Previous poll next poll

Should Gen. Stanley McChrystal resign because of the disparaging remarks he made about top administration officials?

or see results without voting.

Note: This is not a scientific poll. The results reflect only the opinions of those who chose to participate.


KS 7 years, 7 months ago

He should not resign, but I think he will be asked to. He is saying what he believes is right about his boss. We will be in a little hurt if we have to change commanders at this point, but this administration does not have a clue as to how to run it or the oil spill. Golf and Wednesday night parties at the WH seem to be more important. Last I heard, they have spent about $20 million of our dollars on those parties, so far.

jaywalker 7 years, 7 months ago

"Are you aware his own troops at ground zero do not respest him?"

Early favorite for Dumbest Line of the Day.

Blessed4x 7 years, 7 months ago

Not sure where you are getting your facts Babboy, everything I've been hearing and reading would point quite the opposite direction. Please site some sources.

Blessed4x 7 years, 7 months ago

cite....it's already been a long day.

Stuart Evans 7 years, 7 months ago

I think the country should hoist him up on our shoulders for having the nuts to make those remarks.

jaywalker 7 years, 7 months ago

Generals can NOT undermine the CIC; it's no different than if a Colonel did the same to him. Unfortunately, I think his resignation is a foregone conclusion.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

Sorry but if I made public and published remarks about my boss like he did I wouldn't be given the opportunity to resign before I was pushed out the door. Unless you particularly want a military junta like a South American country, it's pretty essential that the President, as Commander in Chief of the military, maintain control of it. I really think McChrystal wanted to quit and knew he couldn't without making a career ending move. He's saved face with his military buddies and got out of a job that he hates under a boss he hates. Win/win.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

You should have just stopped with the first sentence Tom. I read it and then skipped the rest. Wasted space.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

When you sound like a broken record and say the same thing over and over again there's not much to be tolerant about. You read one, you've read them all.

beatrice 7 years, 7 months ago

Since when did being tolerant mean we should tolerate the intolerant?

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

Yeah, yeah, yeah. "one and done", "incompetent", "clowns"...shall I continue? You've made your opinion about Obama known...loudly...over and over again ad nauseum. You never say anything new, just repeat the same thing. Wow! A thought just occurred to me! Are you a real person Tom? Or are you one of those internet bots that post spam?

John Kyle 7 years, 7 months ago

From 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. "

Court Martial the traitor!

Maddy Griffin 7 years, 7 months ago

I have never seen an American President be treated with as much disrespect as this one has.And then for Nancy-Tom to quote Jon Voight, who is an authority on what?And at a time when this country is at war with 2 other countries, we are experiencing the worst oil spill with no end in sight, 65 days and counting. Not to mention the over-loaded plate of crap he was handed walking in the door.After seeing some people treat him with such disdain, I don't know why anyone would want to be POTUS. I hope he runs again. He will definitely get my vote...again.

Kirk Larson 7 years, 7 months ago

Yeah, because as a President, he was incompetent. He and Cheney ran a crony government that cut up the Constitution and ran the economy into the ground while entangling us in an unnecessary war. Or have you forgotten that already?

Stuart Evans 7 years, 7 months ago

seems to me like the exact same thing could be said about Obama/Biden. I know, I know.. Obama is just cleaning up the mess that BushCo. gave us...No.. Obama is just the next hand picked servant of the powers that be. He has no authority, and no spine. he is a lap dog.

overthemoon 7 years, 7 months ago

you are confusing criticism with hatred. Bush was and is an illiterate and incurious (according to those who worked with him) cowboy. Thing is, the opposition was squashed. People wearing t-shirts with anti-bush slogans were arrested at his few public appearances. Now we have out and out racism, idiocy, and violence tinged rhetoric that this country has not seen since the early sixties. This is not a 'liberal' perspective. This is a fact substantiated by photo, video and written record. Your continued comments to the contrary only serve to substantiate the blind ugliness pervading our disintegrating democracy.

SeaBee 7 years, 7 months ago

As much as I disliked Bush II, et. al., I would have firmly supported his decision to dimiss a General officer in the same situation.

If McChrystal has misgivings he should have made them known up his chain of command. If he was still unsatisfied he should have resigned his command and stated the reasons.

Insubordination of the Commander in Chief by anyone in the military, General officers in particular, is inexcusable and a court-martial offense.

Stuart Evans 7 years, 7 months ago

respect must always be earned. just because he attained the position as high supreme leader, doesn't mean he is one.

cowboy 7 years, 7 months ago

Sounds like the good general may have an alcohol problem. While hanging out in Europe with a Rolling Stone reporter he deep sixes his career. A general knows better than to be insubordinate , it's that simple. He may think what he chooses to but a man shares those concerns face to face , in private.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

I suggest you read the UCMJ as posted above. Yeah, he committed insubordination.

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 7 months ago

At minimum, his conduct qualifies as conduct unbecoming and officer and a gentleman under UCMJ Article 133. Through his actions, he has undermined the respect for chain of command, duty, honor, esprit de corps, and has fostered an environment of disrespect and insubordination. It is not a stretch to state that these kind of circumstances get people killed. It is a very serious matter. If the kind General had issues with the leadership or the mission, he is required to take those issues up with them privately (see decorum). If he did not feel that he could successfully carry out his mission, lacking evidence that the orders given are illegal or immoral, the only right and honorable route for McChrystal is to resign.

Something lost with people who have no knowledge or experience with the US military is that it is required without fail or waver to show respect for the rank, office, or position whether you agree or disagree with whomever may happen to occupy that position at that time.

As far as the charge of insubordination, he was ordered by Adm. Mullen to refrain from "boxing in" and publicly criticizing superiors regarding policy decisions last summer. By continuing that line of behavior, it amounts to insubordination.

terrapin2 7 years, 7 months ago

And please, Mr. Shewmon, what would your response have been if this behavior was displayed by a general towards President Bush at a time of war? Your hypocrisy is laughable.

akuna 7 years, 7 months ago

There is one fewer clowns in Obama's chain of command now.

oldvet 7 years, 7 months ago

Hopefully General McChrystal will meet with obama and accept his resignation..

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 7 months ago

That is otherwise known as a military coup. So, tell me, is that what you fought for? Not me.

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 6 months ago

Guess my snark-o-meter needs calibrating. No need for insults, though.

barlowtl 7 years, 7 months ago

Did you know that after the "beer summit" the professor and the officer eventually became good friends?

Rokchalk 7 years, 7 months ago

Regardless of what happens, the truth hurts. Truth is reality folks.

puddleglum 7 years, 7 months ago

yeah, too bad sarah palin isn't in the white house

(raucous laughter)

ferrislives 7 years, 7 months ago

Tom, so would you feel the same way of the General said those words about GW? I bet you'd be claiming the "he cannot say that about the Commander in Chief" then, which makes you hypocritical. Now, please proceed with your old stale rhetoric.

queequeg's 7:38 a.m. post is absolutely correct about the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and regardless of what political side you are on, this type of insubordination for the Commander in Chief of the military cannot and never should be tolerated in our country. The Uniform Code of Military Justice applies to ALL military members worldwide: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm, and that's obviously a known fact upon ALL military members. I even knew this fact growing up as a young military brat. I personally like Gen. McChrystal, but if you let one get away with it, it could lead to anarchy within our future military.

overthemoon 7 years, 7 months ago

The depth of stupidity in these statements is astounding.

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 7 months ago

When you condone or promote behavior that is inconsistent with the laws and system we have in place, you are not merely advocating dissent, you are advocating sedition.

Why do you hate America, Tom?

tomatogrower 7 years, 7 months ago

When you join the military you take an oath to uphold the constitution. His ultimate boss is the president of the United States. He is actually in violation of the document that conservatives seem to hold really dear, well when it supports what they believe. There were military people who thought invading Iraq was a bad idea, but followed orders and didn't give nasty interviews. If you can't follow orders, don't join the military. If you want the right to say whatever you want don't join the military. He is almost as bad as the woman doctor who refused to go to Desert Storm, because all of the sudden she didn't believe in war, except her protest amounted to desertion. How do we know that his dislike of the president would lead him to make decisions to ensure failure, so it would make Obama look bad. Sorry, when you join the military you give up certain rights of dissent.

The military cannot be a separate from the civilian government ever. We would end up with a military dictatorship. Open a few history books and study some Central and South American history. Sure, you probably hated history when you were in school, and wondered why you had to learn it, so you probably just learned enough to take the test and pass, but history really has a purpose. It teaches to avoid mistakes already made.

As to the Afghanistan war, we need to leave now. This war and the invasion of Iraq has already hurt us enough, loss of life, loss of respect, and loss of billions of dollars. Do you think the Soviet Union would have failed if their Afghan war had not bankrupted them? And the conservatives want to blame Obama? Have you learned anything about the Afghans, their culture, "government" system, the chaos that has existed over there now for generations? You are clueless. You think they all want to be just like us, and can't wait to get their first mall. Study history. It will make you see things much differently.

Rex Russell 7 years, 7 months ago

Thank you Tomato. That was both cogent and factual. A breath of fresh air in contrast from the usual Shrewmon mental feces. Even if McChrystal is correct in his critique of the President, (and he very well could be) openly and publicly doing so is grounds for dismissal for subordination. Period. Whether it be this President or the last, makes no different. As a private citizen, I have every right to disagree with my elected leadship and to openly mock them if I choose to. Such is NOT the case for the military, in a chain-of-command structure. You salute, take your orders from your superior, and you say SIR YES SIR. You do it for Obama, you do it for Bush, you do it for Clinton, you do it for Bush Sr. et al. And you do it regardless of your personal opinion. This little spat just undermines those guys in the field and front lines.

jd 7 years, 7 months ago

The Soviets failed in large part because of our support for the Afghans and supplying them with stinger missiles which allowed them to negate the effectiveness of Soviet air power, particularly helicopters. Our biggest mistake came when the Soviets left and we stopped aiding Afghanistan allowing the Taliban to eventually gain control and host Al Queda.

tomatogrower 7 years, 7 months ago

The Afghan situation is much more complicated than that. You have a lot of tribal leaders who will go back and forth to whichever side promises them the most. They have no loyalty to an Afghan government. I say we and other countries need to offer political asylum to any of the educated women and their daughters who survived the Taliban, then withdraw completely. Let the war lords and the women who are stupid enough to be treated like dirt fight it out. Leave behind some weapons for those who truly want freedom, but I'm not sure there are enough of them to win. This is an immoral country full of many immoral leaders, and I'm not talking about their religion. The Taliban has used Islam to gain power and use it against their people. They aren't religious people at all; it's just a means to their end. Yes, there are people there who just want to live their lives, but if they aren't willing to pick up arms and fight the Taliban, then they don't deserve to have that life.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

"The Taliban has used Islam to gain power and use it against their people. They aren't religious people at all; it's just a means to their end." Anybody else here see a parallel with the religious right? Makes me think of Sam Brownback (shiver).

sourpuss 7 years, 7 months ago

Since when it is acceptable to publicly criticize your boss? How would this be acceptable in any business, much less in the military? Yes, he has a right to his opinion, but he needs to shut up and follow orders, just like everyone else. He can speak directly to Obama if he wants to be heard, but at the end of the day, Obama is his boss, just like the jerk you work for is your boss. Everyone else would get fired for this.

I'd not only "ask him to resign" - I'd strip those pretty stars off his shoulders and send him back to Debuque.

gl0ck0wn3r 7 years, 7 months ago

Yes. Any student of civil military relations can tell you that there really should be no question about his resignation. Unfortunately, this will be turned into a political issue by Republicans - but it isn't. The military works for the civilian command structure and if the General is so unable to contain his comments about this leadership around his subordinates, he is unable to lead in Afghanistan. Gripes go up, not down, to quote Tom Hanks. There isn't an officer in the military that can not be replaced. If people believe McChrystal is so unique that he can't be replaced then we have a bigger problem than insubordination within the military.

jayhawklawrence 7 years, 7 months ago

If Obama continues to have problems with incompetent Generals, he is in good company.

Abraham Lincoln certainly comes to mind as a great President who struggled to find the right guy to lead his armies. Fortunately he succeeded, for if he had not, we might all be speaking with a bit of a southern twang and an unhealthy taste for fried foods.

BigAl 7 years, 7 months ago

As usual, Nancy boy-Tom misses it entirely.

McCrystal needs to be either fired or severly reprimanded. Truman fired McArthur and he was another General absolutely loved by the American public. Truman was right.

And once again, I maintain for Tom that it is the corrupt right-wing media that is hurting this country by promoting hate, fear and division.

sherbert 7 years, 7 months ago

It obviously was very poor judgement on McCrystals parts. However, it is unfortunate for him to be put in this position. He has decades of experience in his job and Obama has 1 1/2 years, and a not very successful stretch at that. Ultimately, respect is earned, and Obama hasn't earned it from the armed forces, whose lives he controls. McCrystal might want to resign now and be free to voice his opinions as he wishes, but from the sound of it, we really need him now.

rhd99 7 years, 7 months ago

Precisely what I was going to say. We need a commander on the ground who KNOWS what war is about. The Community Organizer-in-Chief knows NOTHING about war. McChrystal does. If McChrystal resigns, God help this nation!!!!!!

BigAl 7 years, 7 months ago

I just wonder if these people did as much whining about Bush/Cheney when they sent us into Iraq? Somehow I doubt it.
We need a commander on the ground that knows his chain-of-command. Period. Like it or not, the US is not run by the Military. President Obama would have every right to fire McChrystal. At the very least McChrystal needs a severe reprimand.

McChrystal is not irreplaceable.

tomatogrower 7 years, 7 months ago

And there are plenty of military leaders who are just as capable as McChrystal. Conservatives have this mind set that few people can lead. They want to pay CEO's large bonuses for doing a lousy job, but giving the company good PR, and allow a military grunt to keep his job, even though he's insubordinate., because there is just no one out there to take their place. That's BS. The US didn't fall when Truman fired MacArthur, and it won't now. Hmmm Macs again, there must be something about those Scottish americans.

gl0ck0wn3r 7 years, 7 months ago

You two completely miss the point of civil military relations. The word "civil" is first for a reason. It doesn't matter how much experience one believes the CINC may or may not have. Respect, in this case, is not earned. The CINC is respected because he is the CINC and the elected head of the military (among other things). The chain of command ends with the CINC. End of story.

If you don't understand this or can't respect it, you don't understand our system of government and perhaps would be more comfortable in a military led dictatorship?

rhd99 7 years, 7 months ago

YOU have missed the point altogether as well. Bush was the same as Obama, The Commander In Chief, (ELECTED), regardless what your opinion of Iraq happens to be.

gl0ck0wn3r 7 years, 7 months ago

If you are replying to me, I'm not sure where you are getting the notion that I've argued any differently. You, on the other hand, seem to be the one arguing that subordination, poor leadership from an officer and denigration of the civilian command structure is perfectly acceptable behavior under certain CINCs.

You further seem to imply that only CINCs who "know about war" need apply during elections? Interesting concept, but not how our society operates.

rhd99 7 years, 7 months ago

Okay, we sound like we are on the same page. Those, however, who say, that Obama knows more about war than Bush did, don't get it. Yes, McChrytsal screwed up royally, that we know. We know that whoever gets the nod to become the next ISAF commander is qualified. I want to know how this commander-in-chief is going to win in Afghanistan. Withdrawing from Afghanistan without evaluating the conditions on the ground is unacceptable. Yet, Obama's chief of staff of the White House does not understand that concept. They are afraid to use the word victory. Why?

George Lippencott 7 years, 7 months ago

Old proverb

If you take the King's shilling you do the Kings bidding. It is that simple.

Of course, the underlying issue may be a lot more complicated. Once retired the general is free to speak more openly about his thoughts.

I have noted some number of "leaks" lately about the obvious indications that all is not well in our Afghan adventure. Seems to me we are on the search for the guilty step. The leaks have been laying that problem at the foot of the military. Could we be moving toward hearing the military response?

Oh, by the way, Tomato, I agree with you on the Afghan war - reminds me of mine - lost that one too. We are still searching for the guilty.

independant1 7 years, 6 months ago

Rolling Stone? i was expecting a fluff piece praising our military, instead we got quotes from the bar, shower, officers head. The writer was let inside, exposed to candor and then wrote a hit piece. Wouldn't expect anything different in 'gotcha' journalism.

jonas_opines 7 years, 7 months ago

Man, if only there were some easily locateable articles on military dissent during the last administration so we could compare how many of the commenters above did a full 180 turn with no difference but who the president was. (of course, with as many accounts banned as there have been, I suppose some of the key suspects here have no remaining comment record from the day anyway)

Oh well, most of them know who they are.

ferrislives 7 years, 7 months ago

Speaking for myself, I do remember some Generals speaking up during the Iraq war, AFTER they retired of course.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 6 months ago

To get his ass out of a job he didn't want.

rhd99 7 years, 7 months ago

Ok, let's just say that McChrystal is wrong, which he is, without question. The National Command Authority is not run by a military four-star commander (whether he/she is admiral or general). Whoever succeeds McChrystal, does have the qualifications to take command of ISAF in Afghanistan, no doubt about it. I, severely question, however, the wisdom of some here who say Obama knows better about the war in Afghanistan than Bush/Cheney in Iraq. If Obama knows so much about Afghanistan, then why does his loud mouth so-called White House Chief of Staff spout out that we're leaving Afghanistan next summer no-matter-what? Rahm knows nothing about war. Obama doesn't either. At least Bush/Cheney LISTENED to their military adivsers, though they screwed up royally on WMDs. Petreaus, along with Mullen & Gates, continually have said that our withdrawal from Afghanistan will be condition-based. Let's take a vote here. Those of you who want the Taliban & Al Quaeda to win speak up now.

billbodiggens 7 years, 7 months ago

The general should resign on his own or be terminated by the President. No matter how good he may be at his job he has crossed the Rubicon when he publically challenges or derides the civilian authority of this country. The military, in all things, must be subject to civil authority. Otherwise, we turn into yet another banana republic.

Graczyk 7 years, 7 months ago

The general did not simply criticize the president. He showed incredibly bad judgment by making crass remarks. They way the general portrayed himself would not be welcome in any organization, particularly one as hierarchical as the military.

jnixon 7 years, 7 months ago

He should not resign. He should, however, be reassigned somewhere else or be offered retirement. We are fighting for our Constitutional Rights and one is Free Speech. He has served our Country to preserve this Freedom. That doesn't change the fact that what he said was not a case being 'taken out of context'. He granted this interview and quite possibly received payment for his time. We need someone in charge over there that believes it is the right thing to do and not voicing a different opinion. Our troops need to have a leader that they can trust and follow.

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 6 months ago

Funny, it's the environment that McChrystal created among him and his staff that risks lives. Do you not understand that?

Probably never served a day in the military.

tomatogrower 7 years, 7 months ago

He's replacing McChrystal with Patraeus. Now there's a professional. Good move.

rhd99 7 years, 7 months ago

Ok, let's take a deep breath folks. For all who love to bad mouth Petreaus, let's get one thing clear, with General David Petraeus possibly heading the effort in Afghanistan, we have a general who understands counterinsurgency strategies. Those who bad mouth Bush/Iraq, Iraq is in somewhat better shape than it was when this highly decorated general (who commanded Fort Leavenworth before) came onboard. Obama removing McChrystal is a step in the right direction to WIN in Afghanistan. I hope America will not be afraid of the word victory in Afghanistan.

tomatogrower 7 years, 7 months ago

He's the man for the job. He did a good job in Iraq.

remember_username 7 years, 7 months ago

After a review of the article in question most of the remarks attributed to Gen. McChrystal were third hand from unnamed aides (some aides). However, the few direct quotes and witnessed insolence did show a lack of respect on the part of Gen. McChystal for his coworkers and his chain of command. This was at best poor judgment and at worse a punishable offense, regardless of the opinion one may hold for the current administration. The same would be true for any previous administration and Gen. McChystal knows he screwed up.

I think Pres. Obama is handling this perfectly so far by meeting with Gen McChystal before taking action. I also think Gen. McChystal should offer his resignation as that is the honorable action to take on his part. If it Pres. Obama believes that McChystal's command and the outcome of the conflict are endangered by replacing the general (and this is by no means certain) then I think Pres. Obama should defer acceptance of McChystals resignation until after he has completed his assigned tasks. Should he perform those tasks well and with no further missteps then the record should be expunged he should be allowed to retire at rank with honor - else demote him and kick him out.

jayhawklawrence 7 years, 7 months ago

Looks like Petraeus is taking over in Afghanistan.

It is interesting that no matter what happens, Tom is going to be upset.

Guess he don't like those "coloreds" getting all uppity and thinking they are as good as us.

The reasons politics has gotten so corrupt in Washington is because they know how stupid we are. Jesus Christ could be President but we would probably crucify him again.

jayhawklawrence 7 years, 7 months ago

A better man just took over.

Could not have come a day sooner.

verity 7 years, 7 months ago

Surely he didn't really think he could get by with that kind of insubordination.

jonas_opines 7 years, 7 months ago

Lg40 doesn't generally demonstrate a capability for any of the more positive emotions. For example, his love of America is only apparently expressable through his hatred of anyone who is not ultra-conservative.

tomatogrower 7 years, 7 months ago

" One man has a lifelong history of serving his country and giving his all for the US." Petreaus

"The other man has a lifelong history of serving himself and hates the US." - McCrystal

kernal 7 years, 6 months ago

Upi could retire to Mexico. It's warm and sunny down there, just like you!

kernal 7 years, 6 months ago

Nice typing! HA! How about "you could retire...."

ferrislives 7 years, 7 months ago

Petraeus replacing McChrystal is good news. Who has something bad to say about Petraeus...Tom?

beatrice 7 years, 7 months ago

Like a Rolling Stone, I'd let McChrystal gather no moss.

Time for him to move along.

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 7 months ago

Funny how all of the supposedly "Constitution loving" hypocrites here are openly calling for violating it and the long held and respected rule of law. It appears the Constitution and our laws are only good for them when it is convenient for them. They are not simply loyal dissenters. They wish to do irreparable harm to our institutions. Seditious!

One of the strengths of our country is that it does not change merely because a few loudmouths didn't get their way. Grow up!

Jeremiah Jefferson 7 years, 7 months ago

Stupid morons in washington are nothing more than a bunch of arm chair quarterbacks acting as if they are playing a game of RISK. Why don't they take a poll and see how many Americans think we should bring our soldiers, marines, airman and sea men back? Oh thats right, doesn't matter what the people want. Long as a bunch of greedy politicians and defense contractors get what they want, thats all that matters. Damn country is going to hell in a hand basket.

beatrice 7 years, 7 months ago

Tom, did you just call our President a "fraudulent radical"?

So what is it exactly that makes him fraudulent, other than your clear hatred of elections that don't go your way? How stupid. And I'm sure he will be losing sleep over the fact that someone who claimed before the election that America wasn't ready for a black president is speaking ill of him now.

Only radical around here is you Tom. You hate what America stands for and your politics are to the right of the Taliban.

We know why you hate him. We know the truth of your real, deep-rooted hatred. We really do, and you should seek counseling.

overthemoon 7 years, 7 months ago

"I hope America learned that electing a man or woman just because they're a minority is the wrong thing to do."

Well that proves that there is not one thing you say that is worth listening to.

Richard Heckler 7 years, 7 months ago

Bush went through a lot of generals likely for this reason:

What Can Be Done in Iraq? by Lt. Gen. William E. Odom (Ret.)

Text of testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 18 January 2007

Good afternoon, Senator Biden, and members of the committee. It is a grave responsibility to testify before you today because the issue, the war in Iraq, is of such monumental importance.

You have asked me to address primarily the military aspects of the war. Although I shall comply, I must emphasize that it makes no sense to separate them from the political aspects. Military actions are merely the most extreme form of politics. If politics is the business of deciding "who gets what, when, how," as Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall in New York City once said, then the military aspects of war are the most extreme form of politics. The war in Iraq will answer that question there.

Strategic Overview

The role that US military forces can play in that conflict is seriously limited by all the political decisions the US government has already taken. The most fundamental decision was setting as its larger strategic purpose the stabilization of the region by building a democracy in Iraq and encouraging its spread. This, of course, was to risk destabilizing the region by starting a war.

Military operations must be judged by whether and how they contribute to accomplishing war aims. No clear view is possible of where we are today and where we are headed without constant focus on war aims and how they affect US interests. The interaction of interests, war aims, and military operations defines the strategic context in which we find ourselves. We cannot have the slightest understanding of the likely consequences of proposed changes in our war policy without relating them to the strategic context. Here are the four major realities that define that context:

  1. Confusion about war aims and US interests. The president stated three war aims clearly and repeatedly:

  2. the destruction of Iraqi WMD;

  3. the overthrow of Saddam Hussein; and
  4. the creation of a liberal democratic Iraq.

The first war aim is moot because Iraq had no WMD. The second was achieved by late Spring 2003. Today, people are waking up to what was obvious before the war -- the third aim has no real prospects of being achieved even in ten or twenty years, much less in the short time anticipated by the war planners. Implicit in that aim was the belief that a pro-American, post-Saddam regime could be established. This too, it should now be clear, is most unlikely. Finally, is it in the US interest to have launched a war in pursuit of any of these aims? And is it in the US interest to continue pursuing the third? Or is it time to redefine our aims? And, concomitantly, to redefine what constitutes victory?

  1. The war has served primarily the interests of Iran and al-Qaeda, not American interests...


jayhawklawrence 7 years, 7 months ago

I have to agree with Beatrice that you should seek counseling.

If you want to see a real lemming, look in the mirror. You are just repeating vitriole and propaganda all day long. You convince people that all Republicans think like you which turns people off. When I realize what idiots Bush and Cheney were, I think things could have been even worse. I can see Cheney dropping a nuke on somebody.

In the last election, Obama clearly won every debate. He should have been given a fair chance to govern. The Republicans have denied him any respect as Commander in Chief. The have been the sorest losers in modern US history.

You have made it clear that you believe Sarah Palin was ready to be President. Can you be any less insane?

I would have prefered somebody with better qualifications, but the Republican party didn't deliver. They just looked like total losers and still do.

jayhawklawrence 7 years, 7 months ago

Americans are not unhappy with Obama. They are unhappy with their government not being competent. That includes everybody.

The Republicans are alienating Americans with their propaganda. They would rather try to sink the ship if they cannot be in charge. They have no class.

I think most Americans will look for someone in the middle, either Republican or Democrat. Just somebody that is not an idiot. It is not going to be about parties. It will probably be a vote against political parties.

Maddy Griffin 7 years, 7 months ago

Anyone who has ever been in the military knows the protocol. You do not trash talk the CIC. Period. And to do it in an interview published in Rolling Stone is way past wrong. And I'm glad to see Petraeus will replace him. That man knows what he's doing.

SeaBee 7 years, 7 months ago

As much as I disliked Bush II, et. al., I would have firmly supported his decision to dimiss a General officer in the same situation.

If McChrystal has misgivings he should have made them known up his chain of command. If he was still unsatisfied he should have resigned his command and stated the reasons.

Insubordination of the Commander in Chief by anyone in the military, General officers in particular, is inexcusable and a court-martial offense.

SeaBee 7 years, 7 months ago

But I guess Nancy Boy-Tom knows as much about the UCMJ as he does about reality, as indicated by his uncountable posts spewing the same tripe.

Nancy Boy, turn off Faux news, leave your mother's basement, and try to get a life.

Glenn Reed 7 years, 7 months ago

Wow, what a flame war...

Take a look at this:


If you take issue with Obama for McChrystal's resignation, you must also take issue with the GOP for condoning the event. That's really all I have to say on the subject.

uncleandyt 7 years, 7 months ago

I have bad news. Our wars are not going well. McChrystal did a great job of covering up the Pat Tillman lies and oversaw our continuing torture of detainees. Slaughter is nothing to be proud of. We are the invaders. The facts are against US. Have a nice day.

Kat Christian 7 years, 7 months ago

There is such a thing as Freedom of Speech in our Constitution and that should go as well with soldiers. No I don't think he should be fired or made to resign, but instead be demoted and keep over there as consultant since he is familiar with what is happening there and get someone else to replace him in command. Unless he causes a treasoness act, he still is a US Citizen. No his remarks were out of line, especially for a man of his ranking, but he does have a right to speak his mind as long as he is not spilling classified information which he was not. I've a feeling President Obama will get to the bottom of this and find out why MacCrystal said and felt the way he does. This is unfortuate, but I feel our President will find a solution that is fair.

SeaBee 7 years, 7 months ago

That sounds good, but I'm guessing you havent been in the service.

You sign away a good deal of your rights when you sign an enlistment contract.

The General should have followed his chain of command and/or resigned his commission (stating the reason) as he saw fit.

Like it or not, the constitution designates the elected president as commander in chief of the miltary services - no ifs, ands, or buts.

independant1 7 years, 6 months ago

that's right you salute the uniform not the man, been that way for longer than the collective memory herein

independant1 7 years, 6 months ago

yup, but then that would be win-win, naw no way

a_flock_of_jayhawks 7 years, 6 months ago

Problem is, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. The damage was already done.

SeaBee 7 years, 7 months ago

Dream on, partner.

You work for me and I read this in the press - best wishes in your new job.

SeaBee 7 years, 7 months ago

quoted from above "You sign away a good deal of your rights when you sign an enlistment contract."

And your contract even tells you so in so many words!!!

Glad I got out before Bush II took over!

overthemoon 7 years, 6 months ago

Who is the Muslim? One of the house Staff? an Intern?

kernal 7 years, 6 months ago

Oh, for pete's sake. I can't believe you drug out that tired old untruth.

independant1 7 years, 6 months ago

we'll muddle through yet another national PR crisis. what's up with all the venom? there are a lot of bush/obama haters on this beach. a whole lot of experts. and a few level heads, god bless the level headed pragmatic ones.

hammerhawk 7 years, 6 months ago

The guy should be fired immediately. Also, it is immediately time to get our service personnel the heck out of there and everywhere and get back home. Our nation cannot continue to spend trillions on this so-called war, and fix our broken economy at the same time.

NoSpin 7 years, 6 months ago

This was Obama's easiest decision to make. Many freedoms are relinquished when one signs up to defend others' rights and freedoms. It is quite ironic that the libs have to celebrate the hiring of a general they called "betray us". I guess he's a genius now. God bless General Petraeus and our troops.

NoSpin 7 years, 6 months ago

I should have said President Obama. Sorry. He has earned that.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.