June 22nd, 2010
01:17 PM ET

McChrystal apologizes, media ask: Should he be axed?

The gaffe from America's top military commander in Afghanistan and his staffer’s “Biden?-Did-you-say-Bite-Me?” comment is biting back. Hours after news broke that Gen. Stanley McChrystal was recalled to Washington amid his controversial remarks about colleagues in an explosive Rolling Stone magazine article, calls for the firing of the general have surfaced.

The Atlantic magazine’s national correspondent wrote that McChrystal has violated the chain of command and should be sacked for disrespect and insubordination.

"… first is for the civilian Commander in Chief to act in accordance with Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution and demonstrate that there are consequences for showing open disrespect for the chain of command."

A Talking Points Memo columnist points out that this isn’t the first time McChrystal has gone on a scathing tirade about those who are “not in their groove on strategy.” Not firing McChrystal will only hurt President Obama’s standing as commander in chief, he argues.

"Obama needs to fire him. If he doesn't, McChrystal's brand will be validated and the environment of insubordination and unprofessional conduct will be reinforced. If McChrystal survives his White House encounter, then Obama will be diminished. That is what this has come to."

Calling the general’s comments in Rolling Stone “near-suicidal," The Daily Telegraph’s U.S. editor thinks keeping McChrystal, on the contrary, might bode well for Obama’s administration.

"If Obama still believes that success in Afghanistan is possible then the ultimate display of genuine toughness, self-confidence and courage on the President’s part could be to stick with the man he chose to get the job done, despite the general’s reckless and insulting words."

TIME magazine’s Joe Klein writes about the McChrystal he’s known, calling him an “extraordinary man” with a thorough set of skills necessary for the mission in Afghanistan.

"But there is another side to McChrystal: he is so focused on his real job that he hasn't spent sufficient time learning how to play the public relations game. He speaks his mind; in private conversations, I've found, he is incapable of fudging the truth. This leads to a certain myopia, an innocence regarding the not-so-brave new world of the media."

Klein goes on to say that while McChrystal may have to go, firing the “irreplaceable” man will be a great “setback” and “tragedy.”

Afghan President Harmid Karzai doesn’t seem too concerned by McChrystal’s remarks and clearly wants him on the ground. The president’s spokesman, Waheed Omer, told Reuters:

“The President strongly supports General McChrystal and his strategy in Afghanistan and believes he is the best commander the United States has sent to Afghanistan over the last nine years."

Post by:
Filed under: Military • Security Brief
soundoff (520 Responses)
  1. Jaimondrow

    What is going on? The article almost never quotes the general... instead they quote an unnamed staff member who says McChrystal has said something.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      MAT...really? So OBAMA created 8A contract opportunities for minorities and women? The only thing scary about November is how much you Republicans and Tea Baggers really believe what you say. While you sit comfortably at a computer with all system GO here in the US....Obama has kept the ship afloat in numerous ways (economy, mortgage crises, two wars, nuclearized Iran, oil spill, healthcare, etc.). I can't think of any Administration who has managed so much is such short time. It is scary to think that conservatives are fine with a blank check to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but don't want to offer a single dime for children and under insured adults to receive health care. It is intellectually dishonest for you to have the gall to blame Obama for all the ills of the Bush administration and not even hold 43 accountable for anything. 43 left 44 with a near-recessed economy (that was in a budget surplus when he received it from 42), US Forces engaged in two wars with no exit strategy for either theatre, and a mortgage crisis from sub-prime loans initiated during 43's presidency). It appears Republicans only care about profit over people and can't muster the thought of providing a basic level of service to the underprivileged. 44 is a deliberate person, granted, however, what he has done in a year and a half: the economy is growing again, unemployment is holding steady at or below 10%, we have exit strategies and timetables for Iraq and Afghanistan, and for the first time in a long time..there is a multi-lateral response against Iran that includes Russia and China). 43 would have given the orders already for us to go into Afghanistan, provided more tax cuts for th rich, and the oil would have continued to spill.

      Stop telling the rest of us to take off our blinders and take off your own. Get off the Rush and Beck diet (I won't even mention Palin unless you all really believe she's a viable candidate) and take an objective view of your own. I guarantee if you stand on your own two feet, that you will realize there is a big world out there.

      I only advocate a little common sense and enough with the tomfoolery.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Maura

      If you read the Rolling Stone article, a number of his advisor's are present and make statements to the article's author. McChrystal never corrects them but encourages them with remarks in response or laughter.

      McChrystal was really out of line.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Linda

      O.K. Bush is gone after 1 1/2 years Obama and all of you need to quit blaming the last couple of Presidents and start doing something constructive. If the General runs for President I will deffinitley vote for him.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jerry

      If this were G. W. Bush, the general will be in handcuff yesterday.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff

      Give General McChrystal another star for expressing what's on the minds of most Americans.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • 68R

      To do or say noting is to condone... There is only one standard for all Uniformed Service Members. Regardless if you agree with the politics or not; the standard must be met:

      As Stated Under "The Uniform Code Of Military Justice"

      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.

      Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

      934. ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
      Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

      One Team, One Fight, One Standard; Period...

      June 22, 2010 at 3:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      68R....thanks for sharing the Facts and not rhetoric

      June 22, 2010 at 3:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • FHP

      Unfortunately The General may have to be considered a casualty of war. True he is integral to present ground operations and it's continuity. But if he had been physically killed in action, the Nation would have to find someone else to step up to the plate. Insubordination, even in a Nation that touts free speech has a different context when dealing with military command and the relationship of Generals to the President. What he said is tantamount to treason on any Battleship in terms of line of command. "Mounty on the Bounty".

      June 22, 2010 at 3:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • RJC

      his is not Patton! Fire him

      June 22, 2010 at 3:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dale

      Whenever someone speaks up during this presidency, it is considered unpatriotic. If the General is sharing his opinion, it is free speech. Maybe not conducive to his career development, but free speech!

      This free speech and right to criticize was so vigorously defended in the prior presidency. It's a shame the media and the far left have created an environment during this presidency that considers any dissenting opinion irrelevant. I am a moderate and it's a shame what the far right and left have done to our ability to constructively debate issues.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • TheBigSarge

      as Soldiers, we defend the rights of the people to speak freely. the privilige of providing such service however comes down to the Soldier giving up certain individual rights. of those are the right to speak freely in opposition to our elected officials, local, national and federal.

      it seems contradictory in terms, but that is the law.

      as First Sergeant, i would hang one of my senior NCO's out to dry if they were to speak of myself in such a manner to anyone besides myself. even with my Sergeant's Major (outranks First Sergeant for those who don't know) i would be not just wrong, but also unprofessional if i were to speak out against his/her policies to my subordinates or to a crowd at a lecture or in an interview.

      those types of discussions are to be private or privy only to the few involved. but once a decision has been made by my superiors, regardless of my feelings, it is my obligation to support their policies.


      June 22, 2010 at 4:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bob G

      I say fire him. In WWII Patton slapped a soldier and was fired.....for a while. This guy just slapped the Obama and Biden.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dan

      If the General employs a bunch of staffers that openly disrespect the Commander and the mission, well that shows pretty poor judgment on the General's part. He's going to be fired as well he should. Whether he said it, or condoned his staffers saying it isn't the point.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • ABK

      He should never have been put in the position he's in. As an orchestrator of the Pat Tillman cover-up, I think it is an abomination. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Fire him and discharge him DIShonorably

      June 22, 2010 at 4:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike from Sachse

      McChrystal has to go - how he leaves is up to him

      June 22, 2010 at 4:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kevin

      "boo hoo, I'm the President, and people disagree with my socialist policies. Whine, whine, whine, do nothing, do nothing, give a speech, do nothing, do nothing, make someone apologize publically for disagreeing with me, whine whine whine, respect me even though I've done nothing to show an ounce of respect for the country that elected me, blah blah blah, whine whine whine, do nothing, do nothing, do nothing, pass a healthcare bill that the majority of Americans do not want, whine whine whine, make a racist example out of a police officer doing his job, comment on Kanye West, and then whine whine whine, do nothing, do nothing, do nothing"- a day in the life of President Obama.

      June 22, 2010 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kevin

      JERRY- if it had been GW, he would have said "you win some, er, you don't win others" and then gone about his day. He wouldn't have made an example out of this guy for disagreeing with him, which is exactly what Obama's doing. It's like hiring someone so that you can fire them, and make an example for the remaining staff.

      June 22, 2010 at 5:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • m wldron

      It would be so funny if it were not so pathetic. It seems as though Obama and his cronies can dish it out when abusing another commander and chief, but they can't take it. How pitiful.

      June 22, 2010 at 6:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • JonDie

      McChrystal should be fired...today.

      But the bigger story is how Bush left our troops in Afghanistan from 2002 to 2008 with no mission, no strategy and no leadership, and no Republicans complained nor did the media even bother to report on our mounting losses.

      June 22, 2010 at 7:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • US Citizen

      We've become the Roman empire and how dare he saying anything against the leadership!!! Have a talk and work it
      out. You are suppose to be a leader? Deal with the situation and if Obama's being a dork then he needs to own up to
      it. No decending comments well that sounds like something very un american.

      June 22, 2010 at 9:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      If the president was ever in the military or had any idea about the military, the General would not have had to make that comment. I guess if they fire Gen. Mac then they should fire the president for his lack of doing his job in the Gulf of Mexico. He also is messing up in the area of letting people illeagally entering our country.

      June 22, 2010 at 9:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • markpkessinger

      Dale (4:07 p.m.) writes:

      "Whenever someone speaks up during this presidency, it is considered unpatriotic. If the General is sharing his opinion, it is free speech. Maybe not conducive to his career development, but free speech!"

      There never has been, nor will there ever be, any expectation of free speech in the military. What McChrystal did amounts to insubordination, and if the President doesn't fire him, he's a fool. Allowing that kind of insubordination to go unchecked would be to invite chaos within the ranks, as like-minded idiots down through the chain of command feel newly emboldened to engage in similar behavior. The founders of this country placed the military under civilian command and control for a reason; it is critical that the President firmly establish that command in the wake of such outrageous insubordination.

      June 22, 2010 at 10:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dick Lawrence

      This is unforgivable for a General or any officer. He must resign or be booted down to Private.

      June 22, 2010 at 11:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • SGT Stanley

      So he made of fun of his boss and some of his cronies. Who hasn't ? That's part of being a boss or in this case Commander and Chief. It wasn't that long ago that General Shinseki made derogatory comments about Bush during a senate arms committee meeting. The list of both retired and active duty Generals and troops alike that rebelled against the Bush administration is quite extensive. In fact at one point Hillary Clinton even called these verbalized revolts patriotic. I think Obama just needs to grow up a bit and understand not everyone is going to like him and we are all not going to hold hands and sing songs together. Come on people get over this touchy feely crap and start living. P. S. let's not take our off the ball. Obama has yet to handle the B.P. issue. Kind of hard to enforce any punishment when the company has given so much money to your campaign.

      June 23, 2010 at 12:00 am | Report abuse |
    • John L. Wesley, Bristol, Indiana

      Lets fire the pretender in the White House and keep the only person qualified to speak in this matter, the general himself.

      June 23, 2010 at 12:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Kevin "de oppressor liber"

      The story was not a surprise. I am reminded of the covert racism that exists widely within the mostly white special operation forces, whereby I observed (and sadly testified) of my fellow camarades making greatly disparaging comments toward a superior black officer. Moreover, and regrettably, the US servicemen and women are in many ways just well-paid slaves helping to usher in a new world of tyranny and police control... God help us all...

      June 23, 2010 at 12:35 am | Report abuse |
    • phildog

      only cnn would ask the question and not publish the poll results. Is it because they know that the vast majority of Americans suppoert the General and not Obama?

      June 23, 2010 at 1:09 am | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      @68R – well said! That's the point I've been making all day. He violated Article 88... and several other articles... by his condoning this sort of public expression of disdain, and by allowing it to occur in front of a reporter. He should have IMMEDIATELY reprimanded his staff. He didn't. Apparently, he fired his PR Officer, one assumes because he saw the damage the interview would do. I would say the General is going to be gone soon... and his staff's careers will be over as well.

      June 23, 2010 at 1:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      Hey SGT Stanley... read your UCMJ again buddy. The General violated it... as did you, if you are Active Duty, Reserve, or Retired. Let's hope your CO doesn't read this and figure out who you are...

      June 23, 2010 at 1:38 am | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      He should tell them to pack sand and then retire. Let the loser liberals figure it out.

      June 23, 2010 at 1:58 am | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      Get your facts straight there Bill, im a retired Marine and the UCMJ DOES NOT APPLY TO RETIREES. I am free to speak my mind about anyone. How about you edumicate yourself before spouting off.

      June 23, 2010 at 2:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      Mike – you might want to research that a bit more. Under Article 2 of the UCMJ, retired members of the military drawing pay, as well as active-duty service members, are subject to UCMJ provisions. SURPRISE!

      June 23, 2010 at 2:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Danny Coleman

      I think obama should put on a military uniform if he is the socalled commander in cheif so he can see what our soldiers are going through before he decides to wear the " Big Boy Pants" and fire someone, the mirror goes both ways, we voted him in, 2012 we vote him out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      June 23, 2010 at 3:40 am | Report abuse |
    • Simon

      This is the problem in Washington D.C. No one accepts the truth. Gen McChrystal's comment was his way of telling us the truth. What the heck those advisors know about running the war anyway. They do not have any ideas how our soldiers (including the Generals) endure back to back deployments. In the Fayetteville Observer's article, Robert Gibbs' (who is he?) assistment of Gen McChrystal's comments "suggested that the general might not be "capable and mature enough" to lead the war effort." " Where has Mr. Robert Gibbs been, General McCrystal did not get his 4 Stars if he is not capable to be a commander or lead our soldiers to fight. I can tell you, he is a great General and Commander. I was one of his soldier.

      June 23, 2010 at 7:46 am | Report abuse |
    • Tony Ejiofor


      June 23, 2010 at 8:37 am | Report abuse |
    • Bill Edens

      Obama should be axed, I can't see Obama as a general. he cant even lead this country, let alone a battle

      June 23, 2010 at 9:18 am | Report abuse |
    • Lisap

      This situation reminds me of the movie Gladiator. McChrystal is Maximus (the general who protects the country whom everyone loves and trust), and the president is the corrupt son that took over the Roman empire (who has no ideal what he is doing...but doesn't really care...he just loves the power).

      June 23, 2010 at 9:59 am | Report abuse |
    • S. K. Carstensen

      Well, perhaps if our Commander in Chief had spent any time ata ll in the military he would have the "right" to dismiss a decorated General – I think the next time we elect a president we should consider whether they have any past military experience! Perhaps the General was reflecting the feelings of his soldiers. I say keep him, let him do the job we as a nation are paying him for and keep the media out of it

      June 23, 2010 at 10:45 am | Report abuse |
    • tunchris

      This is incredible. What most people don't understand is that military rules are different. McChrustal himself knows. That was why the only reasonbale thing he did was apologize. As a FOUR STAR WAR GENERAL, there is no excuse he has failed in ensuring that information that is not in the interest of his COUNTRY, HIS COMMAND and most of all his Commander-in Chief is not diseminated to the public, either directly or VICARIOUSLY through any of his staffers. If the argument was that he did not say anything personally, that is absurd and idiotic. He is a four star war General. And for the idiots who do not realize that this is a dent on the IMAGE of the GREATEST ARMY IN THE WORLD, shame on you and your likes. The Military is not a place for sentiments. This is not a third world, banana Republic Army. I am a Republican, but this has nothing to do with politics. This is, I believe the one occassion we should all do the right thing.

      June 23, 2010 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |

      Finely a gen. who's not worried about politics . we support gen. McChrystal .because he supports the troops!!

      June 23, 2010 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • SGT Stanley

      Bill thanks for the update. Actually I understand quite well the UCMJ, and it in fact no longer applies to me. Anonymity in this case, is why I used my old rank. So I am free to speak how I want, and no I'm not retired. For the love of God please don't try and say that I can't use my rank with my name anymore, I really don't care. My point was and is still the same. It was considered okay by the media to do when Bush was in office, but now saying something bad about the president either makes you racist or gets you fired. Just all depends on how much power he has over the person as to how it is viewed. Can't fire him..... He must be racist. In McCyrstal's case he's probably going to be fired. Note the UCMJ doesn't say the officer has to resign or is to be replaced, it says he is to be court martialed. Obama hardly represents a Court Martial. Again, right or wrong not one person is above what McCrystal has done. Some critized Bush openly and some will criticize B.O. openly. That's just how it works. Not one person in the military can ever say they have always followed orders without grumbling about their command at some point in time. If they make that claim they are lying.

      June 23, 2010 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • BigRob

      This is just another political tactic – let's through out some patriotic issue with the armed forces so we can take the heat off the real issue at hand – BP and the Gulf. Feel sorry for the prez so it's not as bad that he's doing nothing!!!

      June 24, 2010 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
  2. rev_cletus

    Would it make that much of a difference? Despite blustery, puffed-chest declarations of "political neutrality" from the military (disclosure: I am a former military person), there is plenty enough contempt for this adminstration among the uniformed services, driven by years of exposure to hard-core right-wing ideology. Any Democrat in the White House would be shown the same lack of respect; it's just the cherry on the hate-sundae that Obama's black *and* a Democrat...

    June 22, 2010 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kyle

      Yea blame it on the "hard core right wing ideology" and way to bring race into it, impressive you could do it in the same post.

      If anything, this serves as a troubling sign – one of our top guys over there has little confidence in the CinC's abilities. Further, his guys in Kabul (the guys in the Consul) aren't transmitting his full reports, which ultimately doesn't get McCrystal and the troops what they need over. Politics isn't his strong suit for sure, but military relations and leadership isn't Obama's either – let McCrystal do his job and give him what he needs.

      June 22, 2010 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
  3. wturk

    No, the General should not be axed! We need to use the ballot box to axe Obama and his impotent minions!!

    June 22, 2010 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      And who do you think whould have done better given these challenges Obama has had?

      June 22, 2010 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • J-Z

      EWR –
      Chuck Baldwin for one
      John McCain for two
      It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to think even Hillary would have been doing a better job!

      As for the "challenges" you so eloquently mentioned – You replied to gretchen and were in the long line asking her for specifics regarding her "stuff" comment... What exactly are the challenges that Obama has faced that he hasn't brought on himself with his complete lack of experience, naivety, limited (at best) world view, and Chicago Style Politics?

      June 22, 2010 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • jane boucher

      HE WILL BE GONE, he should've been axed last yr. he can't keep his mouth shut to the media, and goes over his superiors heads. I hope he is fired and not let to resign. Jane

      June 22, 2010 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR


      Thanks for the comment...to be more specific, Obama inherited the following challenges:

      1. Near-recessed economy – at the time Bush came in office, Clinton had the annual budget in a surplus. Eight years later, Bush gave every dollar of the surplus away in tax cuts; started a war with Iraq (Afghanistan had standing, Iraq not so much); and used legal and political means to provide large corporations with tax cuts. The final result of Bush policies was an annual budget deficit of $1.2 trillion dollars and a national debt of near $12 trillion.
      2. US fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (with a declining coalition) – Obama tackled this by providing exit straties for Iraq and Afghanistan; submitted war funding requests with the annual base budget; listened to the advice of military commanders and adopted an aggressive counterinsurgency strategy, increased the use of drones to kill more terrorists leaders than the previous Administration, and authorized the military to attack in Pakistan (a move the previous Administration was reluctant to do).
      3. Mortgage Crisis – Sub-prime lending was originated during Bush's presidency with lax government oversight on industry changes in lending that allowed borrowers to qualify for larger mortgages.
      4. Nuclearized Iran – Under Obama, step one in getting UN sanctions has been significant in that Russia and China signed on with the US on sanctions for Iran. This is a marked difference from the previous Administration's go-it-alone strategy.

      Things Obama brought on himself or otherwise:

      1. Healthcare – He didn't have to do it because of the political risk, but this is a signature achievement that has failed every Administration before him. While it may not impact you personally, 30 million people (to include children) will have health insurance in the US. As an American, I think it speaks volumes when we use our economic prosperity to show compassion and not just greed.
      2. Don't Ask, Don't Tell – Again, political grenade, but is moving forward with key military leaders to repeal the act so that legal discrimination does not exist for gay Americans. Say what you will, but legal descrimination existed for black American's and many of the same arguments we hear now were made then. Yet, the military has continued to thrive when Union and Confederate soldiers stood side by side, when black and white soldiers stood side by side, and even foreign and US born soldiers stand side by side. The military is about training and standards, they will figure it out.
      3. Oil Spill – I think if he could, Obama would suit up himself and plug the hole. This is a disaster and I'm not even sure how you go about fixing this one.

      On your thoughts for who could handle this:

      Chuck Baldwin may be a good man and radio personaility, but the American public is arguably center-right. Baldwin considered Bush-Chaney "too liberal". Is he electable? Is he for America as a whole or a select few?

      McCain – I love and respect him as a person; however, I think he would have been overwhelmed. McCain would have done nothing in Iraq (in terms of an exit strategy) as he advocated we'd be there another 100 years. So if you tie our economic prosperity with the cost of war.....was McCain really the right person to secure America's position. Further, the leisurely pace of his campaign should be telling enough on how the economy, two wars, Iran, healthcare, gay rights, etc. would have been resolved.

      Chicago style politics? I can't speak to that as I'm not from Chicago, but it is a beautiful city. 🙂 I respect your views, but I only advocate being specific and stating facts for folks who post.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • ifyouseenkay


      you disparage minions!

      June 22, 2010 at 3:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jerry

      it is right to vote in or out Obama. War is a political decision not a military decision.
      All the talk about he is the ONLY man know to prosecute this war, it is nonsense.
      If we depend on this kind of military leaders to fight this expensive war, we better come home now instead come home in tear tomorrow. Is this the best general we can produce?

      June 22, 2010 at 3:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • Deb

      Where were you all when Bush @#$% up this country. You are all "Hypocrites". "All Hypocrites." This country is full of "Hypocrites." I believe there is no respect for President Obama because he is black. Let be real and stopping hiding behind those hoods.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • CTYank

      Actually, there's a bit more triggering the cons' knee-jerks- their tendency to believe that they are in sole possession of the truth, and that anyone who differs is not just wrong, but evil.
      Need examples? See Palin, Cheney, Ingraham, Coulter, Rush, Beckk, and ad-nauseam.
      And ... they're conflicted as to which takes precedence for their loyalty- country or party.

      June 22, 2010 at 5:27 pm | Report abuse |
  4. W briley

    This isn't about remarks that are most likely true. Let's quit playing politics and bring out men home. We have been there long enough.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
  5. uva1979

    My son is under his command in Afghanistan and McChrystal's lack of judgement concerns me. If he really feels this way he should make his views known to the President and not thru this magazine. If his views were not considered then he should have resigned from the post. Most importantly, anyone in the military knows how important it is to show respect to the command structure or get out.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Military Spouse

      Lack of judgement? It is very clear that you have no idea of what you speak. I have never known a more honorable and respected commander. You should be thanking God above for your son being under the command of Stan McChrystal. If Obama fires McChrystal not only will the Afghan people suffer, but so will the troops he commands....God help them if Obama make such a crucial mistake. Since he(Obama) has no military experience one can only hope that he listens to those that have.

      June 22, 2010 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      MILITARY SPOUSE....Uhm, "...lack of judgement" were the words Stan McChrystal used in saying the article was a mistake. I think you've lost every bit of credibility on your post for being uninformed. If you have served in the military then even a private would know this one simple rule...voice your concern early and once the commander decides, then you execute the mission as if it were your own. If you have moral or legal issues with the order, then you move out of the way. Don't clog the internet with your misinformation please.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • ifyouseenkay

      would i be off he mark to think that you would have been all feeling real good if bush was the target of the remarks?

      your job in government is never to be blindly follow orders, intructions, directives etc. one should always question leaders. especially neophytes who will be on the job for four years and no nothing of war and leadership!

      June 22, 2010 at 3:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      ifyouseenkay....good point; however, this was not an issue of following orders. If that were the case, General McChrystal would have never signed up for the job. This is an UNSOLICITED interview the General granted. In no way did he not realize this story would be published. I suspect this was a political move by McChrystal that didn't play out the way he anticipated. McChrystal is no Petreus, although he has tried to be. Let's not forget, this is take two with General McChrystal. Take one was when he provided an interview on his Afghanistan assessment requesting 40,000 additional troops before the Administration made a decision. By going public, it was an attempt to force the President's hand. Well he won and got 30,000 additional troops. So the question is really, what was his calculus behind this article and what is he attempting to achieve. Maybe he is looking for an out?

      June 22, 2010 at 3:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • FHP

      Thanks you uva1979. Your statements as a person with a son on the ground is valuable. I am in line with your thinking on this matter. I pray your son receives leadership that keeps him as safe as possible.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • FT.,,,,

      my husband is also in the military and respects mccrystal, the only mistake this man has made was having this conversation (that most of our military have the same feels) where a reporter was. He is very good at his job and should not be faulted for that,he helps keep members of thousands of family's safe and that is truly something to be thankful for.

      June 23, 2010 at 1:38 am | Report abuse |
    • irishfan

      Well..... the president will spend some time with the general. How often has this happened since he took office? I picture a man who has the life of so many others in his hands in a war where he receives only a fraction of the help he requested. At home he sees a financial disaster and an environmental disaster. No one seems to be doing much about either of them. Now... why should he be frustrated? Maybe because his commander in chief is seen partying and golfing and going to baseball games while others are suffering? Who would you rather have leading your son?

      June 23, 2010 at 6:47 am | Report abuse |
  6. Teresa Plunkett

    What I want to know is why everyone who makes a mistake needs to be fired? Doesn't everyone make mistakes? If we all were fired after we said some stupid things we'd all have switched jobs about a million times. Get over yourselves!!! Go down to the Gulf and help cleanup!!!

    June 22, 2010 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      How many "mistakes" do you get? This is the second time the President has to have this conversation with him. The first mistake was doing an interview overseas on his troop request before the Administration could make a decision. Here's a very simple test, if you were a lieutenant and General McChrystal told you to make an assessment and report results back to him, yet the lieutenant provides results to a reporter....what would General McChrystal do with that lieutenant. My guess is fire him for insubordination. General McChrystal has been a soldier for nearly 40 years....this can't be characterized as a mistake.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • tara

      It's not like Gnl McChrystal is running a McDonald's.... he is managing a war... hundreds of thousands of lives depend on his judgment. Millions of dollars, the reputation of the US and the stability of an entire region depend on his judgment.

      This is not his first 'mistake' - he showed a lack of character in his handling of Patrick Tillman's 'friendly fire' death, he showed poor judgment by going to the press outside of the Command Chain once before...

      He should be dishonorably discharged and stripped of his General's pension.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Pat

      Teresa....first...this wasn't a mistake. The General made a choice to be interviewed. Secondly...this is the MILITARY. They are not civilians. They protect and defend us. My father was career military and POW in Germany for 2.5 years. He always told his children that we didn't have to like the President....but we must respect the office of the Commander in Chief. There is no free speech in the military. The is conduct unbecoming of an officer. He should be fired and subject to court martial. God protect our brave men and women. I pray for their families.

      June 22, 2010 at 5:18 pm | Report abuse |
  7. KMAN821

    McCrystal is totally unprofessional and a disgrace to his position ... make that FORMER position. He's a turd with a huge ego and a record of no real success.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rob

      Yeah, cause we all know how attaining the rank of General doesn't indicate anything about sucess...oh wait, that doesn't sound quite realistic....

      June 22, 2010 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Military Spouse

      And you are an A** with an even bigger ego.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • David

      I wonder if Bush were still president and the General's statements were made against him, would all those now demanding his head be so angry? I have a feeling they would be lift the General on their shoulders as a hero!

      What happened to transparency? It is ok to speak your mind in the Obama administration as long as you don’t speak against the administration. And for the record, I am not a Bush fan! I just hate hypocrites.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ed B

      I doubt you even read the article yet you make judgements on news reports and the turd is you for jumping to a conclusion about a real Patriot. Obama cannot use his community organizing experience to solve this one. Perhaps he should call Pentagon bomber and friend Prof Ayers for advice or Val Gerate realestate expert for advice or Rom Chicago politician for advice or Rev Wright, the racist ? Get my point? What a bunch of clowns, it would be a joke if it were not so serious.

      June 23, 2010 at 7:42 am | Report abuse |
  8. Ann

    President Obama is Commander in Chief no matter what you racist Republicans think of him. This guy should so be fired!

    June 22, 2010 at 1:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • NKM

      Disagreeing with the president or his policies does not make someone a racist. I disagree with him on almost every issue, and I voted for him! If I had a problem with his race, I would not have voted for him in the first place. In the second place, I disagreed with most of Bush's policies too. It is the privilege of a free society to be able to disagree or speak against our leaders. It does not make one a racist simply because this particular president has a black father.

      June 22, 2010 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • MAT

      In my experience a thief will accuse someone of stealing before anyone else.

      June 22, 2010 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cicero

      Let's remember that the Democrats are the only Party with a sitting Senator who was a high ranking recruiter for the KKK. Democrats always say that the words and/or deeds of any Republican reflect the beliefs of the whole Party. We can now state that all Democrats support the KKK as one of their own was a member of this racist group. From now on we can dismiss debate on any issue because Democrats support the KKK.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Matt

      If you read the article, you would know that the General is a democrat that voted for Obama. Truth Hurts.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • DB Chief

      Ann, you are truly an idiot and I hope for the sake of the world you are streril.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • ifyouseenkay

      you are making the mistaken assumption the the poster was speaking to the black half. it was the white half that was addressed. thus, the poster could not be a racist, unless, the poster was black. then there would be problem. unless the poster was black and speaking about the black half. that would make the poster self loathing uncle tom. a much worse thing to be than a racist. h

      June 22, 2010 at 3:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      You're right. POTUS should be fired for ineptness.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:40 pm | Report abuse |
  9. drg

    Yes, he should be reassigned...he has undermined the office of the President....

    June 22, 2010 at 1:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cicero

      Obama is responsible for more Americans being killed on our borders by Illegals than McCrystal has lost troops in Afganistan and Iraq. Obama has failed to honor his Oath of Office and should be Impeached.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • drg

      @cicero: whatever dude....

      June 22, 2010 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • ifyouseenkay

      obama is making a good effort of undermining that office

      June 22, 2010 at 3:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • ABK

      @cicero – you're an idiot.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:51 pm | Report abuse |
  10. John T. Gresser

    One of the most importanty aspects of our democracy is absolute civilian control of the military. I shudder thinking of how awful our country would be if control shifted even slightly towards the military. McChrystal may be a good general and an honorable man. It is alright for anyone to criticize the president, but McChrystal crossed the line. FIRE HIM IMMEDIATELY.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cicero

      General McCrystal must speak out when Obama's policies result in our sons and daughters being at risk in Afganistan. The people deserve to know when the Commander in Chief is incompetent and a danger to the security of our Nation.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      Cicero...this is not an referrendum on Obama's policies. The FACT is that counterinsurgency (COIN) operations are advocated by General McChrystal, General Petreus, and Secretary Gates. OMG...where do you get your information. Further, the article is about Obama's advisors, not the President (with exception to McChrystal not thinking the President was prepared during their initial meeting). Obama's policies are exactly what your hero, George Bush, didn't do...provide exit strategies for Iraq and Afghanistan, submit a war request with the annual budget, make the fight a whole-of-government effort and not just a military fight, tighten rules for government contractors, and the list goes on. Some folks will never agree with Obama, but I am always happy to go line by line with you on how his policies have been for the better.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
  11. mark

    To Ann- racist Republicans? Did you forget he is half white? So are we only being racist towards his black side? Get a clue.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
  12. mrmustard

    Military leaders NEVER question the civilian leadership. That is a longstanding tradition in the military, and when it is violated, you usually do not get a second chance. Imagine if he had said those things about the civilian leadership during the Bush administration!! He would be toast! In fact, a couple of generals who disagreed with Bush publicly (and even privately) were given the boot. Remember General Shinsecki?

    Look at it another way. What if the general's chief of staff (probably a Colonel) openly questioned his boss's tactics? What do you think would happen to him? You can be he would be taking an early retirement.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • uva1979

      Absolutely agree.

      June 22, 2010 at 1:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      I agree as well. The General needs to resign or get fired so that he can "go rogue" with his god complex and make millions writing books and giving speeches. The General is a very bad example for anybody in the military. Shooting off his mouth dances around treason as far as I am concerned and any good he may have done during his short tenure in Afghanistan has been erased by his ego spews.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • ifyouseenkay

      you don't seem to get it. if the president of mexico can shi tte on america in front of obama, if the old beatle can disparge a president in front of another president, what is a little opinion from a general matter to obama.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      Seriously! You are using the President of Mexico to make some point here? I wouldn't expect any less from the President of Mexico, but then again it isn't the Pres of Mexico that is suppose to be commanding our troops in Afghanistan, representing the US to the best of his abilities, and at the very least maintaining the chain of command. This General is an embarrassment to this country. Instead of an asset he is proving to be a liability.

      June 22, 2010 at 4:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      mrmustard – good point, except that it's not just "longstanding tradition"... it's the LAW. Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 88 – “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.”

      June 23, 2010 at 1:52 am | Report abuse |
  13. C Briley

    Fire Obama first. He makes Bush look good. He might give wonderful speeches but nothing behind it. LIke a nice package you open and it's empty inside.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Joe

      These are very stupid remarks. First, you don't fire a president, although in two and a half more years, you'll have the chance to vote him out of office. Second, NOTHING will ever make George W. Bush look good. If Obama seems mired in the mud, have you ever considered who made the mud in the first place? Third, if Obama got any cooperation at all, instead of endless obstruction and sabotage from the Republican'ts, he would be able to get a lot more done toward solving some of the problems.

      June 22, 2010 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • ifyouseenkay

      to joe who responded. actually you can fire a president. it is called impeach the f'er.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:57 pm | Report abuse |
  14. MAT

    Absolutely not. This administration is incompetent and the Democratic congress has been nothing but anti US when it comes to the military (terrorizing innocent people in the middle of the night anyone?). Repealing dont ask dont tell means the military is no longer outside of civilian laws and rights. Aparently the truth hurts, but someone has to say it. Get a backbone.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Joe

      Will you please explain exactly when and how the Democratic Congress terrorized our military in the middle of the night? And are you aware of the improvement in Veterans benefits since Obama took office? And what the VA was like under Bush?

      June 22, 2010 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • EWR

      MAT....your posts actually get worse and worse. MAYBE if you were living in Iraq or Afghanistan would you be terrorized in the middle of the night. Where are you writing from...prison? It's okay not to like Obama and his policies....it's healthy and we do need folks to keep politicians honest. However, it is equally important to state facts vice pointless rhetoric that is likely regurgitated from the conservative talk show circuit. It's a testament to the power of the media and how easily we, the average joe, can be manipulated by anyone with a microphone. State facts brother and stop with the rhetoric.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
  15. XWngLady

    Yes. He should be axed. As an Army Veteran, there is NO EXCUSE for insubordination and/or disrespect for your commanding Officer whether he's wearing a military uniform or a tu-tu. Pres. Obama is the Commander-In-Chief. Period. You do NOT go running your trap to a magazine (Rolling Stones) even if you do have disagreements. This is NOT representative of a good soldier....Gen. McChrystal is no different from all the other old white male Republicans in this country. What he means by he's "not connected and intimidated" is, he's not a part of our good old military boy network. Unfortunately, we are in the middle of a war, I don't know if giving the commander the boot right now is the best idea. McChrystal begged for the 30K + troops, now that he has them, his plans aren't working and now he's trying to pawn it off on the President. I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't trying to sabotage the whole thing on purpose. But as long as he does what he's been instructed to do and keeps his mouth shut, then I say let him stay and them axe him once the troops start coming home.

    June 22, 2010 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cicero

      General McCrystal must speak out when Obama's policies put our sons and daughters in the military at risk. The people deserve to know when the Commander in Chief is incompetent and a danger to the security of our Nation. McCrystal is a man of courage and principle not some General who would sell out his troops for a promotion. Hopefully Obama wants leaders like McCrystal not suckup robots.

      June 22, 2010 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Gerry

      @Cicero It is readily apparent you have no comprehension of military culture, yes it is in fact a culture. Conduct unbecoming of an officer ring a bell? Let me spell it out for you, if you are in an elevated position in the military you never, EVER talk sh!t about your superiors. You can cry about it at home but you don’t go to the media, or subordinates about it. Why? Because it not only undermines your superiors, but it demoralizes the subordinates, a.k.a the troops. You are obviously a conservative troll puppet who never looks into things past the headlines. And if this was Bush, you’d be saying the general was unpatriotic and blah blah blah… Well prove everyone right and tell us, is he patriotic now or not?

      June 22, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • mfq

      The problem with the general's comments isn't just insubordination by what was said but the inability to trust the general to do what he's ordered despite disagreeing with it. He has already proven that he will disregard military law when it suits him. Also if he has to make a difficult decision, his views might sway him to make choices that are not in line with the president's goals. That means the president cannot trust him and no one should hold such a high position if they cannot be trusted.

      June 23, 2010 at 12:17 am | Report abuse |
    • knoxknight

      Well Put XWngLady.

      UCMJ is UCMJ, and the General crossed the line. Everyone all the way down to Private would have known better. What punishment is warranted is up for debate- but the fact that the General was out of line is not.

      @ Cicero, how has the current POTUS endangered troops? He sent additional troops to aid the mission at the request of the Pentagon. ROI and ROE have not changed significantly as far as I'm aware, so what exactly are you talking about? Also, I don't know if you are aware, but we've been over there for nearly a decade now. What exactly did the previous administration do that was better than what we are doing now? Boy, I'd like to know.

      June 23, 2010 at 12:30 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23