My personal take on this is that General McCrystal has never gotten along with Obama or his administration and he calls them like he sees them. He is a soldier first and foremost. He is not a politician nor is he a diplomat who flits from capitol to capitol, looking for support or handouts. I do not think he has ever been comfortable doing that kind of event or work. McCrystal was not in favor of Obama's plans for Afghanistan and he said so. He would rather have had more troops, weapons and real rules of engagement that do not our troops in harm's way, so badly. McCrystal may be sacked or asked to resign after the Rolling Stone interview and article. Somewhat sad for the General as he did vote for Obama. Another one tossed under the bus? It is not wise for a general to criticize any POTUS, the senate etc. I will not talk politics or share whom I voted for with the vast majority of people we know. No matter what happens, this speaks very poorly about Obama, his Afghanistan policy, and Obama's credibility. He has none to speak of and the poll numbers reflect this. Those numbers will tank even lower in the days to come.
Laughing_Wolf
The news this morning is that General McChrystal has both issued a preemptory apology for a forthcoming article/interview in Rolling Stone Magazine, and that he has been recalled from Afghanistan -- apparently because of what is being reported may be in that interview.
Anyone who has done any reading on the situation in Afghanistan would be understanding of frustration with Eikenberry (see link on recall above), much less frustration with the administration, on the part of McChrystal and staff. That said, it seems a tad bit unwise to let loose on everyone in an interview while still in the middle of the fight. In point of fact, if the interview is even half of what is being belled in advance, then the fecal matter will be hitting the rotary impeller at warp speed. Even if it is not, expect to see this used to savage not just McChrystal but all military efforts. In fact, I will bet right now that his career is over, regardless of the content as politics will rule the day and there are many in political circles that want his scalp.
Which brings me to my final point on judgment and possible lack thereof. Who thought doing a frank and/or candid political interview with Rolling Stone while you are in the middle of the fight was a good idea? I can empathize with the frustration of not being given what you asked for and needed to do the job, or in finding yourself being attacked by the person who is supposed to be helping you and instead is doing everything they can openly or otherwise to block you, and in not seeing your ideas translated out and done as you desire. Yet, you don't do something like this unless either you are already gone (and even then it's not a good idea because of collateral damage), or all is already lost. So, was this just incredibly poor judgment on someones part in agreeing to the interview, or are other things in play?
I will withhold judgment until the article is out and some other facts are in evidence. Yet, I will be very honest in saying that my respect for Gen. McChrystal and his judgment (and of the staff who thought this interview a good idea) has already been diminished.
LW
UPDATE: You really need to go read Greyhawk, and note Grim's comments here as well. The boss makes some good points here as well.
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2010/06/and-who-thought-this-would-be-a-good-idea.html
Blackfive
-------------------
From Flopping Aces:
Obama Employs the Grand Distraction with Gen. McChrystal to Take Eyes off Oil Spill
By Mike's America
Day 64 of the Spill Disaster!
The master of evasion strikes again!
Remember in the Wizard of Oz when Dorothy’s dog Toto pulled back the curtain to reveal that the Wizard wasn’t so great and powerful after all? [video] Isn’t that what we are seeing with Obama and his mismanagement of the Gulf Oil Spill?
I haven’t updated this report on the oil spill for several days for the reason that there has been basically no news on the matter. And it looks like that may be intentional on Obama’s part as he’s desperate to change the subject and distract the American people away from his failure to lead during this worst ever environmental disaster.
Instead, the White House put out a story on Tuesday that Obama was “angry” because of the Rolling Stone article in which Afghanistan Commander General Stanly McChrystal and his staff made unflattering comments about Obama, Biden and others. What a shame Obama doesn’t direct his anger at the bureaucrats who are making the oil spill worse by the day. But then, those folks don’t criticize him do they?
Instead of addressing the spill, Obama seeks cover behind a tempest in a tea pot over McChrystal (a manufactured outrage if ever there was one) and at the same time directs his political hatchet men at the Democrat National Committee to put out an ad attacking Congressman Joe Barton (R-TX) and suggesting that anyone who criticizes Obama’s performance in regard to the oil spill is somehow soft on BP.
Meanwhile, the oil continues to gush from the floor of the Gulf. We still can’t get an answer to the question as to why cleanup assistance offered by other countries was rejected and why the Coast Guard is only now asking the Navy for help cleaning up the oil?
Still time to vote in the poll: When it comes to managing a disaster or crisis, who does a better job? Bush or Obama?
http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/06/22/obama-employs-the-grand-distraction-with-gen-mcchrystal-to-take-eyes-off-oil-spill/
Flopping aces
Hat Tip: Andrea Shea King, Radio Pilot
Tags: General McCrystal, ROE, military, killed, Afghanistan, oil spill, the Gulf, Barack Obama To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!
0 Comments - Share Yours!:
Post a Comment