RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

DomYngBlk -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 1:43:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Behind closed doors yes. To the press before the President has said a word? Hell no. Insubordination.


Revisionist history. He sent a response to Blowboy's informal request long before he made any public statements.


Matters not. Chain of command my friend



FatDomDaddy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 1:55:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

If a General did this to Bush the lefties would say "he's speaking truth to power."
No, he shouldn't be fired, he's speaking "truth to power."
And Holbrook is exactly the type of person we *don't need* in govt.



I agree with all of that popeye...

But he needs to go.

Generals do not tell Presidents what to do...

Also...they need to fire the White House Aide who OK this interview with Rolling Stone and fire him as well.... Oh yeah... what was that about Rham being on the outs....



pahunkboy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 1:55:26 PM)

How is this any different then his face book comments?



truckinslave -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 3:58:35 PM)

He should be fired for his Afghan policies, which have resulted in needless troop deaths. Our soldiers in most cases might as well be unarmed. He should also be fired for insubordination.

I wonder why he gave the interview. Drunk? Maybe. Does he look healthy to you?
Otherwise:

1. He took the gamble that this was the only way he could get the attention of 0bama0.
2. He's setting up a potential run in 2012.
3. Fatigue (again, look at the man).
4. Some combination of the above.

It really is, from the supposed excerpts I've read, an extraordinary interview.

PS Willbe, Art 3 Section 3 defines treason:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

So, no, probably not prosecutable [:D]



SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:02:33 PM)

Yes



truckinslave -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:05:09 PM)

The genius of PT Barnum comes to mind.



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:15:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Behind closed doors yes. To the press before the President has said a word? Hell no. Insubordination.


Revisionist history. He sent a response to Blowboy's informal request long before he made any public statements.


Matters not. Chain of command my friend


He followed the chain of command.



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:17:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

He should be fired for his Afghan policies, which have resulted in needless troop deaths. Our soldiers in most cases might as well be unarmed. He should also be fired for insubordination.

I wonder why he gave the interview. Drunk? Maybe. Does he look healthy to you?
Otherwise:

1. He took the gamble that this was the only way he could get the attention of 0bama0.
2. He's setting up a potential run in 2012.
3. Fatigue (again, look at the man).
4. Some combination of the above.

It really is, from the supposed excerpts I've read, an extraordinary interview.

PS Willbe, Art 3 Section 3 defines treason:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

So, no, probably not prosecutable [:D]


It is arguably giving aid and comfort.



LadyEllen -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:18:25 PM)

Fired? Hell no - any fool would get their resignation in first, take the initiative and be seen to be acting on principle rather than being disciplined. Even more so when said fool has acquired a deep understanding of the insoluble mess that is Afghanistan and can by way of principled resignation depart with some honour rather than risk being kept on to be the scapegoat for ongoing failure - which should inevitably be the price of evading firing otherwise.

E



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:21:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Fired? Hell no - any fool would get their resignation in first, take the initiative and be seen to be acting on principle rather than being disciplined. Even more so when said fool has acquired a deep understanding of the insoluble mess that is Afghanistan and can by way of principled resignation depart with some honour rather than risk being kept on to be the scapegoat for ongoing failure - which should inevitably be the price of evading firing otherwise.

E


hmmm...sounds like a pretty smart plan, why would he be "said fool" for following it? (And, btw, that is exactly the scenario I think he was looking for. He knows that Afghanistan is a no win cluster fuck and would love to take Blowboy down as he makes his exit.)



maybemaybenot -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:25:01 PM)

Treason ? No.

Altho I don't disagree with his comments, he needs to resign or be discharged/fired. Obama is the Commander in Chief and as such, anyone in uniform needs to refrain from publically calling out the President.

                                   mbmbn



LadyEllen -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:26:28 PM)

Nowt to do with Obama Wilbur - everything to do with McChrystal

I believe you, like us, insist on officers being trained in strategy and such; if McChrystal is anything of a general he will not allow Obama to pick the battle ground (and he hasnt, via this interview and other strategies alike). Obama has, as it would appear, been lured to fight his general on terms laid down by his general, and is almost inevitably therefore set to lose any confrontation. As such he would be wise to minimise his losses rather than attack.

E



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:27:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Nowt to do with Obama Wilbur - everything to do with McChrystal

I believe you, like us, insist on officers being trained in strategy and such; if McChrystal is anything of a general he will not allow Obama to pick the battle ground (and he hasnt, via this interview and other strategies alike). Obama has, as it would appear, been lured to fight his general on terms laid down by his general, and is almost inevitably therefore set to lose any confrontation. As such he would be wise to minimise his losses rather than attack.

E


hmmmm....I think we are in agreement, so I still dont understand the fool comment.



LadyEllen -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:34:59 PM)

Its the maintenance of a theme Wilbur - any fool would...... so the same description is used later to carry through with the idea that any fool who realised (a) would also have realised (b); it doesnt mean he is a fool on either count but rather indicates that (a) and (b) are not overly complex reasonings and so ought be readily within the competence of a general.

Obama happens to be the president right now - it could just as well have played out the same (indeed almost inevitably would have) were anyone else president. Its nothing against Obama but rather the realisation of (a) and (b) by a man not prepared to be scapegoat for this mess for his government, when the order for withdrawal comes later this year.

E



pahunkboy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:35:17 PM)

then how is the news piece actually news and not simply govt propaganda?



KYsissy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 4:41:25 PM)

It's insubordination. Like it or not Obama is the commander in chief and soldiers need to respect that.  If it was a captain talking about a colonel you know there would be consequences.

Fire him? That would be Obamas call. 

Reprimand and send him back is what I would do.  I would reprimand him for making those comments in PUBLIC.  If he believes what he said, there is a time and a place to make his opinions known, and a reporter isn't it.  Those kind of comments should stay in closed door meetings.  



pahunkboy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 5:00:42 PM)

it would sort of box the general in.   now if he stays he can not lose the war- a war which is hard to know- well considering how the Soviets tried- -- it might be un-winnable aside from the fact that we do not know how "win" is even defined.



SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 5:08:01 PM)

It is impossible to win, someone made a good point on C-Span the other week. We are guilty of ignoring the history of that place despite the fact we all knew of it.

Karzai is a fraudster and the whole government in a box approach is flawed because there is no one size fits all approach to tribalism.

Forget the security and instead build strong institutions with well paid government jobs. Then fund it externally with weapons, why get your hands dirty? Did the Russian's get their hands dirty after they left, no but they still kept the state going after they left. People are idiotic to fight other people's wars all we do is give people a common enemy to cast as the villain. It's a shocking travesty how many have died for this war.



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 5:16:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen



Obama happens to be the president right now - it could just as well have played out the same (indeed almost inevitably would have) were anyone else president.


No, it wouldnt. He's engaged in a hopeless battle because his campaign rhetoric was to blast Iraq and focus the war effort "where it belongs". No one could be as incompetent a CIC.



TheHeretic -> RE: Should McChrystal be fired for the Rolling Stone interview? (6/22/2010 5:58:11 PM)

So has anybody bothered to read the article? I saw a link along the way. It is six pages, which is probably more than a few of our illustrious commentators here could manage, but RS isn't written to highest intellectual standards anyway (mostly a mag for dumbass old dopers who think it makes them look enlightened when they try to impress bubbleheaded liberal girls).

Treason? Fucking idiocy. A US citizen tried to blow up Times Square with a car bomb and they didn't have treason on the list of charges for him to plead guilty to.

Does McChrystal need to go? I sure the fuck wish he would. When they gave him the job, I thought having a serious SOF guy would be a good thing, but what he wants to do is spend decades, and God knows how many hundreds of billions (trillions?) on a full-blown counterinsurgency campaign. The fact that Karzai is sticking up for him ought to be enough to get him fired.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875