Gen. Stanley McChrystal, America's top military commander in Afghanistan, has been recalled to Washington amid his controversial remarks about colleagues in a Rolling Stone article, officials said.And of course since in the Wingnut world a General outranks the civilian Commander-In-Chief (but only if he's a Democrat) you're going to hear howls of anger from the right over this. "How dare Obama summon the General", etc, Obama should resign, not McChrystal, etc.
McChrystal was summoned to attend a meeting on Afghanistan and Pakistan in person rather than by video conference, a senior administration official said Tuesday.
"He has been recalled to Washington," another official said.
McChrystal apologized Tuesday for the profile, in which the general and his staff appear to mock top civilian officials, including the vice president. The article is set to appear in Friday's edition of Rolling Stone.
"I extend my sincerest apology for this profile. It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened," McChrystal said in a Pentagon statement. "Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard."
In the profile written by Michael Hastings, the author writes that McChrystal and his staff had imagined ways of dismissing Vice President Joe Biden with a one-liner as they prepared for a question-and-answer session in Paris in April. The general had grown tired of questions about Biden since earlier dismissing a counterterrorism strategy the vice president had offered.
"'Are you asking about Vice President Biden?' McChrystal says with a laugh. 'Who's that?'"
"'Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say: Bite Me?'"
McChrystal and his aides do not directly criticize President Barack Obama in the article, but Hastings writes that the general and Obama "failed to connect" from the outset after the president took office. Sources familiar with the meeting said McChrystal thought Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the room full of top military officials, according to the article.
Like it or not, making fun of the guy in charge is not a good military career move, despite McChrystal's considerable counterinsurgency cred. On the other hand, it's not like the latest offensive is going really well in Afghanistan.
It's good to remind folks who's in charge once in a while. Isn't that what the Republicans after all want Obama to do constantly, to show he's not weak?
Marc Ambinder actually has a pretty good piece on this.
What in the heck was Gen. Stanley McChrystal thinking? I mean, I know what he was thinking: he was tired of being the victim of what he believes is a concerted effort on behalf of Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry and others to undermine everything he was given 18 months to do. He was tired of being perceived in the press as a neoconservative killer, Dick Cheney's hired assassin, or disloyal to President Obama and his staff. He was angry at being blamed for leaking the draft of his report to the President to Bob Woodward. (He did NOT leak the document). He was miffed that a large number of mid-ranking soldiers and battalion commanders and enlisted guys didn't support his strategy.
What I don't know is which of McChrystal's aides thought it would be a good idea to let his senior staff speak on background to Rolling Stone (!), of all publications, venting McChrystal's frustrations and their own.
Bad judgment by the guys supposedly in charge of our war effort. There's a shocker.
Posts
1 comment:
Well tbh flying him back to the states to talk about this is really unnecessary when he is running a war. A video conference would have sufficed. This comes across more so as a "How dare you" or "Who do you think you are?"
Granted if this were Petraeus discussing Bush/Cheney you would be up in arms with fireworks, flares, and spotlights "Look not even his General supports him!" So let's take a step back and look at this without the wingnut hypocrisy that normally exists here.
A General is obviously frustrated with the lack of support and quite frankly dragging of the feet Obama did for months with getting him the troops he requested. Regardless of frustration though the General has an obligation to maintain professionalism.
Why did Obama drag his feet? That is subject to speculation. Some will say it was so he wanted to have all his ducks in a row, others will say it's because he knew he was about to severely infuriate his anti-war base. In the end I don't see this having any kind of positive spin for the Obama regime because a General they put in charge is criticizing them for their lack of action.
Post a Comment