Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Gen. McChrystal must go

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the man charged with executing President Obama's war plan for Afghanistan, has gone rogue in an explosive article in Rolling Stone. He and his staff crack wise on just about everyone. Obama ("unprepared"), Vice President Biden ("bite me"), American ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry (betrayer), special envoy Richard Holbrooke ("wounded animal") and White House National Security Adviser Jim Jones ("clown").

The magazine doesn't hit the newsstands until Friday, but McChrystal has been burning up the phone lines since yesterday afternoon apologizing to everyone slimed by him and his staff in the piece. He'll get a chance to do so face-to-face tomorrow, when he's been ordered to appear in the White House Situation Room. In the meantime, he released this statement:

I extend my sincerest apology for this profile. It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and it should have never happened. Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard.

That is the height of understatement. When McChrystal enters tomorrow's meeting (if he hangs on that long), he should have his resignation in hand. And the president should accept it. Some might argue that Obama shouldn't do so because there's a war on. But with this journalistic IED, McChrystal has stripped himself of the confidence Obama needs to have in him to trust that the Afghanistan war policy is being carried out faithfully.

By Jonathan Capehart  | June 22, 2010; 7:46 AM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Charlie Crist comes back from the political dead
Next: Rolling Stone McChrystal article understates the backbiting

Comments

Right or wrong McCrystal is gone. Which means another change in strategy and getting someone to put up with the fools at both the WH and the Pentagon. This will shape up like when the Army had to find a C of S who would put up with the Bush-Cheney.
In any event McCrystal is going to retire this week.

Posted by: KBlit | June 22, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

I personally think he should stay and make Obama either fire him or listen to the reasons on why he is so unhappy.

Maybe he is disgusted on having to enforce a rules of engagement that is accomplishing nothing but getting our kids brought home in body bags.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | June 22, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Absolutely. What an idiot. The war in Afghanistan is failing and this guy is showing us why: He's not very bright.

Posted by: joebanks | June 22, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Capehart posts like a typical shortsighted political hack. There are people lives at stake and our national security at risk. he acts like you can just fire Generals leading a war because they say something stupid. If you want to fire him because he is doing a poor job as a general fine, but generals, like Presidents don't just get fired.

You do not just fire people for making stupid comments either. Did Obama resign for his moronic comments about a policeman in Mass?

It is amazing how many idiots, often people writing for major publications, live in make believe world where we should just fire people and there are no consequences for constantly changing things.

Capehart wants to fire the guy and I bet Capehard doesn't have any idea who would even replace him.

Posted by: KCV257 | June 22, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

I agree. The problem is not so much that he has disagreements with his superiors. Rather, the problem is that he is so stupid to reveal them in such overt terms to a journalist. This guy may be a good soldier and in some ways a good leader, but he is obviously just not smart enough to have the position he has. Taken together with his previous mistakes, it is clear that it is time for this guy to go. The real question is the political one - will Obama make a show of his dismissal, or will he de facto strip him of his power today but only later (in a few months) accept the general's resignation. Based on Obama's history, I suspect that latter.

Posted by: waldmant | June 22, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

I agree, Mr. Capehart. After WWII President Truman fired General MacArthur, a wildly popular general, because MacArthur went rogue and openly challenged President Truman. Military people might not always agree with the administration but they need to remember who pays them and who's in charge. I'm thankful that most military people conduct themselves in an honorable way.

Posted by: njglea | June 22, 2010 8:49 AM | Report abuse

You can't have a top General publicly slamming the White House; it doesn't matter if he is right or wrong. He needs to resign his post or be relieved of his post.

Posted by: BT23 | June 22, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

I'm certain General Patton would have been equally expressive. My hat is off to the General. He will not have fallen on his own sword.

Posted by: johnrusselldee | June 22, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE

ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

Posted by: docholliday1 | June 22, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

The general has obviously been a credit to his profession and himself, but his remarks -- and those of his aides -- clearly go beyond the pale and an apology is just not good enough.

Especially in view of the morass that our Afghanistan effort has become.

This is sad, and I feel sorry for him.

Posted by: YondCassius | June 22, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

"There are people lives at stake and our national security at risk."

Exactly! That is why you can't have a General publicly slamming the Government - in Rolling Stone nonetheless.

Posted by: BT23 | June 22, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Regardless of what McCrystal thinks or how he feels what he did was/is insubordination. The Constitution is clear on the chain of command. One of the reasons our country has a civilian Commander-in-Chief is to prevent a Miltary type coup "Seven Days in May" scenario. I could give a rats ass if McCrystal likes Obama or not or believes that Obama can lead. That is not for him to decide. If he is a true professional soldier he knows when to follow orders and when to offer suggestions and opinions.
For those who complain that President Obama is not a miltary man, well neither was George W. Bush (weekend guard duty does not count) or Clinton. He is McCrystal's boss. Period.
It was Rolling Stone Magazine for god's sake....what the F***! Did McCrystal think the interview was "off the record"...?!!

Posted by: chrisel0 | June 22, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

It's about time someone spoke up about this failed administration and its failed strategy and constant backstabbing of all who wear the uniform. About time! Way to go GEN McCrystal!

Posted by: Capitalismworks | June 22, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Unless the General is a fool he knew public statements like that can be used to ruin his career. President Obama should hear him out and not take advice to arrogantly dismiss him for lese majeste.

Posted by: almorganiv | June 22, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

General McCrystal is frustrated with a war going no where and with the SECOND administration in a row that uses war as a political game or calculation. If Obama is so bent on the July 2011 withdrawal timeline -- does he really have the will to fight the war or the will to give General McCrystal the support he needs to win it?? If we're going to withdraw, lets cut our losses and withdraw today. There's no dishonor in withdrawing from the "graveyard of empires" before more of our soldiers get killed or our equipment gets destroyed. Concentrating on making Iraq the best possible pro-American anchor in the Middle East may be a more efficient use of our time.

Posted by: chrojo01 | June 22, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

The armchair types here as usual have no idea of history,,generals have always been relieved,,Patton,,Macarthur,mitchell,foch.Custer reviled by the PC types to this day.MCrystals career ending statements should have come in a resignation speech rather then an article.

Posted by: gonville1 | June 22, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

"crack wise" or speak the truth? Probably the truth, but it is wrong for a General to do this publicly.

Posted by: trjn30 | June 22, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

I believe the General knew full well what he was doing in his interview and knew he would be outed. My question is if he was so unhappy, why didn't he take it directly to the President (to whom he had compelte access) and not to Rolling Stone Magazine?

Posted by: OHREALLYNOW | June 22, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Capehart is foolish. Get rid of a guy that has brought your success in this difficult war? Ummmmm... boy you media people are arrogant. How bout not basing a decision that could endanger US soldiers lives on a personal insult.

Posted by: briang111 | June 22, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Its about time someone with authority finally spoke up about the inadequacy of this administration.

Posted by: jk6532 | June 22, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Stanley McCrystal should treat this incident as the opportunity to bail out of this campaign, which has absolutely no chance of success.

In excess of 200,000 of the people that he would need to act as reliable partners, no longer live in Afghanistan, but have fled the country to seek refuge in the EU and the US.

The police and Afghan army (ANA) are riven by dope-fiends and mercenaries. The Afghan government is utterly corrupt and incompetent. And the Taleban are not an insurgency, they are an ideologically committed and utterly ruthless menace that the US simply refuses to defeat.

Posted by: CharlesSmyth | June 22, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

For the sake of accuracy, President Truman was forced to fire General MacArthur for insubordination after meeting at Wake Island during the Korean War (not conflict). Despite apparent agreement and despite several calculated disrespectful acts, MacArthur was permitted to return to his command and continue on a dangerous path contrary to the orders of his civilian superiors. His repeated lack of judgment in dealing with duties commensurate with his rank dictated his removal. Truman later stated that his big mistake was to give MacArthur too many chances and that he should have fired MacArthur much sooner. This General is on a collision course with his marching orders and civilian higher-ups. I hope his mentors and colleagues in and out of government service persuade General McCrystal to do the honorable thing and resign. In any event, the President should settle for nothing less than McCrystal's removal this week. There are many battle tested Generals proficient in counterinsurgency warfare who can step up and lead! To paraphrase Clemenceau, "nobody is indispensable."

Posted by: victorlesperance | June 22, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Another supporter of bring on the clowns, leadership is more than a pressed suit and a tele prompter. One hears that the only lead dog sees the trail. That is great but our lead dog wears blinders and his team or adminstration are sorely are misfits.

Posted by: ZebZ | June 22, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

McCrystal requested 45,000 troops and after 3 months of "study", Obama decided 30,000 was enough. Withdrawal begins July 2011, regardless of the situation.

Capehart got the first sentence right. McCrystal is not in charge, he is only supposed to execute President Obama's war plan. I guess Obama is one of the best military minds around. McCrystal is supposed to do what he is told even if it is stupid and failing. Just don't tell anyone.

Posted by: kitchendragon50 | June 22, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Despite his years of service, it is clear that Gen. McChrystal has had a catastrophic lapse in judgment in making his opinions known in this article.
The problem is not so much what he said but that he chose to say it at all. This is a serious breach of military discipline and protocol, badmouthing one's commander and his trusted advisors in a time of war. It is not a betrayal, exactly, but there cannot be any trust reposed in a military officer who would go on record saying such things.
McChrystal is finished and I believe he knows it. The meeting tomorrow will end with an announcement of his resignation and deservedly so. For all his service to his nation, this is a humiliating end to his career, entirely from a self-inflicted wound.

Posted by: dbitt | June 22, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Since the Commander-in-Chief and his associates have no coherent and reasonable plan for either carrying on or ending the US military action in Afghanistan, General McCrystal was in an impossible position. He ought to have tendered his resignation, returned home, and then publicly explained why neither he nor any other able and upright general should attempt to work with the present administration unless and until it resolves its own problems.

Posted by: Gerry6 | June 22, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

McChrystal never should have been appointed in the first place after his Iraq behavior.

But because Barack Obama has an obsessive need to be liked by his enemies, he won't fire McCrystal.

The only people this White House ever tries to discipline are core constituencies in the progressive base.

The only way Obama would fire McCrystal is if he turned out to be a gay union member who opposed Blanche Lincoln.

Posted by: uh_huhh | June 22, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

The fault General McCrystal lies not in your stars but in the fact the VP is the village idiot know as Joe Biden and the President is more comfortable with leftist radicals such as Bill Ayers than Pentagon officials.

This is the same President who dithered for months over his Afghan Policy wasting lives and billions and then adopted the Bush playbook in full.

McCrystal has simply behaved like any corporate employee who has an idiot for a boss.

Posted by: krankyman | June 22, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

McCrystal shouldn't have been in there in the first place. He's got blood on his hands as being in charge of a torture site in Iraq. The guy is a criminal.

Posted by: B-rod | June 22, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse


Should Gen. McChrystal resign for mocking the administration? Vote

http://www.youpolls.com/default.asp

.

Posted by: usadblake | June 22, 2010 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Maybe he's trying to get Obama's attention. It took 60 minutes to finally get the President to talk to his General. Our President has absolutely no leadership skills and our government’s arrogance can only be exceeded by their greed.

Posted by: jerseydevils76 | June 22, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Maybe he's trying to get Obama's attention. It took a tv show, 60 Minutes, to finally get the President to talk to his General. Our President has absolutely no leadership skills and our government’s arrogance can only be exceeded by their greed. Not the right forum but can't imagine his frustration.

Posted by: jerseydevils76 | June 22, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse


McCrystal should go. That way the reason for the unfolding disaster in Afghanistan will fall directly where in should, the Oval Office.

Posted by: edbyronadams | June 22, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

These chickenhawk RepuBPlicans are such hypocrites. They cheered as Bush purged anyone, even Rumsfeld, who talked out of turn but expect Obama, our duly elected commander-in-chief, to take crap like this from a Bush-era holdover whom he entrusted to lead a war effort. McCrystal is a traitor putting our troops in danger. This is quite clearly insubordination and McCrystal must go. And be replaced by no one. End this stupid war!

Posted by: dnahatch1 | June 22, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

It took Obama months to even speak with McCrystal, he was forced to react by the media when that fact brought out. It seems to be Obama's MO. Quite apparent, our military or their families have no respect for this supposed Commander-In-Chief..or his team of bafoons. Obama has shown himself time and time again to be over his head and totally incompetent. I call Biden "Biden the Bafoon"..this administration is an embarrasment..from the economy to the oil spill to our military strategy. November cannot come soon enough..then 2012.

Posted by: WAGTHEDOG1 | June 22, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

The General made a crucial mistake: he exposed Obama as an empty suit. All the lib media like the WoPo have been worshipping him for the last 2 years as the smartest president ever and now we find out he's a lightweight unprepared to lead this nation through any crisis.

Posted by: frank141 | June 22, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

It took Obama months to even speak with McCrystal, he was forced to react by the media when that fact brought out. It seems to be Obama's MO. Quite apparent, our military or their families have no respect for this supposed Commander-In-Chief..or his team of bafoons. Obama has shown himself time and time again to be over his head and totally incompetent. I call Biden "Biden the Bafoon"..this administration is an embarrasment..from the economy to the oil spill to our military strategy. November cannot come soon enough..then 2012.

Posted by: WAGTHEDOG1 | June 22, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

I hate to admit it, but I AGREE with Sweethart. McChrystal needs to go. I mean, who are these Officers, that would serve a Commander In Chief who began his Political career in the living room of a couple who MURDERED POLICE OFFICERS, BLEW UP RECUITING OFFICES, and BOMBED THE PENTEGON? What kind of Military Man serves at the pleasure of a lifelong America hater? A man who has surrounded himself, HIS WHOLE LIFE, with ENEMIES of this country. Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Khaleed Rashidi, William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.
Do yourself, and your personal HONOUR a favor. RESIGN. Every day you serve this THING in the White House, you spit in yourself, your honour, and every service member who came before you.

Posted by: GoomyGommy | June 22, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Jerseydevils76, KCV257 et al: Your ignorance is only exceeded by your pettiness. In fact, President Obama has met with the general plenty of times (including before taking office). So there's no basis for your snide claim that it took a TV show to get him to do so.

Second, McChrystal's remarks show that HE is the arrogant one. True leaders use facts and logic to persuade others--they don't trash those who disagree with them.

The general was insubordinate, and needs to resign or be fired, period.

Posted by: DCSteve1 | June 22, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Leave it to the Republicans to screw up tradition and re-write history. Only an uninformed, self-indulgent, anarchist would advocate a US military member rising up against the President of the United States for the whole world to see. To hell with order and discipline. Let's just let every soldier, airman,etc., do as they please. This is the kind of US the Republicans would like us to have.

Posted by: ruthella10 | June 22, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

What was McChrystal thinking? You can't make comments like that around a reporter even if you're joking and don't really mean it. It shows really bad judgement. He needs to submit his resignation and then Obama needs to evaluate his performance in leading the war in Afghanistan and make an independent evaluation on whether he should continue in that position.

Posted by: JohnnyU2Berry | June 22, 2010 9:48 AM | Report abuse

How many of you commenting have actually SERVED in the Armed Forces in Iraq or Afghanistan? Yeah, that's what I thought. RRrrrrrr yeah fire that guy....rrrrrrinsubordinate jerk....rrrrrr. What most of you don't know is this guy will now probably be rated by fellow military members as one of the BEST military officers to serve this war...oh wait "Overseas Contingency Operation" Col. Ollie North may have some competition on my wall of fame. A man who truly served his commander in chief and did the right thing in the end. Gen. McCrystal, doing the wright thing by serving the troops, and exposing a corrupt, partisan, self-serving administration yet again to the world. I just wish he did it in Congress on the floow and not some liberal rag like The Stone.

Posted by: BarryHO | June 22, 2010 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Gen McChrystal should resign immediately for there will no longer be confidence in him. At the same time, Obama needs to look at the entire team in Afghanistan -- now that the 'cat is out of the bag'!!
That said, Obama has a real problem. IS HE EVER PREPARED?
He has consistently been behind the power curve on everything that has happened on his watch. Without doing homework, he FIRES; then he GETS READY; and after he misses the target completely, he AIMS! In the meantime, he blames others, or lately, has Gibbs to go out and mock them.
Obama was unprepared for:
*Health care
*Cash for Clunkers
*Wall street bailout
*Auto bail out
*Economy in general and jobs in particular
*Developing an Afghan policy and having to go to West Point to announce it
* Christmas Day bomber (if we recall, it took him days to respond)
*Failure to secure US borders
*TImes Square bomber
*GITMO
*Lack of effective action in the Gulf Spill, and failure to listen to the governors involved
One simply cannot play golf; take two vacations in less than a month; shoot hoops; have parties as the present incumbent of the White House seems enjoy, while the nation is in a deep recession; prosecuting two wars; and has a major disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, and on our borders. Just signs of POOR LEADERSHIP ON THE PART OF OBAMA!! Regardless of what he believes, HE IS NOT, REPEAT NOT OMNIPOTENT!!
It just seems that President Obama has purposefully gone against the American people. This blow up with Gen McChrystal is going to have ramifications with NATO that Obama has not thought through. It may also have ramifications with volunteers signing up for a 'leadership challenged' regime.
Well, at least Rahm Emanuel is happy. He has another CRISIS that he can now manipulate!

Posted by: wheeljc | June 22, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

If he doesn't resign he should be fired immediately. He is a General and to make those comments to a reporter is unprofessional and stupid.

Posted by: rlj1 | June 22, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

BarryHo: I served in the military 3 active and 12 in the Alabama National Guard. You are deluded if you think other military former and present agree with you. Have you not read the comments from other veterans on this site. You are in the minority, and worshipping an insubordinate a------ and prima donna aint what I call a model soldier!

Posted by: ruthella10 | June 22, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

It's about time someone spoke up about this failed administration and its failed strategy and constant backstabbing of all who wear the uniform. About time! Way to go GEN McCrystal!

Posted by: Capitalismworks
____________________________________

Well, you are right in principle, and I'm fairly certain that Gen. McChrystal is probably spot on in all of his criticisms (thought maybe not in his tone).

Still, this just can't happen. I support Gen. McChrystal in all that he is trying to accomplish, but you can't be a military officer and make these kinds of public comments about your civilian leadership.

If he really has such contempt for the Obama administration, as he clearly seems to (and for which he really can't be faulted), he could have resigned his post and then said all he wanted to.

I support what Gen. McChrystal believes. I do not support what he said, how he said it, and where he said it.

But this is bad for Obama no matter what he does. If he fires him, his authority is undermined because this was his handpicked officer to lead this mission (not a "Bush-era holdover" as someone ignorantly posted). If he retains him, his authority is undermined because he is keeping the guy who is openly contemptuous of his leadership.

But that's what Obama gets for not knowing the first thing about this, not caring about Afghanistan, and not being at all engaged in the conflict or the mission.

Then again, Obama isn't engaged in much these days outside of the golf course or a baseball game.

Posted by: etpietro | June 22, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Since McChrystal took command in June, he has met Karzai more than 45 times, mostly one-on-one, including a regular Sunday morning chat in the presidential palace. In an effort to present Karzai as commander in chief, McChrystal has flown him across the country on five "battlefield circulations."

McChrystal has done more than his predecessors, including Eikenberry, to minimize civilian casualties, such as restricting the use of air power and night raids. He has regularly apologized to Karzai for civilian deaths and shown him video and slide presentations to explain how such mistakes occur.

"He was the first military man to really show that he respected and would respond to Karzai's agenda, civilian casualties, of course, being the biggest issue," one senior NATO official said. "In a sense, Karzai said, 'Here's a soldier that finally I can deal with.' "

Posted by: corebanks1940 | June 22, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

This is what happens when a war is fought for political reasons and the nation is not 100% committed to supporting its objectives and the men and women who go into harm's way to fight it. Politics may be nuanced, war is not!

He must go and whomever replaces him made to understand their job is to inform his CIC when there is a disagreement in strategy which is getting in the way of achieving however victory is defined; not to complain about it to the press.

Posted by: bobfbell | June 22, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

The Ditherer in Chief's carefully considered strategy in Afghanistan ain't looking so good.

Posted by: edbyronadams | June 22, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like Obama relied on the General to come up with and follow through on a plan, and the General and his staff have failed, so they are playing a little CYA ahead of time. But since their explanation is that everyone else is the reason--and remember, they are blaming not just political Dems, but also former military types--it is fairly plain that they screwed the pooch, and know it.

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | June 22, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Hitler fired generals who would avoid war.

Posted by: ravitchn | June 22, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

The war in the Middle East cannot be won. The threat is not what we have been told. The terrorists are ants up against a giant. No, its about oil, minerals, and pipelines. That is why we are there. It has nothing to do with terrorism. Obama really screwed up by not ending this war. It will cost him dearly in this life and next.

Posted by: hempplanet | June 22, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

anybody who doesn't think people in power talk this way about each other is living in a fantasy land.

sure he shouldn't have gotten quoted. but don't cry in your milk over poor holbrooke having his feelings hurt - his claim to fame was being a cheerleader for bill clinton bombing the third world (and 70 days of bombing belgrade). and Biden, to be fair, appears to be an alien who constantly says strange things.

capehart, what do you think of the almost ten year long u.s. bloodbath in afghanistan and iraq? I mean you seem so concerned about the PR fallout of a couple of bad jokes, surely you can muster an opinion on actual significant events that actually matter.

Posted by: malcolmyoung1 | June 22, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

With McChrystal and Karzai both going rogue, it's time to end the farce. Bring the troops home.

Posted by: Jose5 | June 22, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Face it...Afghanistan was a lost cause from the start. How can you fight a war, try to (unsuccessfully) reign in a corrupt government and try to educate an illiterate populace all at the same time to achieve what objective?

We were doomed to fail and we're reaping the fruits of our labor today - false alliances, untrustworthy allies and Afghani troops that sell their allegiances at the drop of a hat.

Posted by: dc1020008 | June 22, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I thought Obama was going to give us a transparent government. Looks like it is only transparent when he wants to look good and opaque when he and his minions are portrayed as they are.

Do you suppose Gen. Stanley McChrystal's being right will have anything to do with the outcome?

Posted by: dwstclair | June 22, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Is Capehart Obama's plant at the Post? If not, I would bet he's great "buds" with the prez.

Posted by: Rehcab1 | June 22, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

"Rolling Stone Magazine"

If McCrystal and his staff were not bright enough to keep their traps shut in front of a reporter from a music mag, they need to be removed from their post immediately.

It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong in concept or who the president is.

Posted by: hoos3014 | June 22, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

For some strange reason I get the feeling Capehart and the prez are great "buds."

Posted by: Rehcab1 | June 22, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Amateur-Hour in Washington. No one in Obama's Administration has ever held a job so they don't understand how to do things. And here we are with chaos in EVERY catagory of the American interest. Every single thing is on the ropes. This is what happens when you elect small-mined, selfish little idealist children to run the country. From Pelosi and Reid on up to the White House, we're completely at the mercy of little children.

Posted by: JamesChristian | June 22, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

There 's not a chance is Hades that this General will be fired.
The knows to much and thy can't keep firing Generals for their mistakes...

Posted by: corebanks1940 | June 22, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

The way I see it, McChrystal was speaking truth to kooks; if this had happened five years ago, he;d be hailed as a "hero" or a "whistleblower". I can understand why little sycophants like Jonathan are in high dudgeon over this: how dare a man of such distinguished service question the petulant man-child that is Obama.

Posted by: sladenyv1 | June 22, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Now if Bush were in the White House, the left would be praising the General for speaking the truth. But since we have an unqualified uber-liberal black President, not so much...

Posted by: flyingv | June 22, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse


Barry the incompetent boob Obama, the chickenhawk demander-in-chief who never served a day in uniform, IS "unprepared".

Woefully unprepared to lead this nation. The General is correct.

Miserable failure Obama

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 22, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Fire the insubordinate, arrogant fool. He now has the gall to apologize? And yes, the war itself is stupid and pointless, and has no obvious mission. Let them cut each others' throats for the next 100 years and let's get out of there.

Posted by: opinionated4 | June 22, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

The issue is whether this is gross misconduct and while it would not be in civilian ranks, it clearly is here. The military code of honor requires respect for your superiors--including and especially the Commander in Chief. McCrystal should not have to be fired, he should instead resign effective immediately for his gross violation of honor--that is what should have come, following his apology.

Posted by: Prosperity2008 | June 22, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

@ PennyWisetheClown -

It was Gen McCrystal who made the rules of engagement MORE restrictive in Afghanistan, and issued his guidance that protecting the civilian population is the priority. Let's not keep regurgitating conventional, if irrelevant, rhetoric.

Google "General McCrystal tactical directive close air support"

Posted by: capbeltway | June 22, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

What a jerk. Fire him

Posted by: Munir1 | June 22, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Paint him gone!!

Although he may be right.

Posted by: hfaulk01 | June 22, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

The only reason Pres. Obama increased troop levels and basically gave McCrystal what he wanted was that Republicans would have accused the president of being "soft on terrorism". I blame Obama for not doing what he and most people know needs to be done: face reality and withdraw from Afghanistan without delay.
Apparently, there needs to be a purge of those military officers who don't seem to know who is in charge in this country. I hope Pres. Obama has the backbone to remove insubordinate officers immediately and demand those who can't execute policy in good conscience to resign their commissions.
Afghanistan and Iraq never should have been invaded. We are only making a bad situation worse by injecting our power and values in places that are still tribal in nature. Not one more American soldier should die for the Karzai crime syndicate.
The administration needs to get control of our foreign policy and stop letting generals make it up as hey go alon. If you ask a general what should be done, they will always need more men, equipment,time and money. Obama needs to be decisive. The pentagon is loaded with West Point graduates. McCrystal can easily be replaced with someone who will execute the administrations policies. The American people need to decide want they want and vote for leaders who know what they are doing.

Posted by: jp1943 | June 22, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse


Barry the incompetent boob Obama, that inept bungler, has already sent 487 American soldiers to their deaths in Afghanistan on Barry's watch.

That is more than were lost during SEVEN YEARS of fighting in Afghanistan, 2001-2007. Yet nary a peep out of WaPo hacks who are completely in the bag for Barry.

This headless chicken in the White House is on target to reach the 500 mark by Independence Day.

Miserable failure Obama


Posted by: screwjob16 | June 22, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

screwjob16:
Barry the incompetent boob Obama, the chickenhawk demander-in-chief who never served a day in uniform, IS "unprepared".
____________________

I think you meant to say George the incompetent boob Bush, the chickenhawk decider-in-chief who dodged the Vietnam draft, right?

Or did you mean to say Dick the torturing conspiracy theorist Cheney, the chickenhawk shadow president who dodged the Vietnam draft?

They succeeded so well when running the first 3/4 of the Afghanistan war, huh? I especially like how they captured Bin Laden in those first few months when they knew where he was.

Posted by: uh_huhh | June 22, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

I wish we had a General like this back in 1965 during the Vietnam War. LBJ refused to listen to reality back then, just like obama and his "fight them with paint ball guns" idea.

Posted by: economy48 | June 22, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

McChrystal should be fired so he can follow his true passions in the Tea Bagger party. McChrystal is a disgrace to the armed forces.

Posted by: miknugget | June 22, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse


What else cab you expect from a chickenhawk administration? Not only Barry the incompetent boob Obama, but his entire presidential line of succession, never spent a day of their lives in military uniform.

Barry the inept bungler - NEVER SERVED
Joe 'hair plugs' Biden - NEVER SERVED
Nancy Pelois - NEVER SERVED
Rob't 'sheets' Byrd - NEVER SERVED
Hillary Clinton - NEVER SERVED
Tim Geithner - NEVER SERVED

Miserable failure Obama

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 22, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

If General McC was so dissatisfied with the leadership..both civilian and military..he should of resigned. Now he will take a place in history for those who used extremely poor judgment in a political sense during wartime.

Remember, this is the same General McC who authorized the Silver Star for Pat Tillman..and when asked how he could of authorized such an award...he reply was in part..."I did not read the citation as well as I should of.."

LTC/US Army
Afghan, Iraq, HOA

Posted by: LTC-11A | June 22, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Why is it that critics of President Obama never say exactly what the President should do. What exactly should he do to cap the oil leak? Say what he should be doing in the oil crisis that he has not done.

What exactly should he do in Afghanistan that he has not done. On advice from the Pentagon, generals, former generals and other knowledgeable persons he sent 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. What should he be doing in Iraq that has not been done? Make your case, after the criticism, say what you think should be done.

Along with the criticism of the President playing basketball, going to dinners etc. Say exactly what you think he should be doing with his time, don’t just criticize say “instead of playing golf the President should be ____________to solve the problem.”

Republicans scream 24/7 about leaving business’ PRIVATE SECTOR alone to move the economy. When President Obama relied on BP to care for the oil spill all Gulf Coast red state Republicans changed, for political reasons, and are now screaming for the President and federal government to do everything at once to stop the spill and clean up oil coming from the gulf.

Then there’s Congressman Joe Barton, the top Republican on the committee overseeing the oil spill and its aftermath, delivering an apology to BP, saying the $20 billion fund that President Obama directed BP to establish to provide relief to the victims of the oil disaster was a "tragedy in the first proportion." Congressman Barton apologized and like Barton General Mc Chrystal put out a weak apology. Barton made a criticism but did not say what the President should have done. Mc Chrystal made fun, in public, of his Commander In Chief, he needs to go.

Posted by: 1strombone | June 22, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

There is nothing to choose from between McChrystal and Obama.

McChrystal condoned and turned a blind eye to torture. By choosing McChrystal, so did Obama.

They are both war criminals AFAIC.

It's almost comical that McChrystal could get canned for NAMECALLING.

Posted by: solsticebelle | June 22, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

I don't think McCrystal should report to the White House. He should be directed back to the Pentagon to say hello to the JCS, where they will have his retirement papers filled out for his signature. This would be a courtesy.

If McCrystal doesn't like that option he should be court-martialed.

This in not a debatable offense.

Posted by: James10 | June 22, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

When will any of these "leaders" acknowledge that the Afghan situation is rapidly evolving into America's new Vietnam?

Posted by: Cactus09 | June 22, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

I personally think he should stay and make Obama either fire him or listen to the reasons on why he is so unhappy.

Maybe he is disgusted on having to enforce a rules of engagement that is accomplishing nothing but getting our kids brought home in body bags.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | June 22, 2010 8:46 AM
______________________________________
The President didn't dream up the hare-brained ROE, McChrystal did. The soldiers are fighting under McChrystal-developed and approved ROE. The President inherited a war gone bad from the last guy and if you want to throw me in the blame Bush crowd so be it. It's the truth. The President took the advice and counsel of many people including McChrystal and sent him more troops. The plan isn't working and the man to blame will not be Obama but McChrystal. He was given what he asked for and it apparently ain't working --- mostly because we don't have a willing and able partner in the Afghan government. But please, don't blame Obama for something he had nothing to do with ---

Posted by: army164 | June 22, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

McChrystal's frustration is with his own failed military strategy - it has not shown the results he expected. Hence he is blaming all others. McChrystal should own up and leave the war theater. He has failed - that is the real reason for his badmouthing others.
Mo Ahmed

Posted by: bigmoahmed | June 22, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

I personally think he should stay and make Obama either fire him or listen to the reasons on why he is so unhappy.

Maybe he is disgusted on having to enforce a rules of engagement that is accomplishing nothing but getting our kids brought home in body bags.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | June 22, 2010 8:46 AM
______________________________________
The President didn't dream up the hare-brained ROE, McChrystal did. The soldiers are fighting under McChrystal-developed and approved ROE. The President inherited a war gone bad from the last guy and if you want to throw me in the blame Bush crowd so be it. It's the truth. The President took the advice and counsel of many people including McChrystal and sent him more troops. The plan isn't working and the man to blame will not be Obama but McChrystal. He was given what he asked for and it apparently ain't working --- mostly because we don't have a willing and able partner in the Afghan government. But please, don't blame Obama for something he had nothing to do with ---

Posted by: army164 | June 22, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

McChrystal's frustration is with his own failed military strategy - it has not shown the results he expected. Hence he is blaming all others. McChrystal should own up and leave the war theater. He has failed - that is the real reason for his badmouthing others.
Mo Ahmed

Posted by: bigmoahmed | June 22, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

The Constitution gives the Commander-in- Chief the power to fire General McCrystal.

Unfortunately, the Constitution cannot give the Commander in Chief the
- ability to manage the miltary so incidents like this don't happen
- the decisiveness to win the respect of the miltary
- the common sense to not play gay politics with the military in the middle of a war.

Only fools think all it takes to manage the military is issuing orders.

Posted by: jfv123 | June 22, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Fire his behind as well as all his staff

Posted by: ibhernandez2003 | June 22, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

As Clemenceau said, "War is too important a matter to be left to the military." War MUST reflect the political will of a country, which often does not coincide with what the military wants. The wide differences of opinion about the correct course are resolved at our ballot boxes; Obama won fair and square, and the generals' duty (well defined by law) is to find the best way to execute the strategy their Commander in Chief gives them. McCrystal should resign.

Posted by: jimgmcc | June 22, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

PennyWisetheClown: "Maybe he is disgusted on having to enforce a rules of engagement that is accomplishing nothing but getting our kids brought home in body bags."

Yes, the Soviet approach was so much more successful. Wasn't it?

Posted by: jkoch2 | June 22, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

McCrystal requested 45,000 troops and after 3 months of "study", Obama decided 30,000 was enough. Withdrawal begins July 2011, regardless of the situation.

Capehart got the first sentence right. McCrystal is not in charge, he is only supposed to execute President Obama's war plan. I guess Obama is one of the best military minds around. McCrystal is supposed to do what he is told even if it is stupid and failing. Just don't tell anyone.
=========================================

It appears that GEN McCrystal was so frustrated at being undermined by the White House staff he was motivated to set the record straight, and it blew up in his face.

From the excerpt I think he's right but I also think Capeheart is right too.

Posted by: bbface21 | June 22, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

This not about strategy or ability. Its about a general with a big ego and a loud mouth. Generals are a dime a dozen in today's Army. They are more accustom to presiding over day care centers they call forts. Mr. President Fire this loudmouth and move down the ranks to find a hard charger who is smart enough to be the whole package. Don't look back just get down with it.

Posted by: fare777 | June 22, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Our military is getting out of control. Obama needs to remind them what it says in the U.S. Constitution about the "commander in chief" and who's in charge.

And, of course, this general should be in civvies before the end of the week. And that would make a good opportunity for Obama to do some major makeover work on
Af-Pak policy and planning. Before it's too late.

Posted by: S1VA | June 22, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Capehart is foolish. Get rid of a guy that has brought your success in this difficult war? Ummmmm... boy you media people are arrogant. How bout not basing a decision that could endanger US soldiers lives on a personal insult.

briang111, I have to ask. What is the "success" that you're referring to?

Posted by: Mandela1 | June 22, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Should McCrystal offer his resignation President Obama should refuse to accept it. Obama should then fire him.

Blatent insubordination by anyone in the military must never be tolerated.

Posted by: alyeager1 | June 22, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Obama will probably give him a medal. He loves to reward his enemies and punish his friends.

Posted by: JayJonson | June 22, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

The American tradition of "civilian control of the military" is FAR more important than winning or losing in Afghanistan.

McChrystal must go on principle: American generals must NEVER be openly contemptuous of the President.

Posted by: kcx7 | June 22, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

The General has every right to his opinion. However, to express such opinions as these in a public forum is not only a case of insubordination but sheer stupidity as well. What did he expect when he and his men started spouting off, and to a Rolling Stone reporter no less? He can't even understand the consequences of these types of actions, and he's the commander in Afghanistan!

Posted by: Aquarius1 | June 22, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

This was technically insubordinate behavior. Not my opinion--officers in the military are not allowed to publicly make comments that "embarrass or disparage" the President. And while it does still happen, human nature being what it is, most officers are not stupid enough to do it in front of a journalist writing a profile of them for Rolling Stone. McChrystal has been a good soldier, but there are a lot of good soldiers in the US Army. Let him retire and replace him with someone who knows to keep his criticisms out of the press.

Posted by: dkp01 | June 22, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Pennywisetheclown wrote:
I personally think he should stay and make Obama either fire him or listen to the reasons on why he is so unhappy.

Maybe he is disgusted on having to enforce a rules of engagement that is accomplishing nothing but getting our kids brought home in body bags.

Response:

This is the military. It's called insubordination. If you do not have the good judgement to keep your criticism private, then you do not get to keep your position......same would be true in the business world. Complain up the ranks, complain directly to the President but do not spill you complaints to a reporter or create an environment where your staff feels empowered to complain to reporters.

The rules of engagement are MacCrystal's rules. He has made that clear publicly more than one time..... before the congress, in print and on the tube. So Penny, he is not enforcing someone else's rules. Our kids are coming home in body bags because this is a nasty war we should not be fighting any longer. I suspect what really happened is that MacCrystal's policy is not working, he knows it, he is upset because back in 2009 he said it was his baby, and now he has to admit responsibility for failure.

You do not get to be a three or four start general without being a politician. It goes with the territory. Clearly General MacCrystal is not on his game and it will cost him his job..... as it must.

Posted by: tarryh | June 22, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

McChrystal should be fired immediately & retired in a lower grade if not charged under the UCMJ. If any of these comments had been made about him by a subordinate, you can bet there would have been swift and severe retribution.


Posted by: xmptle | June 22, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Let's not shoot the messanger. McChrystal simply made the mistake of articulating what all his peers are thinking.
Obama's administration lacks a clear, decisive direction. The Prez has failed to provide the aggressive Leadership that winning requires and he lacks experience and managerial skills that would enable a true leader to get things going in the right direction. Yes, I’m talking about Afghanistan… did you think I was talking about the Gulf?

Posted by: meaton11 | June 22, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Gen. Stanley McChrystal must resign. If I were Obama I would also take one of his stars before he retires. McChrystal seems to not understand his role and chain of command. His ego has caused his fall. Sad thing is he really does not have a lot to brag about unlike other historical egotistical generals such as Patton and McArthur. At least those generals were WINNERS.

Posted by: kschur1 | June 22, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Given the gross incompetence, fecklessness, ignorance and grandiosity of Obama et al, methinks McChrystal, his flawed judgment about speaking within earshot of the press notwithstanding, was quite temperate in his criticisms of the President and his colleagues. He shouldn't be fired; he should resign and go on a speaking tour describing how and why the current administration's approach to Islamist terrorism is FUBAR!

Posted by: director1 | June 22, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal at best tolerated, and more likely encouraged insubordination and contempt for civilian leadership. MacArthur was fired in the middle of a war for less. Let's not forget the McChrystal got a pass for his deep involvement in the Pat Tillman coverup. That was his second chance, and he blew it.

Posted by: turningfool | June 22, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

How dare McChrystal violate his oath of office?
He's got to go and fast.
And, since this is about Afghanistan and where we're going, it is time to really plan US departure.
Even the Times Square bomber said the US will face further attacks and plots until we leave there (and Iraq), so let's get moving. If the people of both SOVEREIGN nations do not want us in their countries, bring our troops home.

Posted by: joycebl | June 22, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Gen. McChrystal failed in his oath of service and apparently he has no respect for the President or the chain of command. One could say he is attempting to jump of a sinking ship who's course he projected and commanded. Relieving Gen. McChrystal of his command should be only a first step, he should be charged under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and Congress should bring action against him to ensure that Officer of our Armed Forces take their duties seriously.

Posted by: Randy9 | June 22, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Capehart, you're a racist and that's all there is to it. If McChrystal was black this story would never have been written by you. You're not going to admit it, but I can see through you just like the plastic so-called "journalist" that you are. There is no need for me to dignify any of your article trying to explain why General McChrystal said any of the things he allegedly said. Others have already covered most, if not all of that. Just remember while you are spewing your ignorance all over the internet, there are brave soldiers and a brave General McChrystal leading them, that are defending your right to write and say what you do.

Posted by: bucknekkid_ga | June 22, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

I voted for Obama, and wish this wasn't true, but there's no way the Afghanistan policy can possibly work. We have announced we will start leaving one year from now. In that time, somehow we have to get the Afghan government to stop being corrupt and get the Afghan civilians to start trusting it. Any sensible person in the government would be planning for what happens after we leave -- i.e., either retire/escape to another country or set yourself up as a warlord controlling enough land to ensure your longevity. So there's no way the policy can work. Whoever takes over after McChrystal will have the same problem.

Posted by: jonawebb | June 22, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

This is a serious offense.

Mr.Obama again should take 3 months to weigh all possibilities before making a wise decision on his Afghanistan general.

Posted by: llrllr | June 22, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute This man is a whistleblower and needs to be protected at all costs. There are goobers running the country.

Posted by: jmounday | June 22, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Mullen should be the first (and only) one to go.

Let the new plan be tested and see if it works or not.

That should decide for McChrystal.

Performance should be the test.

Read "Red Badge of Courage."

Posted by: GaryEMasters | June 22, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I think the people making all the other outrageous remarks need to realize something. If you criticize your boss publicly more than once, how long do you expect to have a job?

Anyone who doesn't have the common sense to realize this should not be leading our brave men and women!! I hope the General will have the common sense to make the transition to a new general easier.

Posted by: thisiscrap | June 22, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

At least he didn't call our Sec of State a fat horse.

Posted by: mlemac | June 22, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't take much to "Fall from Grace", does it.

Look what happened to Helen Thomas, a WH Press Queen whose career spanned for some 57 odd years. The problem with that is in the end she had a mean spirited lively tongue that could bite the head off a rattlesnake.

Now we have a 4 Star Army General with the same kind of tongue.

"Loose Lips Sinks Ships" and the man in charge of the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, "ship" seems to be now sinking from those loose lips.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | June 22, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

My bet is that President Obama will keep him on. McCrystal (mainly his staff) said some pretty dumb things in front of a reporter. But you really need to read the Time article to get a better view of McCrystal and the relationship he has with the troops. http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/06/22/mcchrystal/

McCrystal, like Patton did before him, needs to understand that the media isn't always his friend.

Posted by: mehrenst1 | June 22, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

It is not the general who needs to change. It is the incompetent boobs in the White House. Anyone who tells the enemy when you are going to quit fighting is an idiot.

Posted by: groovercg | June 22, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal should have been gone much earlier, in fact immediately after he took over.

When McChrystal first took over in Afghanistan, instead of protecting the troops, he spread them out, putting many in valleys which were at low points, and they were attacked and many of our military killed as a result.

McChrystal, after the many deaths said it was the President's fault for not providing more troops as he wanted.

Unfortunately, he did not request more troops until many deaths were being reported.

We learned in the Government, that first you take care of your employees/troops. You do not put them in harms way if you believe they are unable to handle the job in the numbers assigned.

Your job is is to go up the line for more help before deploying an inadequate number of people, whether military or civilians.

McChrystal instead, deployed troops in dangerous areas, and then went public about needing more troops. I would have fired him then.

The President took him to the woodshed, and promised never again.

Now here we are again, except, he is denegrating the Commander in Chief, as being intimidated by him and other Generals which I serious doubt, he is talking badly about the VP, his immediate boss and about others others in the administration.

I believe the problem is the General, and it is time for him to go, in fact, past time for him to go.

Posted by: SCVoter | June 22, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

The general needs to go, ..... and in about 6 months, Gates if things don't improve.

Posted by: richard36 | June 22, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

If McChrystal had aired his grievances, spoke truth, pointed out incompetence as many here suggest, perhaps it might have been defensible. But the comments I've read have just been childish name calling ("clown", "biteme", etc.).

This was no considered critique by a military professional; it was a peevish bull session with a bunch of overgrown adolescents who apparently couldn't handle their liquor. How embarrassing for them.

When we consider that, according to his top aide, Gen. Franks had to get half-crocked on tequila before going along with Rumsfeld's plan for Iraq, it makes one wonder how many of the top brass have serious drinking problems. It would explain a lot.

Posted by: writinron | June 22, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

This is the same dim bulb that decided the Army should cover up the circumstances of Pat Tillman's death. He should never have had another command after that boneheaded move. How can this round of poor judgment be a surprise to anybody?!

Posted by: Sackim | June 22, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Mr. McCrystal should go, but he won't.

Mr. Obama has not held anyone to account for torture, has bailed out the Wall Street fraudsters, and believes in "looking forwards, not backwards and turning the page". With this track record, why should Mr. Obama fire Mr. McCrystal? It sets a bad president. Sorry, Precedent.

Posted by: zone3zone1 | June 22, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

It is a shame someone like obummer gets to pretend he's commander of anything. I think McCristal is heads and shoulders above the so-called president. I think it is good he spoke his mind and what a pity his apology for anything to the likes of our chicago thug president. Obummer is not qualified to be a any kind of leader, never mind being in charge of all military. He never seved a day. It is all so disgusting!

Posted by: chatelain | June 22, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

No… George W. Bush and cronies exercised poor judgement by sending our entire military structure into Afghanistan, instead of just the initial, tiny special ops teams. Obama exercised poor judgement by deciding to continue and "escalate" a doomed strategy of spending billions to pay off Taliban and others to help "cooperate" with our protection and their annihilation. McChrystal has now officially judged what he probably knew all along: that he was being employed to perform a job, a miracle, that was unobtainable… to build a new nation that thrived and lived in peace. And didn't really even exist in any real strategy anyway, just a few isolated talking points.

McCrystal: are you an American? Or are you a crony? I hope that you will have the courage to resign immediately so you are free to "spill the beans" and come clean… What are we doing over there?! And WHY?! It's partly your legacy now, too.

Posted by: LawsLuvr | June 22, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

IT IS OBAMA WHO NEEDS TO GO-O-O-O-O!
OBAMA KNOWS ZILCH ABOUT LEADING OR ABOUT RUNNING MILITARY.

Posted by: chatelain | June 22, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Everyone already knows that Obozo is the Clown-in-Chief.


Posted by: Jerzy | June 22, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I don't see how McChrystal and his civilian counterparts on Afghanistan can continue with any confidence in each other, so I reluctantly agree that he must resign--or at least humble himself by offering his resignation to the President. But even that wouldn't be enough: this kind of behaviour by the senior military officer in a major military campaign is an egregious and unforgiveable breach of discipline. What was he thinking?

If it had been an off-the-cuff remark or a thoughtless response under pressure from reporters, I could see forgiving him, but the remarks were consistent among his staff, in a sustained involvement with a reporter. It shows a negative and resentful group attitude towards the president and his Afghanistan team, and a peculiar arrogance in letting their views be known to the reporter.

These folks weren't born yesterday. I see no saving grace here, nor any confidence that things will improve if McChrystal stays in the post. It's all too bad.

Posted by: nickcw | June 22, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

I don't know if McChrystal should be fired or not.. I just know Capehart doesn't know either. To me his WHOLE record should be judged and before he's fired there has to be an evaluation on who will replace him and will the new guy be as good if not better. To replace a general without someone better to step in only puts our troops at more risk. That should be the number one concern.

Posted by: sovine08 | June 22, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

The men and women whose lives are on the line in Afghanistan deserve a better leader than a shoot-from-the-mouth general.

Posted by: robfield | June 22, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

The men and women who put their lives on the line in Afghanistan deserve a better leader than a shoot-from-the-mouth general.

Posted by: robfield | June 22, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

" ...There are people lives at stake and our national security at risk. he acts like you can just fire Generals leading a war because they say something stupid. If you want to fire him because he is doing a poor job as a general fine, but generals, like Presidents don't just get fired."
Posted by: KCV257

Well, yes, generals do get fired - especially when they prove unsuited to critical missions. (How many generals did Lincoln go through?)

Here, it's not just that McChrystal said something stupid. It is that his continued presence would be a threat to the mission.

He didn't say, "I'm sorry sir, but I'm not your man." He grabbed the glory of cammand, and now snipes about his superiors behind their back. This is not smart and it's not honorable. It sets a terrible example for the troops and undermines their morale and confidence in their mission.

Posted by: j3hess | June 22, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

When you're caught up in the moment, we sometimes lose sight of the afterwards. Once the lights are down, cameras are off and everyone's gone, you're left with reality and the now. He exercised poor judgment and he needs to go. Too many lives on the line for one's ego. Like it or not, he's on the job 24/7. His job isn't like a light switch that you turn on and off at leisure. He should have known better or at the least went in more prepared. Once the damage is done, there's no turning back.

Posted by: peterpan1 | June 22, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

The men and women who put their lives on the line deserve a better leader than a shoot-from-the-mouth general.

Posted by: robfield | June 22, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

The General is my new hero. B.O. doesn't know much about anything. How in in the world did he become our President?? Oh, stupid liberals, that's how.

Let's fire Obama, not the General, in 2012.

Posted by: Robster1 | June 22, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Strikes me that McChrystal's staff is kind of like a bunch of high school "mean girls". Fairly embarrassing behavior from supposed adults in responsible positions. Their "boss" should have nipped this long before a reporter showed up.

Question: what are the rules for firing military personnel? There must be distinct guidelines. Do they just lose their current post, or can they actually be kicked out of the service?

Posted by: Rivery | June 22, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

The men and women who puit their lives on the line in Afghanistan deserve a better leader than a shoot-from-the-mouth general.
Comment censored by the staff of the Washington Post.

Posted by: robfield | June 22, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

There is no suggestion that Gen. McChrystal and his staff were motivated by serious disagreement with President Obama on Afghanistan policy, the NY Times, quoting an advanced copy of the Rolling Stone article, said:

"The article, ... does not mention any serious policy differences with Mr. Obama, who chose General McChrystal ..."

It may be that we just overheard the typical grousing and sharp humour of military folk in relaxation mode (i.e., with a drink or three). However, indulging in the notorious military assumption of superiority over civilians and showing off with a "gotcha" reporter was just plain stupid and arrogant.

It now doesn't matter whether McChrystal really differs from Obama on Afghanistan policy or not; he has severely embarrassed the President, a lot of powerful people, the military chain of command, and himself. That's a lot to overcome with an apology.

And don't think for a minute that Obama will hesitate to fire him just because it isn't obvious to us who would replace him; keeping McChrystal in his post under such circumstances would be worse for the Afghanistan campaign than anything else Obama could do. Confidence is everything.

Posted by: nickcw | June 22, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"If you want to fire him because he is doing a poor job as a general fine, but generals, like Presidents don't just get fired."


Uh, not true. They are not elected officials and can be dismissed by the President at any time. Ask Pres. Truman who fired argueably our greatest general for insubordination.

Posted by: theFieldMarshall | June 22, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Obama needs to suck it up and figure out why the military is unhappy with Afghanistan policy. He has been doing better than Bush, who blew a chance to take out AQ and leave. Still, do we really have a strategy in the "graveyard of empires?" Firing McChrystal would be no magic bullet. The Petraeus-McChrystal team is probably the best we are going to do in a difficult situation.

Posted by: scientist1 | June 22, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

I am career military and career progressive. McChrystal must go and he must go now. This interview doesn't just show poor judgement, it shows incredibly poor taste and reflects poorly on him, his service, and the United States of America.

President Obama should not wait. He should have fired him immediately. The man should be doing door guard duty at the Pentagon. Nickcw is spot on, about this.

Posted by: arancia12 | June 22, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Agree with Capehart (OMG several neurons just died).

I only hope that McChrystal goes on the speaker circuit to explain the disaster of these rules of engagement. If his sole point is to win the war with the least amount of casualties....then he should go before the congressional Armed Forces committee immediately.

Posted by: jhpbriton | June 22, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

" The truth will set you free" unless you're part of the Obama crowd then the truth will get you fired.
How bad must it be on the inside for smart people, who clearly know the protocal,to say these things openly?

Posted by: jjflynn628 | June 22, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Why not just end our insane involvement in these foreign civil wars that have nothing to do with al-Qaeda - who are in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan?

Bring the troops home YESTERDAY.

Posted by: WillSeattle | June 22, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse


Has anyone ever heard Barry utter the phrase "victory in Afghanistan"? Well, have you? Hmm?

Miserable failure Obama

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 22, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal has precious little to gripe about. Obama chose McChrystal's strategy, and gave him the troops he wanted. You can't make the mess Obama's just because Obama gave the general a reasonable target date for being in a position to start drawing down troops. That doesn't make the strategy incoherent, guarantee failure, explain McChrystal's strategic blunders, or much of anything else. McChrystal is launching preemtive attacks at the folks who are increasingly unimpressed with HIS execution of HIS plan, with all the troops HE asked for. Not that the snipers shouldn't also be smacked on a few wrists, but they're just politicians outside the chain of command. McChrystal reports to Obama, Obama gave the keys to McChrystal, and McChrystal has no business blaming Obama for driving the car into a ditch.

The rules of engagement are McChrystal's, not Obama's, so he owns them, too. And the suggestion that we are undermining our generals is b.s. - it's the general who is undermining his boss by carping at only getting 99% of his way and getting a bit touchy over his lack of performance.

Posted by: JoeT1 | June 22, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal must be a racist .

Posted by: borntoraisehogs | June 22, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone ever heard Barry utter the phrase "victory in Afghanistan"? Well, have you? Hmm?

Miserable failure Obama

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 22, 2010 2:54 PM

=======================================

Uh........No, I don't think I have.

Posted by: bbface21 | June 22, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

As a veteran of two Iraq wars, I can say with certainty that troops would rather follow a Warrior General (McChrystal, who has always been a warrior), over a Politician General. The politicians are only worried about getting that additional star and getting that cushy office in the Pentagon. The warrior general is concerned about his troops first and foremost.

Make no mistake. McChrystal is beloved by his men and women. He has always demonstrated that he has our best interests in mind. We would follow him into battle any day. He isn't some guy "playing the game" and waiting around for his promotion

Posted by: rls1188 | June 22, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

the removal of a competent general in the middle of a mission puts soldier's lives in danger. This is a CONCRETE result of removing the General now.

Obama and Biden's public images are NOT more important than the lives of American soldiers.

I wonder how many people who like to say they support the troops are just paying them lip service? You can't say you support the troops, then in the next breath say you support removing the most competent combat General in our Army over some hurt feelings.

Posted by: rls1188 | June 22, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Fire him.

It won't make a difference.

The situation is bad.

The economy is in bad shape.

Unemployment is still high.

The deficit is balooning.

The gulf is polluted.

Border security is broken.

The war in Afghanistan is not going well.

You can put a smiley face on a bad situation, but that won't make it better.

Posted by: ttj1 | June 22, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Will the Ditherer in Chief fire the clear thinking, straight speaking general?

Posted by: johne37179 | June 22, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Q: why are we in iraq and afghanistan?
A: because the bush administration invaded
those countries.

Q: why are we still in both countries?

A: IRAQ
1. we have too much invested in lives
and capital.
2. oil. (which is the real reason we
invaded in the first place).
3. Iran. leaving would create a power
vacumn and iran would take over.

AFGHANISTAN
1. the taliban would take over and
the country would once again be
an al quaeda stronghold.

unless you live past another 20 years you
won't see the day that we are completely out of either country.

now you see what a "war of choice" can cost you, and you know whose choices these wars of choice were.

so now you know who to blame it on.

Posted by: surlydoc | June 22, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Contrary to the anti-Bushies contention, this is Obama's war. He said as much at every opportunity on the campaign trail. It's his "war of choice." Now that Obama is losing his war, and someone calls it like it is, Capehart is screaming, like the little Obama poodle that he is.

Posted by: jpfann | June 22, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

No disrespect to our troops serving honorably both domestically and abroad, but I would like to know wtf happened to our military?

I have a buddy who's served in Iraq (a major up for promotion to colonel): the DFAC (dining facility in the Green Zone) serves lobster and steak, provided by outside contractors, along with Häagen-Dazs Ice Cream and every other freakin' delectable delight you can imagine.

No more GI's peeling potatoes, that's for sure.

Under Bush-Cheney (or really, Cheney-Bush), if it could be contracted out to a private (or better yet, publicly-held) company, then farm it out baby! There's bucko bucks to be made in them thar wars!

Forget the military industrial complex that Ike warned about, it's now the military commercial complex.

And now, generals hire civilian press aides to arrange profiles in magazines like Rolling Stone?

As I said, wtf?

Obama needs a complete and total reinvention of the military from the top down...but it probably won't happen, because the Republicans will cry that he's weak on defense (while lining their pockets by investing with the companies doing the work that the military used to do for itself).

Ugh!

Posted by: Bondosan | June 22, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

As a veteran of two Iraq wars, plus a Vietnam Era Vet, I echo other Veterans here that the troops would rather follow a Warrior as General (McChrystal, who is a West Point Graduate and has always been a warrior), over a Politician General.

The rank and file Soldiers and Marines have their hands tied behind their backs in the issue of the rules of engagement and getting the job done!
I personally think Warrior Gen. McChrystal, should stay.

The military needs real leadership here. The strategist is the best out there to lead his soldiers. Obviously he is frustrated and should have the opportunity to inform President Obama either fire him or listen to the reasons on why he is so unhappy.

Most play it safe. Most Generals use the politician card are only worried about getting that next promotion. We have a problem. The rules of engagement and how to win a war that is unobtainable.

The problem is how we win this war with an enemy that hides out and plants IEDs, all the while yelling religious diarrhea unsupported by a President that thinks we should began pulling out and setting dates to pull out.

Posted by: sgtbilly1 | June 22, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

A very brave soldier will fall on his sword to protect an inept, immature, ill prepared leader (?) and the military in general. Obama (is that his REAL NAME ?) is a failure at everything and the General is right to call him out. In fact the American people should be calling the clown in chief out in November by clearing out all of his "friends" and "syncophants" in the house and senate and taking back this nation. The fool in charge has ruined the economy, caused the unnecesary death of brave military personnel by his "show" of "knowledge" about now to run HIS WARS rather than getting out of the way and letting the Generals run it the way it should be: no holds barred, collateral damage expected and accepted and kicking some A@@ in the process. And now we have the oil disaster which is only getting worse by the lack of attention and appreciation as to the long term serious consequences by playing politics with the lives and incomes of the residents along the Gulf coast. He is off playing golf (but then he does play at being the leader of this nation so what else is new) while he should be leading, not trying to figure out the best spin to the problems his failure to lead has created. So no, the General should stay, and the leadership in washingto stay out of his way. We have another vietnam on our hands the way things are going.

Posted by: upgp46 | June 22, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

rls1188: It is clear that Gen. McChrystal is a top-notch soldier and leader of troops as you say. No one is disputing that. It may also be that he is "not playing the (political) game," but he intruded himself into the political game with this interview in a way that his commanders and his military and civilian colleagues cannot and must not ignore or excuse.

No one made him do this; it was an act of supreme carelessness, and the consequences are of his own making, no one else's. He can't even claim that his enemies are out to get him or that he was forced to speak up because of profound policy or strategy issues; it was just careless talk in front of a reporter, over a long period of time.

No matter how good a fighting soldier McChrystal is, he has to be cognizant of the responsibilities of the post he occupies and the implications of his actions for others; if he is so careless that he undermines all those working with him at the top of the nation's command structure, then he has to be removed.

Posted by: nickcw | June 22, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Macarthur he isn't. And if his and his staff's comments are the example, He doesn't appear to be too strong on maintaing good order and discipline.

Posted by: snake_taylor | June 22, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Every generation in my family has served since we immigrated here in 1830. MY father (’40-WWII) and eldest brother (’64- VNx2) graduated from the USMA at West point. Another brother served in the Navy (VNx2). One protested at Berkley. I served 8 years RA. Both of my sons served in Desert Storm. My younger son also served in Afghanistan. We privately rarely agreed with any senior command decisions.

General McChrystal failed to abide by the UCMJ; once you have taken the oath you DO NOT publicly disparage or denigrate anyone in command, EVER. If you cannot accept, support, and follow the orders given by your superiors, you resign, PERIOD. If you lack the personal integrity to do so, you are relieved of command and are retired – sometimes with a reduction in rank.

The chain of command is not a convenience or an occasional thing. It is the absolute backbone of the military’s ability to develop, support, and execute the battle plan: General McChrystal is whining; it doesn’t become him.

Posted by: BillFer | June 22, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

BillFer: Amen to that. Well said.

Serving soldiers should not behave like politicians, superstars, media darlings, or pundits. And they should especially not cozy up to and hobnob with reporters out of vanity. It's the scorpion and the frog in spades.

Posted by: nickcw | June 22, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal and his butt kissing staff should be reassigned to a 3 year no outs tour at the new survival school opening tomorrow on Adak Island. Let's see if they like being Donner Party reenactors better than being loyal, honorable, military officers.

Posted by: NICKYNUNYA | June 22, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

As with the Gulf of Mexico oil rig disaster, maybe Obama should make the best of a bad situation and fix the underlying problems:

1. Stop using the Dept of Defense for nation building. As the Rolling Stone article pointed out, the civilian agencies responsible for foreign policy have no clout in Afghanistan or anywhere else because the DoD has all the money.

2.Admit that Afghanistan isn't a place where we should be engaged in nation building in the first place. We are squandering lives and treasure in Afghanistan for no purpose.

Posted by: exco | June 22, 2010 7:08 PM | Report abuse

As with the Gulf of Mexico oil rig disaster, maybe Obama should make the best of a bad situation and fix the underlying problems:

1. Stop using the Dept of Defense for nation building. As the Rolling Stone article pointed out, the civilian agencies responsible for foreign policy have no clout in Afghanistan or anywhere else because the DoD has all the money.

2.Admit that Afghanistan isn't a place where we should be engaged in nation building in the first place. We are squandering lives and treasure in Afghanistan for no purpose.

Posted by: exco | June 22, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

If he didn't need to resign before the apology, he needs to resign now.

H didn't say

"It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and I never should have said it."

instead he said

"It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and it should have never happened."

It didn't "happen." A man who doesn't take responsibility for his own actions and utterances, and reflexively, shouldn't be in the lead.

Posted by: Dissecting_Table | June 22, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama hasn't advanced his agenda far enough to actually start 'Kicking a$$" yet. Only to the point where he can THREATEN to 'kick a$$'. When he gets a few more giant corporations to surrender their property and capital, gets the union thugocracy in place and constitutes his Civilian National Security Force, with assets "equal to DOD", he will start actually "kicking a$$".

Posted by: chatard | June 22, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

People need to quit crying for McChrystal, especially those who claim to be veterans. You can call him a warrior or a hero or whatever you want, but he violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice. By the standards typically applied by conservatives, that makes him a CRIMINAL. His headquarters was an embarrassment. If you're a commanding officer, you don't disparage those above you in the chain of command and you don't allow your subordinates to do so, either.
By the way, think back to what your boy did to officers who answered questions on war policy when they were asked by congressional committees. They didn't bad mouth or disparage anyone in the chain of command. They answered policy questions and their careers ended almost before they were out of the hearing room.
If we apply that standard, McChrystal should probably do some time in Leavenworth--and not the Command and General Staff College.

Posted by: jlhare1 | June 22, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

KCV257 - with all due respect, I'm not sure you understand the Constitution and the chain of command. General McChrystal not only demonstrated insubordination, but so had those below him, also.

You are right: there ARE people's lives at stake, but why, then, did the General choose to offer up such childish comments in the midst of the conflict?

Again you are wrong when you say - "he acts like you can just fire Generals leading a war because they say something stupid."

You can fire a General -- especially if you lose confidence in his abilities to execute the mission.

Again, according to the Constitution, Article Two, Section Two, the President of the United States is the Commander-in-Chief.

While we must wait to fire a President until an election, a General may be fire anytime. (The General before McCrystal was let go too because Gates disagreed with his implementation of the war).

Maybe our country would do better if not only solidiers like McCrystal, but also citizens like yourself -- fully understood the role of the military and the benefits of discipline.

Posted by: RodCMC | June 22, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Read the article. It only reports hearsay from McChrystal's aides. The general never directly disses Obama, and never undercut the chain of command.

Obama should have had such an angry reaction to the Gulf gusher. If so, perhaps it wouldn't have become such a disaster.

Once again, Obama's thin skin takes precedence over real-world concerns. The narcissist-in-chief just can't tolerate criticism.

Posted by: judithod | June 22, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

This so called general should be demoted to a private, and then dishonorably discharged. His thoughts about the President of the United States and members of his administration are despicable. If he ever found Obama and those he insulted on the front line, he is capable of ordering their assasination and cover it up just like he covered up the assasination of Pat Tilman.

This is not the first time this idiot put his foot in his mouth. He is so full of himself by thinking that the President is intimidated by him. Mr McCrystal is approximately the same height as Obama and weighs about 200lbs. That kind of a stature cannot intimidate a chiken, much less any body. What a fool.Obama should not even meet with him in person tommorow. He should be made to put his explanation in writing, and then wait for his demotion and dishonorable discharge.

Posted by: store4720theupsstorecom | June 22, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Sadly Australia lost three soldiers on Monday in an helicoptor accident. Which has raised the question of our involvement in Afghanistan.

Like many Australians I support our particicpation with ISAF. However how can you respect the most Senior Allied Commander after making juvenile and disparaging, school girl remarks about his elected leaders, whilst our troops put their lives on the line every day.

He must go!

Posted by: RobertNaylor | June 22, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse


It is nothing but unattributed hearsay by anonymous "aides" not by General McChrystal himself.

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 22, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Every soldier in this war is at risk of being "replaced" because every one of them is at risk for being killed.
McChrystal is no different. He most certainly CAN be replaced and he MUST be replaced if civilian leadership is to be maintained in this country.
This guy is dangerous to our Constitutional form of government and so are all those guys surrounding him.
How on earth could the President, or the rest of us, trust him to act on behalf of anyone other than himself?

Posted by: cms1 | June 22, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

For all of you bafoons quick to criticize Obama and his administration, where was your criticism when our brave young men and women were dying needlessly and their lives were wrecklessly risked in a failed mission in Iraq? Do I sense a double standard here?

Posted by: rodneygage | June 22, 2010 8:39 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal for President!

Posted by: physicianexec | June 22, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

McChrystal for President!

Posted by: physicianexec | June 22, 2010 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Poor General McChrystal! With his bosses General David Petraeus and Admiral Mike Mullen as well as Defense secretary Gates justifying Pakistan’s ‘terrorist connections’, Mullah Mohammed Omar’s QST trail from Quetta to Kandahar is operating unimpeded.

McChrystal himself had warned about Pakistan’s sheltering of Taliban terrorists in his August 2009 report to Obama: Quetta Shura Taliban (QST) based in Quetta, the provincial capital of Baluchistan, is the No. 1 threat to US/NATO mission in Afghanistan. At the operational level, the Quetta Shura conducts a formal campaign review each winter, after which Mullah Mohammed Omar (Afghan Taliban Chief) announces his guidance and intent for the coming year‘.

But US can not even use its drones to destroy QST that is causing daily deaths of US/NATO soldiers in Afghanistan since 2002! That shows Obama’s continuance of Bush’s mollycoddling of Pakistan.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates sought to justify Pakistan’s terrorist connections, alluding to a “deficit of trust” between Washington, DC and Islamabad. Mr Gates also said there was “some justification” for Pakistan's concerns about past American policies. Gen David Patraeus, rushed in with an apologia for his Pakistani friends, by claiming that while Faisal was inspired by militants in Pakistan, he did not necessarily have contacts with the militants. Both Adm Mike Mullen and Gen Patraeus fancy themselves to be “soldier statesmen” a la Gen Dwight Eisenhower. Adm Mullen has visited Pakistan 15 times and Gen Patraeus no less frequently. Both evidently have high opinions of their abilities to persuade Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani to crack down on the Haqqani network in North Waziristan and the Taliban’s Mullah Omar-led Quetta Shura.

All American officers in southern Afghanistan know that they cannot prevail in the ongoing military operations, unless Taliban strongholds across the Durand Line in North Waziristan and Baluchistan are neutralized. Adm Mullen and Gen Patraeus evidently do not want to acknowledge that hard options have to be considered if their soldiers are not to die at the hands of radicals, armed and trained across the Durand Line.

With McChrystal’s hands tied by his bosses and Pakistani ISI financing Afghan Taliban insurgency from US financial aid as narrated by Matt Waldman on 6/13/2010 in a report titled 'The sun in the sky' published by London School Of Economics, US military’s Kandahar operation and Afghan mission is headed for failure.

Posted by: martymartel3 | June 22, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

This is not by any chance McChrystal being hounded for saying Israel was the cause of the worsening situation in Afghanistan ?

Posted by: skygillnewton | June 22, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

This is not by any chance McChrystal being hounded for saying Israel was the cause of the worsening situation in Afghanistan ?

Posted by: skygillnewton | June 22, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

You know, it's a lot like when an intern disses Acorn's head community organizer. This kind of conduct cannot be tolerated.

Posted by: rationaleman | June 22, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

You know, it's a lot like when an intern disses Acorn's head community organizer. This kind of conduct cannot be tolerated.

Posted by: rationaleman | June 22, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Mr. Caphart and feel that General McChrystal should be fired or resign voluntarily. General McChrystal has lost professional credibility and trust and is no longer fit to lead soldiers. For a man of his rank and stature, this situation is extremely reprehensible and he should be ashamed. We American people expect better of our military officers and so does President Obama.

Posted by: abishop2 | June 22, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Mr. Capehart and feel that General McChrystal should be fired or resign voluntarily. General McChrystal has lost professional credibility and trust and is no longer fit to lead soldiers. For a man of his rank and stature, this situation is extremely reprehensible and he should be ashamed. We American people expect better of our military officers and so does President Obama.

Posted by: abishop2 | June 22, 2010 9:57 PM | Report abuse

WE ARE AT WAR
(Giving comfort and aid to the enemy is treason, The military cannot afford a breakdown in the chain of command)

Contempt towards officials is addressed in the Punitive articles, specifically Article 88 of the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice in the 2008 Manual for Courts-Martial of the United States as follows:

“ Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

COURT MARTIAL THE LOSER aND TAKE IT OUT OF THE PRESIDENT'S HAND

Posted by: MILLER123 | June 22, 2010 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama is right in wanting to hear from McChrystal directly. Let's think of our troops first and wounded egos later. Maybe McChrystal has some legitimate grievances and they came out wrong, maybe he's a complete dunce and can't find his ass with two hands, but there's a dangerous campaign going on, and winning with minimal losses should be our first priority.

If McChrystal proves to be an obstacle for victory, by all means throw him to the dogs; but if he can deliver the goods in spite of his blunder, give him a good spanking but keep him on the running for America's Next Top Model.

Posted by: alarico | June 22, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

There isn't going to be any victory, and McChrystal knows it. This Rolling Stone article gives the General a way out, whether through resignation or termination. Either way, he'll be around to write a book saying "I told you so".

Posted by: Henry5 | June 23, 2010 12:10 AM | Report abuse

This train wreck left the station when the administration put the egotistical, very vocal leftist Richard Holbrook (who cut his teeth in the Peace Corp) in the same lane with a combat commander during a war. Their objectives in the region collided from day one, but only McChrystal had the responsibility of making decisions that had an absolute affect on human life. Military commanders have the unenviable task of motivating young Rangers and Marines who have bravely answered a call to duty at great sacrifice. Within hours the commanders frequently have to appear before leftist diplomats in horn rimmed spectacles mincing around in embassy fortresses in order to explain a battlefield configuration as the diplomatic corp sit staring at him like dogs watching TV. The constant modification of the rules of engagement has also contributed to this unfortunate situation that may over time put our young troops in peril. If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there. This kind of disjointed "policy" doesn't fit in a five paragraph field order when Soldiers and Marines are leaving a line of departure on a mission that may very well be their last day on earth. There seems to be a leadership breakdown at every level.

Posted by: Galasso | June 23, 2010 1:53 AM | Report abuse

Gen. Stanley McChrystal is doing a great job protecting the United States and helping a troubled part of the World. V.P. Biden has made his own loss lips issues and contributes nothing to our national defense.

Simple question who do you want protecting you President Obama, VP Biden or Gen. McChrystal?

Personally I would be proud to serve with the Gen. Present DC politics are at an all time low in my opinion, the health care bill is receipt for disaster and the economic programs of President Obama a failure!

If President Obama lets Gen, McChrystal walk this will show his lack of understanding of our military and would be a failure of the Presidents management skills.

Posted by: viperfred | June 23, 2010 3:22 AM | Report abuse

I've read the comments. Firing offense. I don't think so. While the remarks may be embarrassing to the administration's ego, I wouldn't consider them insubordinate or treasonous. Most of these benign comments were made by staff or "unnamed sources" over a several month period. President Obama's reaction gave the article too much importance.

Posted by: bethg1841 | June 23, 2010 7:33 AM | Report abuse

I wonder what the General would have to say if a lower ranking officer spoke out in a magazine about him?

Posted by: crispyblack20 | June 23, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company