Menu
General McChrystal’s Fate
The infamous Rolling Stone profile of General Stanley McChrystal is now online. The reports that burst into the public eye yesterday are all true and perhaps a bit understated. The upper echelons of the military are exceedingly political. The image of the non-ideological warrior is a myth; it’s just that some do a better job of covering up their political maneuvering than do others.
The general and his aides are certainly entitled to their opinions (and this article gives full vent to them), but the fact that they would utter them with a reporter in their midst evinces an astonishing lack of judgment. And when they are so lacking in good judgment in this instance, how can we have any confidence of their judgment in others?
One line from the article seems to sum up the general’s fate: “his brashness comes with a price.” I won’t predict what that price will be, but I am asking for your opinion. I’ve created our first-ever user survey. It takes you to my site on Survey Monkey – it’s free, it’s anonymous, and it will take you 10 seconds. Please try it out. Click here to take survey
I read the Rolling Stone article last night. It certainly appears to come very close to violating Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice but maybe not an actual violation. That’s a question for JAG experts.
No one can rise to the rank and responsibility of General McChrystal without being politically savvy and I am truely shocked that he and his staff would make comments like that in front of a journalist that they knew was working on an article! It shows a lack of judgement.
That said, I think The General will be repremanded by the President (not the first time) but won’t lose his job yet. There really isn’t anyone as capable to step up to the plate immediately.
AP says he was just fired!
Obama played the “Petraeus card.”
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/boot/319121
I have family (in-laws) that are retired from the military (Navy & Army). I am curious to see what their thoughts are about this whole situation (i.e chain of command, borderline insurbordination). In addition, neither were officers so I wonder if their opinion/insights will be diferent than say retired officers.
Firing was both appropriate and just and I’m convinced McChrystal won’t spend any time lamenting the outcome.
We need a psychiatrist to help us understand, to help explain McChrystal’s motives in granting such access to the Rolling Stone journalist; in making his several unprofessional statements to that journalist; and in allowing his staff to shoot their mouths off in such disrespectful ways. He knew better. He certainly understood the potential for dire consequences.
Was it all done with hidden purpose? A way for McChrystal to flamboyantly end his career and, by doing so, extract himself from a very uncertain outcome in Afghanistan? Of course, he now also gets to write his memoirs, collect a huge book advance, hit the rubber chicken circuit, and cash in on the whole fiasco!
I do not believe the general was the victim of a simple lapse in judgment. The general has recorded several similar lapses during the past year. This most recent transgression is just the most egregious one.
He needed to go, and I genuinely believe he wanted to go.
Replacing McChrystal with Petreaus was a masterful move by Obama and probably best for the continued prosecution of the war.
The results of our first-ever survey were as follows based on 19 responses:
31% said he would be fired
42% said he would retire immediately
16% said he would return to duty
11% said none of the above