General butts head publicly with the White House

[NickCole]

You're right, it's worse: he has no honour. And if he is too chickenshit to speak his grievances in plain language instead of engineering a smarmy sideswipe in an entertainment magazine, and then publicly retracting and toadying at the President's side, then he has no courage.

And if you don't think honour and courage matter in war; I dunno what to add. The Commander in Chief made the right call.

Of course the President should fire him. I said that before he did it.

That's obvious and, to me, not the point The People can get from this.

The point is what McChrystal, et al, put their careers on the line to say publicly. You can dismiss it with "he has no class" or "he has no courage," but while you and some others fail to pay attention to a top General telling us our President is an empty suit, I'd rather listen to what these informed people put their careers on the line to tell us and try to figure out what it means.

 

[JB3]

The whole issue surrounding the resignation of McChrystal is much more important, than a general bad mouthing his president and hangers on. That matter is one of a military campaign that is failing to create an Afghanistan at peace with itself. After nine years of hard campaigning there would appear to be no end in sight that would signal a victory for the Coalition forces.

We need to look beyond the narrowness of McChrystal's undiplomatic opinions that Rolling Stone so lovingly presented for our entertainment.

A nine year military campaign in Afghanistan has not produced the results that would signal a good reason for continuing with the current strategy. A more pragmatic approach to the war lords might conceivable produce a better result than continuing to kill more and more of the enemy's foot soldiers. As one dies, so another replaces him.

Clearly something was irking McChrystal badly enough for him to feel sufficiently frustrated to speak so contemptuously of the president, vice-president and other White House poodles.

Your posts continue to show a complete lack of knowledge about what's going on in Afghanistan. Yes casualties are at a high; but that's because there are an increased number of troops in the country carrying out an increased number of missions. The strategy they are currently carrying out is relatively young; it IS working, but it is doing so slowly. The fact that you don't know that the strategy is a new one discounts for me any opinion you might have on the matter.

And yes, something was clearly irking McChrystal. To put it bluntly, I think he was fed up dealing with the weasels in the Obama administration that are loathe to make the hard decisions.

 

[MercuryJones]

And yes, something was clearly irking McChrystal. To put it bluntly, I think he was fed up dealing with the weasels in the Obama administration that are loathe to make the hard decisions.

And that's not a justification for violating the Code of Justice.

 

[JB3]

Can you provide a source link to verify a declaration of war by the United States against Afghanistan, and against Iraq?

There was no declaration of war like there was during the World Wars, but there were authorizations for the use of force and war authorizations. They are equivalent. (war declarations are rare in US history)

 

[opinterph]

There was no declaration of war like there was during the World Wars, but there were authorizations for the use of force and war authorizations. They are equivalent. (war declarations are rare in US history)

Good answer.

 

[kallipolis]

Of course the President should fire him. I said that before he did it.

That's obvious and, to me, not the point The People can get from this.

The point is what McChrystal, et al, put their careers on the line to say publicly. You can dismiss it with "he has no class" or "he has no courage," but while you and some others fail to pay attention to a top General telling us our President is an empty suit, I'd rather listen to what these informed people put their careers on the line to tell us and try to figure out what it means.

Such common sense thoughts are not gelling with the hoi polloi.

Why would McChrystal commit ritual suicide? He knew there could be only one response from President Obama.

The follow on chapter should be enlightening. I am waiting for Stanley's memoirs.

 

[kallipolis]

Your posts continue to show a complete lack of knowledge about what's going on in Afghanistan.
Yes casualties are at a high; but that's because there are an increased number of troops in the country carrying out an increased number of missions. The strategy they are currently carrying out is relatively young; it IS working, but it is doing so slowly. The fact that you don't know that the strategy is a new one discounts for me any opinion you might have on the matter.

And yes, something was clearly irking McChrystal. To put it bluntly, I think he was fed up dealing with the weasels in the Obama administration that are loathe to make the hard decisions.

I note your predictable tactics. First abuse and then belittle the poster who annoys you. Such a strategy has no impact on me.

The strategy that you refer to is not working. Do not presume to know who I am, nor my depth of knowledge on the Afghan campaign.

The Dutch contingent is being withdrawn. The Canadians have set a specific date for their withdrawal. The Germans are very unhappy with their involvement despite being allocated a rather safe zone for their operations. The United Kingdom remains committed but is also discussing a troop reduction levels from 2011.

Pakistan (a nuclear power) is increasingly faced with destabilisation and internalised terrorist activity that has its source in the Taliban dominated tribal areas that border the frontier with Afghanistan.

The UK ambassador to Afghanistan has just resigned in protest at the failure of the military campaign to produce the desired results. There is an enormous rift between political and military experts on the ideal approach to dealing with the Afghan war lords.

We should recall that the American armed forces had persuaded the American media that the Vietnam war was being won, just weeks before the fall of Saigon.

I am sure that Stanley will spill the beans in due course.

 

[DeeChai]

I was hoping General Mattis would be appointed, let the Marines run things over there for a chance.

 

[JB3]

Actually, no. I've been looking for a few minutes. And my memory isn't what I'd like it to be. So I was in error.

So I do still wonder about the principle of being at war with a group.

Well, the authorization of force that allowed the beginning of the Afghan war was directed at a broad group of people. (the terrorists that perpetrated the 9/11 terrorist attack) The resolution was broad enough to allow for the use of military force against any nation or group of people that harbored terrorists or aided their efforts in any manner. I think that's as close to you can get to authorizing war against a group.

 

[bankside]

Of course the President should fire him. I said that before he did it.

That's obvious and, to me, not the point The People can get from this.

The point is what McChrystal, et al, put their careers on the line to say publicly. You can dismiss it with "he has no class" or "he has no courage," but while you and some others fail to pay attention to a top General telling us our President is an empty suit, I'd rather listen to what these informed people put their careers on the line to tell us and try to figure out what it means.

My point is that for him to pull a stunt like this goes a long way to cutting the legs out from any argument he might otherwise have been able to make. He "put his career on the line?" or is he as kallipolis intimates perhaps positioning himself as a political candidate? Again, him saying the president is an empty suit carries far greater weight if he was above board about the whole thing. But the way he went about it, whatever he says about Obama now, my first response is "Consider the source." Look at this jackass, he doesn't have much to say worth listening to.

Informed people my arse! You seem prepared to give him great leeway because of his rank, yet you give no quarter to another man who made it all the way to commander in chief of your military.

If McChrystal is entitled to a presumption of competence because of his station, so is Obama. So far, McChrystal took a dump on his own track record for competence. Oh well.

 

[Ninja108]

I wonder how many of these military minds would be lauded if they had criticized Bush for getting us involved in Iraq? A war that has done NOTHING but put innocent civilians in body bags and made the world more dangerous.

 

[JayHawk]

I was hoping General Mattis would be appointed, let the Marines run things over there for a chance.

Marines are excellent at killing everything they see..... unfortunately our war strategy is to love them into submission.

Kinda like we are hugging the illegals into not coming across the border.

We are now a nation of hugs and highbrow failure instead of down and dirty get it done American spirit.

 

[BostonPirate]

Ah yes

and the military still resists the reclasification of its place in our society after WW2, when it ceased to be the department of war and became the department of defence.

It's hard for the military to absorb it. Hard for all of us to grasp it really.

My buddy served in afghanistan, a marine. He told me the war was so underbudgeted that they bought their own personal armor and ammunition because they just werent given enough to do the job and stay alive.

I hear all this talk of organization and plans, but he said there never was one.

They wandered the mountains, bartering for food with the locals trying to route out holdouts in the villages. Sitting across from a man eating dinner never knowing if he was the one that was going to shoot you when light came the next day.

undermanned, underbudgeted and underplanned.

He left afghanistan in 2006 and as far as I can tell, there have been no changes in the tactics and conditions he described.

of course diplomacy can only make it worse

 

[JayHawk]

How do you diplomatically negotiate with a movement that spans countries and is not satisfied unless you submit or pay a tithe and agree your second class?

How have them Israeli diplomatic negotiations been going?

 

[bankside]

How do you diplomatically negotiate with a movement that spans countries and is not satisfied unless you submit or pay a tithe and agree your second class?

How have them Israeli diplomatic negotiations been going?

LOL tell that to a Canadian who lives next to a country that used to go on about Manifest Destiny.

You don't negotiate with them; you burn down their White House, that's how.

 

[bankside]

Here's a hint: most of this "movement" thinks the taleban are also a bunch of blowhard assholes. The trick to "negotiating" is to be less blowhardy and less assholey. People pick up on that.

 

[BostonPirate]

How do you diplomatically negotiate with a movement that spans countries and is not satisfied unless you submit or pay a tithe and agree your second class?

Obama has killed more of the al qaida leaders in 18 months than bush did in 7 years. You don't negotiate with them, you negotiate with the nation they are hiding in so that killing them is easier.

How have them Israeli diplomatic negotiations been going?

last thing I heard, Netanyahu was stealing land and the westbank elected a gov't whose goal is to destroy the entire jewish race.

I think a few less bombs and a few more conversations could help.

Obama has not made any mid east peace innitiatives.

 

[kallipolis]

Diplomacy invites us to consider buying off the Afghan war lords, and exploiting the ethnic rivalries that have beset Afghanistan for centuries.

When the Italian forces were allocated their zone of operations, they simply bought off the local war lords with gold coins. The Taliban stopped killing in that region. When the Italians were replaced with the French, the French were surprised that a peaceful zone suddenly reverted to being a blood soaked region. The Italians had neglected to share the secret of their successful pacification of their respective responsibility with their French allies. The French forces were to suffer many casualties before waking up.

Despite the efforts of some on this forum to describe The Taliban as religious fanatics, it is accurate to state that the Afghan war lords do respond to financial bribery.

There is more than one way to skin a rabbit.

 

[BostonPirate]

well

are you saying the taliban are not religious fanatics? they may be money hungry religious fanatics, but alas.... they are still fanatics.

money is a viable tool in the toolbox of the state department.

 

[kallipolis]

well

are you saying the taliban are not religious fanatics? they may be money hungry religious fanatics, but alas.... they are still fanatics.

money is a viable tool in the toolbox of the state department.

I have clearly stated that religion is not the motive that dictates Taliban operations against the coalition forces.

The Afghan tribes have resisted invasions from foreign military forces for centuries. Ask the Russians how they feel about their ten year adventure in Afghanistan. The Russians also beat a retreat. Russian tactics employed against their Afghan enemies showed no respect for human life. The Russians did not fight their Afghan enemies with their hands tied by political restraints. Nevertheless the Russians were defeated.

A combination of military operations, and diplomatic initiatives aimed at pacifying the Afghan war lords will eventually bear fruit. Only using military means will create the same result that obliged the Russians to retreat from Afghanistan.

We must learn from historical precedent, or risk a repeat of the defeat in Vietnam that still pains the American sense of supremacy, when attempting to relate with peoples still living in a seventh century culture.