Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

WaPo: Gen. Stanley McChrystal coming to Washington to explain anti-administration comments

Redskins Diehard

By Redskins Diehard
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

Teller

Teller

Posted
Posted
I think there may even be a small chance that he will keep his command, if he says the right things and the Administration figures out a way to spin this.

Hm. In spite of my overall respect for him, I'm not sure if I could support that or not. Lack of faith in the way the mission is being carried out can be devastating to the troops on the ground. Especially when it's coming from the very top.

I should say too, that I do respect the way the president is carrying out operations over there. I wished that W would have gone into Pakistan with drones more often when targets were verified there. This president is going after the enemy wherever they're hiding over there, and he deserves credit for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
So, please refresh my memory as to why the commander of the war in Afghanistan is granting interviews with Rolling Stone? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

.

From my understanding it is even worse than that in that the reporter was allowed to tag a long for weeks

Foolishness

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redskins Diehard

Redskins Diehard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hm. In spite of my overall respect for him, I'm not sure if I could support that or not. Lack of faith in the way the mission is being carried out can be devastating to the troops on the ground. Especially when it's coming from the very top.

I should say too, that I do respect the way the president is carrying out operations over there. I wished that W would have gone into Pakistan with drones more often when targets were verified there. This president is going after the enemy wherever they're hiding over there, and he deserves credit for it.

He didn't speak critically of the military plan(he would be crazy since it is his plan!)

As far as strikes in Pakistan goes...it would be useful, although not likely, if we could look at that process on a continuum instead of some line on the calendar. Targets can't be engaged until they are discovered. Getting info of who is where in the tribal areas is not an overnight. As painful as it will be for a lot here to admit...both guys(Bush and Obama) deserve credit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted
Didn't Macarthur get relieved of his duties by Truman (for letting his head get too big)? I've heard about that story but never read into it.

Letting his head get too big, planning an invasion of China against express presidential orders, trying to provoke a nuclear confrontation, and conspiring with a foreign government (Taiwan) to do all of the above.

After WWII....

When President Truman heard Macarthur had met with the Emperor of Japan, Truman said; they probable had a lot to discuss, one deity to another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Teller

Teller

Posted
Posted
He didn't speak critically of the military plan(he would be crazy since it is his plan!)

FOX (yes, I know) is reporting that McChrystal said he was "selling an unsellable plan." I'd say that's pretty critical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redskins Diehard

Redskins Diehard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
FOX (yes, I know) is reporting that McChrystal said he was "selling an unsellable plan." I'd say that's pretty critical.

In context the "unsellable" plan was not what he is doing now. When he said he was selling and unsellable plan he was actually talking about selling the notion of a troop buildup that would be required to execute the plan. He was trying to sell that plan to his seniors not subordinates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jumbo

Jumbo

Posted
Posted
So, please refresh my memory as to why the commander of the war in Afghanistan is granting interviews with Rolling Stone? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

I would love to be a fly on the wall of this meeting.

What he did was completely unacceptable and he should be fired over this IMO. Doesn't matter what you think of Obama, you don't pull disgraceful public stunts like this and publicly call into question the Commander In Chief...particularly in Rolling Stone. What was he thinking? Methinks he's been indulging in some of Afghanistan's fine opium products. Unreal.

I just saw a Rick Sanchez interview on a colleague's laptop that was just aired with the article's author, and wow, the number of things/people commented on in this matter, and the nature of the comments, really does make this a real "wtf were they thinking" moment above and beyond the general topic of these players in this context being critical in public. There is really some odd (to be cautious for now in use of terms) judgement shown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Predicto

Predicto

Posted
Posted
FOX (yes, I know) is reporting that McChrystal said he was "selling an unsellable plan." I'd say that's pretty critical.
In context the "unsellable" plan was not what he is doing now. When he said he was selling and unsellable plan he was actually talking about selling the notion of a troop buildup that would be required to execute the plan. He was trying to sell that plan to his seniors not subordinates.

Classic FOX. We give our viewers just enough information so that they can misunderstand what's going on. :silly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fergasun

Fergasun

Posted
Posted

You know what's ironic? It's clear Afghanistan is another Vietnam. I'm not talking about in the ways people say it is. Back when RFK was campaigning for President in '68 he spoke hard about how our boys were getting a raw deal (my summary) and it doesn't make sense to send Americans to die for Vietnamese who aren't fighting for themselves. I have to say that no matter what strategy we have for Afghanistan whether it is COIN or otherwise, if the Afghanistani's aren't going to stand up for themselves, then its not worth being there anymore. I know it was all about trying to find bin laden and disrupt the Taliban, but I think we've reached the point where the Afghanistani's need to do what they have to do. If they fight their own civil war when we leave, so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABQCOWBOY

ABQCOWBOY

Posted
Posted

What is going on in Afghanistan today is not what McChrystal wanted to do at the outset. He is working within the frame work of what the President wanted to allow. If you recall, McKeirnan wanted 50 thousand more troops and he didn't get them. In fact, what he got was replaced by McChrystal and now, you have problems with the Battle Plan.

I posted the fact that I thought certain things needed to happen and needed to happen quickly if McChrystal wanted to recover the initiative about a week ago and nobody really listened. The current strategy is not working and it's only a matter of time before the President is either forced to extend troops or go back on his promised of withdrawl. Either position is a bad one for him politically.

Regardless, I think the President has to rethink his strategy in Afghanistan. If we pull out, it will be no time at all before terrorist camps are back in Afghanistan and drugs are again thriving to finance operations IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fergasun

Fergasun

Posted
Posted

Well, its obvious we are going to pull out at some point. Let's just start pulling out now. I'm not convinced the occupation is a good way to battle terrorism either, between the Christmas day attempt, Times Square, Fort Hood. I'm sure this will leave many unsatisfied, but the wars appear to be a waste of money at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABQCOWBOY

ABQCOWBOY

Posted
Posted
Well, its obvious we are going to pull out at some point. Let's just start pulling out now. I'm not convinced the occupation is a good way to battle terrorism either, between the Christmas day attempt, Times Square, Fort Hood. I'm sure this will leave many unsatisfied, but the wars appear to be a waste of money at this point.

At some point, all Wars end. The problem here is that if we pull out on the President's time table, we are putting ourselves in a very bad position. Attacks are becoming more prevalent. If these planned attacks are financed with the kind of money Al Qaeda had available to them when they were running drugs, like they were previously, that's a very dangerous combination. Not just politically but for the country. You really have to think about what pulling out means.

You have to ask yourself the question, does pulling out mean that terrorists will not come back to the U.S. or does it mean that it only provides more resources with which to work? If another 9/11 attack happens, that means that you have to go through the expense and all the rest of redeploying etc. That's not something our economy can do at this point. Unfortunately, I don't believe it's as easy as just pulling out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebluefood

thebluefood

Posted
Posted
Well, its obvious we are going to pull out at some point. Let's just start pulling out now. I'm not convinced the occupation is a good way to battle terrorism either, between the Christmas day attempt, Times Square, Fort Hood. I'm sure this will leave many unsatisfied, but the wars appear to be a waste of money at this point.

I saw somewhere on Sunday that we'll be out of Iraq by late 2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABQCOWBOY

ABQCOWBOY

Posted
Posted
He will make more as a Fox News pundit anyways.

:ols:

I'd be shocked if that is what McChrystal was doing in a years time. He just is not that kind of person IMO. I don't know? I guess if you offer enough money, anything might happen but I dont' see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nonniey

nonniey

Posted
Posted
DCBnG21,

Except journalism 101 says "make sure you have clearance to go on the record with the story."

McCrystal and crew wanted this to come out. I read the article and thought it showed real unprofessionalism. You can't have that attitude toward your chain of command. How would McCrystal feel if a bunch of SSgt or other were talking **** about him?

Wait a minute. You absolutely can have an attitude about your Chain of Command. You just can't display in a manner that undermines that chain of command. You can ***** to confidants, complain to friends, heck even post on message boards when you are not identified. And yes SSGs ***** about their chain of command to one another.

(OK these word censors are just too sensitive - the female dog word is taboo?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nonniey

nonniey

Posted
Posted
His blunder was so obviously moronic that he deserves to be punished. I don't understand how you can be in the military so long, and then all of a sudden forget how you're supposed to act.

Well, even a General can vote for whoever he wants.:evilg:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EersSkins05

EersSkins05

Posted
Posted
As I remember it, Truman wanted to fight a defensive war. At first he didn't want to risk China getting into the war, and Mac assured Truman China would not enter the war.

After China got into the war counter to Macs assurances, Truman wanted to fire Mac but couldn't. American forces were fighting for their lives and President Truman didn't think the time was right.

What sealed it for Mac was when he gave interviews and had public meetings with Chang in Taiwan about invading China frm the east and Mac Invading China up through Korea. That and opennly advocating for using the bomb, even discussing acceptable loses.

Mac was basically working out his own foreign policy, independent from the President. Truman actually had enough on Mac to shoot him, rather than just fire him.

After WWII....

When President Truman heard Macarthur had met with the Emperor of Japan, Truman said; they probable had a lot to discuss, one deity to another.

That led to MacArthur getting a ticker-tape parade and giving a speech before a joint session of Congress which caused Truman to utter the greatest high-school yearbook quote in history (obviously he didn't say the abbreviated version):

"It's a bunch of GD BS."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...