, why he spoke as he did and allowed his team to do so as well. Was it deliberate? Was there a motive?

Posted by: Lilycat1 | June 30, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I continue to be amazed at how ignorant many Americans are of their constitution, laws, history and customs. Since 1775, armed forces of the United States have been led by elected civilians. That set us apart from most of the world's despotic, dictatorial regimes like Syria or Iran or military junta run nightmares like Burma, North Korea or Venezuela. Like it or not, a significant majority of Americans voted to place President Obama in charge of our military as Commander In Chief. For 235 years we have made this system work. No matter what you armchair generals or former corporals think, that is our system. We elect a President to be in charge. If you disagree with the President's policy and you can get one more than half of America to agree with you, the policy will change. Until then, suck it up and deal.

I have worked for years alongside my colleagues in the military -around the world. For the most part, we have dedicated, patriots who do a days work for a days pay. And their base pay, although perhaps slightly lower than their civilian colleagues, when the benefits are added, such as medical, uniform allowance, housing allowance, educational benefits for them and their families, combat pay (not always in a combat zone), add up to very competitive packages.

But, just because they have spent 2, 4, 20, or 34 years in the military, does not mean they have learned the skills of governance.

General McCrystal screwed up, not once but several times. Because he has soldiered on in difficult times, he was cut some slack in the past, but his incredible bad judgement, his scorn of his superiors, and his flagrant violation of the Military Code of Conduct required that he be taken to the woodshed. President Obama showed solid judgement in relieving him of his position. There is no way that a working relationship could continue and Stan McCrystal knew it. That the President let him keep the 4th star is recognition for his previous service to the country, but he is tarnished because of his apparent disdain of our American system. Shame on him.

Posted by: tsavidet | June 30, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

SanCo, no, there is nothing wrong with the system so far as your benefits are concerned. I too was drafted and served in Vietnam. I went on later to join and serve in the National Guard for over 30 more years and retire with a pension and benefits. You had the same option as well as the option to remain on active duty and retire. You chose not to. Your problem, not ours.

Posted by: davidirons | June 30, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

For those so anxious to promote McCrystal to 5 Star General, the rank currently does not exist as an authorized rank and is not listed on military pay scales. The last time we had a 5 Star, General of the Army, was Eisenhower in WW2.

McCrystal has been a great leader and done a great job under extremely difficult circumstances, tactically and politically. His retirement as a full general, 4 stars, is well deserved.

Posted by: davidirons | June 30, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I think Omar Bradley would be disappointed to know he was not a 5 star general.
I wish they would have let me retire at E-9 instead of E-8.

Posted by: gdbrumley | June 30, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

To retain the honour of being referred to as a four star, instead of a three star, general is worth a lot more than a measly $8,000 or so dollars. Is Obama maybe trying to buy McC's silence?

Posted by: paulinni | June 30, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama is on thin ice here. Many in the military like McChrystal.
Many in the military hate Obama. His treatment of McChrystal
is being watched.
"My My Hey Hey, it's better to burn out than fade away"!!

Posted by: drjazz777 | June 30, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company