Big time Afghan General-President-Diplomat fallout

[HOZ]

Channeling General MacArthur.......G. MacArthur come in....


Only the ONE can fix this..........

NOT THE SPILL>>>>>
They are both decorated generals, West Point graduates who studied at Harvard University and earnest taskmasters who would rather work than sleep.


The U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl W. Eikenberry, and the top U.S. military commander there, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, assumed their posts amid lofty expectations that they could re-create the hand-in-glove partnership that Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker had while leading the war effort in Iraq.
But the Eikenberry-and-McChrystal team that returns to Washington this week, alongside Afghan President Hamid Karzai, has a much different dynamic.
Both men said in interviews that they enjoy a productive relationship and have built stronger bonds between troops and civilians across Afghanistan. Still, they have had significant disagreements over the course of the Afghanistan war and have struggled to align their visions for how to work with Karzai's government, according to interviews with U.S., NATO and Afghan officials.

Read it all boys and girls...1950's all over again

[Cowperson]

What happens in the locker room, stays in the locker room.

Not too smart of the General but more particularly his aides to be out in the media dissing his equals and superiors.

One aide slapping VP Joe Biden around in the press requires a special kind of stupid in particular . . . . . and obviously that aide felt very comfortable which indicates he got the "attitude" from his boss, the General and that it's pervasive in the organization.

McCrystal might be a great guy and the right man for the job, but if you're Obama you might have to torch him or, in the way made famous by Ronald Reagan, take him out to the woodshed.

Cowperson

[Fugly]

More locker room talk aired my McChrystal and Co. in this Rolling Stones article. The only one spared seems to be Clinton, but I haven't finished reading the whole thing yet. CNN has a nice story with him apologizing.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236

[Byrns]

Didn't the General resign today?

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Byrns

Didn't the General resign today?

No. He offered to resign if Obama has lost confidence in him. He still has to meet with Obama, though.

I can't believe McChrystal thought it'd be a good idea to put these inner thoughts and details out into a popular magazine. Jebus, he criticized the President. You can't do that -- well, at least not publically the way he did.

Maybe he's just looking for a way off a sinking ship. However, he has done stuff like this before, though . . .

[Azure]

Yeah, right or wrong he shouldn't have been public like this about it.

[Calgaryborn]

My guess is that McChrystal is unsatisfied with Obama's support for the war and wants out. If he just resigned he would look like he was retreating while his soliders were under fire. Also if he called Obama out directly every military man in the States would condemn his conduct.

By saying some borderline stuff to a reporter he might just hope that Obama replaces him with very little tarnish to his record. If Afganistan and Obama both end badly this might even help him later in political life.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

No. He offered to resign if Obama has lost confidence in him. He still has to meet with Obama, though.

I can't believe McChrystal thought it'd be a good idea to put these inner thoughts and details out into a popular magazine. Jebus, he criticized the President. You can't do that -- well, at least not publically the way he did.

Maybe he's just looking for a way off a sinking ship. However, he has done stuff like this before, though . . .

Why not?

McChrystal is a straight shooter. They need more of his ilk....

It's about time Americans get in their faces more. Obama is doing a bad job......period. He should be criticized...

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

My guess is that McChrystal is unsatisfied with Obama's support for the war and wants out.

That's way off. McChrystal got *everything* he wanted in regards to his strategy (COIN) and direction in Afghanistan.

Interesting move on his part though... I haven't been able to figure out his real angle.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

That's way off. McChrystal got *everything* he wanted in regards to his strategy (COIN) and direction in Afghanistan.

Interesting move on his part though... I haven't been able to figure out his real angle.

He got more troops?

Wasn't there a surge planned or something?

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Why not?

McChrystal is a straight shooter. They need more of his ilk....

It's about time Americans get in their faces more. Obama is doing a bad job......period. He should be criticized...

Yeah, criticize him responsibly -- don't try and undermine the public's perception of the Commander-in-Chief during a war, possibly spreading confusion amongst the soldier's under McChrystal's, AND Obama's, command.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

Yeah, criticize him responsibly -- don't try and undermine the public's perception of the Commander-in-Chief during a war, possibly spreading confusion amongst the soldier's under McChrystal's, AND Obama's, command.

Apparently there are rumors going around that people McChrystal was clashing with people further down the command chain too.

I can't remember if I read it in an article or something, but some guy wanted to blow up a house, and McChrystal refused saying it might further distance the US from the Afghan people, and whoever it was that wanted to blow up the house got pissed off.

The guy is in a tough position.

And it doesn't matter what Obama wants, or what Obama says, or what his administration says. That the Whitehouse and the troops on the ground are in agreement is a pretty rare occurrence. Hell, Bush was a lot more military friendly than Obama, and even he had to fail in Iraq for a few years before he let someone else outside of Washington DC start calling the shots.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

That's way off. McChrystal got *everything* he wanted in regards to his strategy (COIN) and direction in Afghanistan.

Interesting move on his part though... I haven't been able to figure out his real angle.

He didn't get all the troops he wanted and he didn't get them as soon as he wanted.

Also, he got a dead line which could only help the enemy and new rules of engagement which makes inteligence gathering more difficult and the soliders work more dangerious.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

He didn't get all the troops he wanted and he didn't get them as soon as he wanted.

Also, he got a dead line which could only help the enemy and new rules of engagement which makes inteligence gathering more difficult and the soliders work more dangerious.

McChrystal asked for ~45K troops which would have depleted all the reserves (see Spencer Ackerman's reporting from late 2009). He certainly knew this as well and basically used a large opening bid to ensure that the final agreed upon level would still be around the numbers he wanted. So he got the numbers he wanted. 2009 started with ~40K soldiers in Afghanistan which Obama bumped to ~70K, and now has steadily been increasing it through a second surge that will eventually land about ~100K soldiers in the country.

As for the deadline helping the enemy, that's a red herring. They've been plenty motivated all these years even prior to deadlines; therefore the deadline itself doesn't provide any additional motivation for these guys to mount their attacks. Having foreign soldiers in your country for nearly a decade launching wide-ranging military / drone attacks that inflict significant collateral civilian casualties is far more motivation than any deadline could ever provide*.



* Apparently we should be on the lookout for another release from Wikileaks about an attack in Garani, Afghanistan in mid 2009 that had a significant civilian toll.

[Cowperson]

McChrystal is fired and replaced by Petraus.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

I'm not an Obama fan but that was really the only decision that could have been made. You can't have that kind of insubordination happening in any organization, let alone the military.

Good call.

Cowperson

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

McChrystal is fired and replaced by Petraus.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

I'm not an Obama fan but that was really the only decision that could have been made. You can't have that kind of insubordination happening in any organization, let alone the military.

Good call.

Cowperson

It should have been Petraus all along. He will bring a lot of good experience from Iraq.

[HPLovecraft]

Plus, Petraeus is just an awesome name for a General. Sounds like some ancient commander of hoplites.

[VladtheImpaler]

I wonder if politics is at play here too... Petreus is mooted (hoped for?) as a Republican presidential challenger in 2012. By putting him in a no-win situation in Afghanistan, the Dems effectively sideline him. Too conspirational?

[Azure]

Or he manages to turn it around, and the Democrats completely fall apart in 2012.

The man is smart. I wouldn't put it against him for being able to accomplish something in Afghanistan.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Azure

Or he manages to turn it around, and the Democrats completely fall apart in 2012.

The man is smart. I wouldn't put it against him for being able to accomplish something in Afghanistan.

I guess, but I am coming from the perspective that it's impossible to accomplish anything in Afghanistan.