Professional Soldiers ®
Page 1 of 4 1 23 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Middle East (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=109)
-   -   Top General In Afghan War: US Envoy Betrayed Me (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29394)

Richard 06-21-2010 22:40
Top General In Afghan War: US Envoy Betrayed Me
 
Whoa! :eek:

Richard :munchin

Top General In Afghan War: US Envoy Betrayed Me
AP, 21 June 2010

The top U.S. war commander in Afghanistan told an interviewer he felt betrayed by the man the White House chose to be his diplomatic partner, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100622/...rystal_enemies

Basenshukai 06-22-2010 00:54
Soap opera drama. Nothing to see here. Moving along.

LongWire 06-22-2010 04:09
US general McChrystal sorry for Rolling Stone 'error'
 
Not sure why he thought that they would cut him any slack.......But that's why I don't make the big bucks........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_...a/10372558.stm


Quote:
The top US commander in Afghanistan has apologised for his role in a magazine article that mocks senior Obama administration officials and diplomats.

Gen Stanley McChrystal said the article in Rolling Stone showed "poor judgement" and a lack of integrity.

In the article Gen McChrystal said he felt betrayed by US ambassador to Kabul, Karl Eikenberry.

The general's aides mock Vice-President Joe Biden and say Gen McChrystal was "disappointed" in President Obama.

The apology came as a US congressional report said the US military had been giving tens of millions of dollars to Afghan security firms who were channelling the money to warlords.

'Clown'
The Rolling Stone article - The Runaway General - is due out on Friday but Gen McChrystal has quickly sought to limit the damage.

He said in a statement on Tuesday: "I extend my sincerest apology for this profile.

"It was a mistake reflecting poor judgement and should never have happened."

He adds: "Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honour and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard.

"I have enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his national security team and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting this war and I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome."

Nato spokesman James Appathurai said on Tuesday that the article was "unfortunate" but that the organisation's Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen had "full confidence in General McChrystal as the Nato commander and in his strategy".

The BBC's Quentin Sommerville in northern Afghanistan says the article highlights the long-suspected divisions between the US military and administration officials.

One of the main targets of the article appears to be Mr Eikenberry.

Gen McChrystal says he felt "betrayed" by the ambassador during the White House debate on troop requests for Afghanistan.

The general says: "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before.

"Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so'."

Gen McChrystal also appears to joke in response to a question about the vice-president.

"Are you asking about Vice-President Biden?" McChrystal asks. 'Who's that?"

An aide then says: "Biden? Did you say: Bite Me?"

Another aide refers to a key Oval Office meeting with the president a year ago.

The aide says it was "a 10-minute photo op", adding: "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was... he didn't seem very engaged. The boss was pretty disappointed."

Gen McChrystal himself says: "I found that time painful. I was selling an unsellable position."

Another aide refers to national security adviser, James Jones, as a "clown stuck in 1985".

Of an e-mail from US special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke, Gen McChrystal says: "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke... I don't even want to open it."

Last year's Afghan strategy review by the new president was detailed and drawn out, with Gen McChrystal finally getting an additional 30,000 US troops from Mr Obama.

Analysts say Gen McChrystal disagreed with the pledge to start bringing troops home in July 2011.

The Rolling Stone article reflects the fraught nature of the diplomatic process in Afghanistan.

On Monday, it was reported that the UK's most senior diplomat in Afghanistan, special envoy Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, was taking extended leave amid reports of clashes with senior Nato and US officials.

Meanwhile the US congressional report says trucks carrying supplies to US troops allegedly pay Afghan security firms to ensure their safe passage in dangerous areas.

The convoys are attacked if payments are not made, it is alleged.

Bill Harsey 06-22-2010 05:07
The best quotes may be yet to come in the Rolling Stone thing and if true are well said.

Then there's that pesky protocol thing...

Richard 06-22-2010 05:35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basenshukai (Post 336079)
Soap opera drama. Nothing to see here. Moving along.
Maybe not. :confused:

An Obama administration official says the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan has been summoned to Washington to explain his controversial comments about colleagues in a recent interview.

The official says Gen. Stanley McChrystal has been directed to attend the monthly White House meeting on Afghanistan and Pakistan in person Wednesday rather than over a secure video teleconference, so he can discuss his comments with President Barack Obama and top Pentagon officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010...er=rss&emc=rss

This would be an opportunity for a GO to resign on principle, retire, and become an ardent critic of an administration's policies.

And so it goes...

Richard :munchin

Paslode 06-22-2010 06:46
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...200813_pf.html

Quote:
Gen. Stanley McChrystal coming to Washington to explain anti-administration comments

By Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, June 22, 2010; 8:18 AM

KABUL -- The top U.S. general in Afghanistan was summoned to Washington for a White House meeting after apologizing Tuesday for flippant and dismissive remarks about top Obama administration officials involved in Afghanistan policy.

The remarks in an article in this week's in Rolling Stone magazine are certain to increase tension between the White House and Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.

The profile of McChrystal, , titled the "Runaway General," also raises fresh questions about the judgment and leadership style of the commander Obama appointed last year in an effort to turn around a worsening conflict.

McChrystal and some of his senior advisors are quoted criticizing top administration officials, at times in starkly derisive terms. An anonymous McChrystal aide is quoted calling national security adviser James Jones a "clown," who remains "stuck in 1985."

Referring to Richard Holbrooke, Obama's senior envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, one McChrystal aide is quoted saying: "The Boss says he's like a wounded animal. Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous."

On one occasion, McChrystal appears to react with exasperation when he receives an e-mail from Holbrooke, saying, "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke. I don't even want to read it."

U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, a retired three-star general, isn't spared. Referring to a leaked cable from Eikenberry that expressed concerns about the trustworthiness of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, McChrystal is quoted as having said: "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.'"

A U.S. embassy spokeswoman said she had no immediate comment on the piece.

The story also features an exchange in which McChrystal and some of his aides appear to mock Vice President Biden, who opposed McChrystal's troop surge recommendation last year and instead urged instead for a more focused emphasis on counter-terrorism operations.

"Are you asking me about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal asks the profile's reporter a at one point, laughing. "Who's that?"

"Biden?" an unnamed aide is quoted as saying. "Did you say Bite me?"

Lt. Col. Joseph Breasseale, a U.S. military spokesman, said McChrystal called Biden and other senior administration officials Tuesday morning in reference to the article. "After these discussions, he decided to travel to the U.S. for a meeting," the spokesman said in an e-mail.

A senior administration official in Washington said McChrystal had been summoned to the White House to explain his remarks. The general will attend a regular meeting on Afghan-Pakistan strategy scheduled for Wednesday. Normally, he would have participated in the session via videoconference.

The magazine hits newsstands Friday and could be posted online earlier in the week. The Washington Post received an advance copy of the article from its author, Michael Hastings, a freelance journalist who has written for the Post.

"I extend my sincerest apology for this profile," McChrystal said in a statement issued Tuesday morning. "It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and it should have never happened."

The timing of the piece could hardly be worse. Amid a flurry of bad news in Afghanistan and a sharp rise in NATO casualties, U.S. lawmakers and senior officials from NATO allied countries are asking increasingly sharp questions about the U.S.-led war strategy.

Dutch and Canadian troops are scheduled to pull out within the next year. And the White House has said it will start drawing down U.S. forces next July.

The magazine story shows that McChrystal is also facing criticism from some of his own troops who have grown frustrated with new rules that force commanders be extraordinarily judicious in using lethal force.

A few weeks ago, according to the magazine, the general traveled to a small outpost in Kandahar Province, in southern Afghanistan, to meet with a unit of soldiers reeling from the loss of a comrade, 23-year-old Cpl. Michael Ingram.

The corporal was killed in a booby-trapped house that some of the unit's commanders had unsuccessfully sought permission to blow up.

One soldier at the outpost showed Hastings, who was traveling with the general, a written directive instructing troops to "patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourself with lethal force."

During a tense meeting with Ingram's platoon, one sergeant tells McChrystal: "Sir, some of the guys here, sir, think we're losing, sir."

McChrystal has championed a counterinsurgency strategy that prioritizes protecting the population as a means to marginalize and ultimately defeat the insurgency. Because new rules sharply restrict the circumstances under which air strikes and other lethal operations that have resulted in civilian casualties can be conducted, some soldiers say the strategy has left them more exposed.

June is on track to be the deadliest month for NATO troops in Afghanistan since the war began nearly nine years ago. At least 63 NATO troops have been killed so far this month, including 10 who died Monday in a helicopter crash and a series of attacks.

In his statement, McChrystal says he has "enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his national security team."

"Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity," the general said. "What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard."

dr. mabuse 06-22-2010 08:40
*

Richard 06-22-2010 08:50
Quote:
...his golf excursions ( during the oil leak at that ). :mad:
And that's relative to the price of Lung Ching in China how? :confused:

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Utah Bob 06-22-2010 09:07
Obama "furious" at McChrystal
 
Interview with the top rated hard news publication Rolling Stone? Sure why not? How about a music video too?
Brilliant!
:rolleyes:

Quote:
WASHINGTON - The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan has been summoned to Washington to explain derogatory comments about President Barack Obama and his colleagues, administration officials said Tuesday.

The move came hours after General Stanley McChrystal apologized for comments by his aides insulting some of President Barack Obama's closest advisers in an article to be published in Rolling Stone magazine.

In the magazine profile, his aides are quoted mocking Vice President Joe Biden and Richard Holbrooke, the special U.S. representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

The first victim in the growing controversy was the Pentagon's PR official who set up the interview with McChrystal. NBC reported that Duncan Boothby, a civilian member of the general's public relations team was "asked to resign."

According to administration officials, McChrystal was ordered to attend the monthly White House meeting on Afghanistan and Pakistan in person Wednesday rather than over a secure video teleconference. He'll be expected to explain his comments to Obama and top Pentagon officials, these officials said.

President Obama was described as "furious" about the remarks while the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen told McChrystal of his "deep disappointment" in a conversation late Monday, a spokesman said.


Video
‘Poor judgment’
June 22: Sen. John Kerry wonders about his ability to have a relationship with Obama and the rest of the National Security staff.

The Daily Rundown
Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Tuesday that he had confidence on McChrystal's ability as a general. However, he said the issue was whether the article would impact his ability to have a relationship with Obama and the rest of the National Security staff.

Kerry, speaking on MSNBC's "Daily Rundown," described the remarks in the article as a "mistake," and "poor judgement" by the general and some of his staff. He declined to say whether McChrystal should step down.

In Kabul, an Afghan government spokesman said President Hamid Karzai backed the general. "The president strongly supports General McChrystal and his strategy in Afghanistan and believes he is the best commander the United States has sent to Afghanistan over the last nine years," Waheed Omer told Reuters.
Entire article is here.

dr. mabuse 06-22-2010 09:13
*

wch84 06-22-2010 09:25
I'm mystified by the General and his staff. Poor SA in regard to Rolling Stone, perhaps? I subscribed to Rolling Stone a few years ago, being a music lover and all. Needless to say, I canceled my subscription after the first year. Every issue saw a new article bashing President Bush, the military, etc. Very little music coverage and way too much politics for a magazine supposedly covering the music industry.

Rolling Stone is the absolute worst media source that General McCrystal and his staff could have granted access to. By the accounts I've read about McCrystal and his discipline, I have a hard time believing this was a mistake. We're a year out from the self-imposed drawdown date that the POTUS dictated. (Warning: speculation ahead) Perhaps McCrystal sees the writing on the wall and wanted a way out?

LongWire 06-22-2010 09:53
Quote:
Originally Posted by wch84 (Post 336126)
Perhaps McCrystal sees the writing on the wall and wanted a way out?
I'm guessing that you don't know the General very well, or at least don't understand how General's operate. In the very least being fired by the POTUS is not something, that I would think, that General McChrystal would want on his resume. One doesn't work so long and hard as someone like Gen McChrystal, just to throw it all away and blame it all on the media. Regardless of anyone's take on the Politics, Gen McChrystal would fall on his own sword before going out of his way to get fired like this.

Utah Bob 06-22-2010 09:56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard (Post 336092)
Maybe not.

This would be an opportunity for a GO to resign on principle, retire, and become an ardent critic of an administration's policies.

And so it goes...

Richard :munchin
Exactly what I was thinking. Walk into the Oval Office resignation in hand.:mad:

The Reaper 06-22-2010 10:13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utah Bob (Post 336131)
Exactly what I was thinking. Walk into the Oval Office resignation in hand.:mad:
I suspect that he has already done that.

It will be up to the POTUS whether to accept it or not.

TR

Richard 06-22-2010 10:16
Quote:
The oil leak referral was an askance view at grumblings over the BP exec at the yacht races while oil is gushing, but, IIRC, P'BO has plenty of time for golf.
Sorry - I missed the sarcasm in your original statement - I think the lack of pink font and use of an angry emoticon threw me.

Quote:
I wasn't aware the topic lanes were narrowing so much around here.
They aren't - that's just a perception on your part in this instance. ;)

Richard

head 06-22-2010 10:37
I've read the RS article. Most of the damning statements were from his aides telling the reporter what their "Boss" had previously said about the politicians in charge of this war. Perhaps Gen. McChrystal thought that only he was on the record - either way, the article makes him look like a rogue general trying to bully Washington into adopting a failed strategy and, at the end, the author even hints that VP Biden had the right gameplan all along. I kinda feel bad for the General, but I scratch my head when trying to figure out what he must have been thinking to let this happen...

DubyaDubyaDubya.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236

The Reaper 06-22-2010 10:43
Quote:
Originally Posted by head (Post 336143)
I've read the RS article. Most of the damning statements were from his aides telling the reporter what their "Boss" had previously said about the politicians in charge of this war. Perhaps Gen. McChrystal thought that only he was on the record - either way, the article makes him look like a rogue general trying to bully Washington into adopting a failed strategy and, at the end, the author even hints that VP Biden had the right gameplan all along. I kinda feel bad for the General, but I scratch my head when trying to figure out what he must have been thinking to let this happen...

DubyaDubyaDubya.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236
You know, maybe they let him sit around as an embed till the point where they started to think he was a potted plant or even a buddy?

Obviously, they said a lot of things that should not be said in front of a reporter. Surprisingly candid and unprofessional for McChrystal and his staff.

The real question at this point is whether Obama can afford to cut him away and put another guy in, increasing his buy-in to the success or failure of OEF. Does he want to own the problem any more than he already does?

We will soon see....

TR

head 06-22-2010 10:57
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Reaper (Post 336144)
You know, maybe they let him sit around as an embed till the point where they started to think he was a potted plant or even a buddy?

Obviously, they said a lot of things that should not be said in front of a reporter. Surprisingly candid and unprofessional for McChrystal and his staff.

The real question at this point is whether Obama can afford to cut him away and put another guy in, increasing his buy-in to the success or failure of OEF. Does he want to own the problem any more than he already does?

We will soon see....

TR
No question that the reporter is talented in gathering information... from the last people you would imagine - men, I assume, who have worked on the flipside of the coin.

If President Obama sticks with McChrystal, the reason for failure in Afghanistan will be percieved as the lack of support/cohesion from his subordinates, the POTUS' lack of leadership, and the POTUS will receive much of the blame for not replacing him.

However, if he replaces McChrystal, he will be able to cast more blame on McChrystal's strategy and it will also allow him to extend his impossible Jully 2011 deadline due to giving time for the replacement to implement whatever new vision is decided...

abc_123 06-22-2010 14:28
What if Gates pulls the trigger? Will that insulate the WH and allow the President to fence sit?

The SecDef came out with comments today that included:

""I read with concern the profile piece on Gen. Stanley McChrystal in the upcoming edition of 'Rolling Stone' magazine. I believe that Gen. McChrystal made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment in this case. We are fighting a war against al Qaeda and its extremist allies, who directly threaten the United States, Afghanistan, and our friends and allies around the world. Going forward, we must pursue this mission with a unity of purpose. Our troops and coalition partners are making extraordinary sacrifices on behalf of our security, and our singular focus must be on supporting them and succeeding in Afghanistan without such distractions. Gen. McChrystal has apologized to me and is similarly reaching out to others named in this article to apologize to them as well. I have recalled Gen. McChrystal to Washington to discuss this in person."

Roguish Lawyer 06-22-2010 14:53
Amazing that this reporter could spend that much time with GEN McChrystal and his staff and still be so completely uninformed. Well, maybe not.

Utah Bob 06-22-2010 15:16
Quote:
Originally Posted by abc_123 (Post 336173)
What if Gates pulls the trigger? Will that insulate the WH and allow the President to fence sit?

The SecDef came out with comments today that included:

""I read with concern the profile piece on Gen. Stanley McChrystal in the upcoming edition of 'Rolling Stone' magazine. I believe that Gen. McChrystal made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment in this case. We are fighting a war against al Qaeda and its extremist allies, who directly threaten the United States, Afghanistan, and our friends and allies around the world. Going forward, we must pursue this mission with a unity of purpose. Our troops and coalition partners are making extraordinary sacrifices on behalf of our security, and our singular focus must be on supporting them and succeeding in Afghanistan without such distractions. Gen. McChrystal has apologized to me and is similarly reaching out to others named in this article to apologize to them as well. I have recalled Gen. McChrystal to Washington to discuss this in person."
That is a whopper of a statement by Gates. In most cases a speech like that from the Sec would activate the trap door and the General Officer referenced would be down the chute and out in the cold.

LarryW 06-22-2010 15:34
When I hear about the Gen'ls "staff", aren't we talking about senior O5's and O6s? Maybe an O7 thrown in for good measure...possibly Air Force or Marine or Navy Senior officers, maybe even Canadian or British "staff"? Are all these people politically illiterate? I have a problem beleving the Gen'l wasn't aware of the exchange. And furthermore, what's Rolling Stone magazine dong in A-stan anyway? What next? Road & Track? Good Housekeeping? Field & Stream? :eek:

Pete 06-22-2010 15:56
But the big question is.....
 
were the statements true?

Don't see much chatter about that one.

Utah Bob 06-22-2010 16:06
Well Newsweek has decided he needs to go. And they're experts.
I guess that's all she wrote.

Source

Quote:
Why Military Code Demands McChrystal's Resignation

The most important issue at hand in the furor over Gen. Stanley McChrystal's acerbic comments in Rolling Stone is the central one in a democracy: civilian control over the military.

As upset as certain military officers have been with the Obama White House—as much as they like McChrystal's can-do spirit—this was a seriously can't-do moment. No one can quite believe that McChyrstal would be so stupid as to give this interview, which McChrystal himself this morning conceded in a statement was "bad judgment." One retired but informed military source I reached speculates that McChrystal will offer his resignation and President Obama is likely to accept it. I can't independently confirm this, but it sure sounds right to me. The only caveat is that Obama operates on his own timetable, not the media's. He will take his time and make a decision based on what he thinks is best for the overall effort in Afghanistan. He won't sack his commanding general unless he—with Defense Secretary Bob Gates's advice—thinks he is now more a liability than an asset to the war effort, which McChrystal himself described as a "bleeding ulcer."

View a gallery of the longest--and shortest--American wars.

The reason McChrystal must go is that this isn't his first time in trouble for talking out of school in a way that can fairly be described as insubordinate. Last fall, McChrystal gave a speech in London and afterward was asked if he could support the Biden Plan: fewer troops for Afghanistan, with a stepped-up use of Predator drones. He said "no." In other words, the commanding general in the region was saying that if the president sided with the vice president, he couldn't support the policy. Many in the White House last year viewed this as insubordination.

Obama met McChrystal on Air Force One on the tarmac in Copenhagen to discuss the incident. The president decided that McChrystal had been naive about the media and true blame lay with Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As I recount in The Promise, Obama pushed back hard. He summoned Mullen to the Oval Office upon returning to Washington and dressed him down for allowing McChrystal to box him in—telling him he wanted that conduct changed "here and now." When I later asked the president if he had been jammed by the Pentagon, he replied, "I neither confirm nor deny that I was jammed by the Pentagon."

This time it's clearly not Mullen's fault, which is why he's not likely to be a McChrystal ally. He is more likely to view Gen. David Rodriguez (or perhaps another senior general) as a suitable replacement. Having been burned once by Stanley McChrystal, the president probably will not allow himself to be burned again. The military code—and American democratic traditions—all but demand that he accept the general's resignation of his command.

LongWire 06-22-2010 17:00
Damn.....Even the TB are now using it as an IO Win..........

Sigaba 06-22-2010 17:01
[President] 'angry' after reading McChrystal's remarks
 
Source is here.
Quote:
Obama 'angry' after reading McChrystal's remarks
By the CNN Wire Staff
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

* NEW:McChrystal has submitted resignation, Joe Klein says
* Gibbs says 'all options are on the table' in deciding McChrystal's fate
* Obama 'angry' after reading McChrystal story
* Rolling Stone article appears to show McChrystal as strongly critical of the administration

(CNN) -- President Barack Obama was "angry" after reading Gen. Stanley McChrystal's remarks about colleagues in a Rolling Stone article, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.

McChrystal -- the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan -- has been recalled to Washington to explain his actions to the president. He is expected to meet with Obama in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Gibbs said. Gibbs refused to speculate about McChrystal's fate, but told reporters "all options are on the table."

McChrystal has already submitted his resignation, Time magazine's Joe Klein told CNN Tuesday, citing an unnamed source. CNN is working to confirm Klein's information.

The White House will have more to say after Wednesday's meeting, Gibbs said. He noted, however, that McChrystal did not take part in a teleconference Obama had with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and other top officials on Tuesday.

The "magnitude and graveness" of McChrystal's mistake in conducting the interview for the article were "profound," Gibbs said. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said McChrystal had "made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment."

Several elected officials have strongly criticized McChrystal but deferred to the president on the politically sensitive question of whether the general should keep his position. A couple of key congressmen, however, have openly called for McChrystal's removal.

McChrystal apologized Tuesday for the profile, in which he and his staff appear to mock top civilian officials, including the vice president. Two defense officials said the general fired a press aide over the article, 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, writer Michael Hastings 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, France, 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 does not directly criticize Obama in the article, but Hastings writes that the general and Obama "failed to connect" from the outset. 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.

Later, McChrystal's first one-on-one meeting with Obama "was a 10-minute photo op," Hastings writes, quoting an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run his f---ing war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss (McChrystal) was disappointed."

The article goes on to paint McChrystal as a man who "has managed to piss off almost everyone with a stake in the conflict," including U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, special representative to Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke and national security adviser Jim Jones. Obama is not named as one of McChrystal's "team of rivals."

Of Eikenberry, who railed against McChrystal's strategy in Afghanistan in a cable leaked to The New York Times in January, the general is quoted as saying, "'Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, "I told you so.'"

Hastings writes in the profile that McChrystal has a "special skepticism" for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating Taliban members into Afghan society and the administration's point man for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"At one point on his trip to Paris, McChrystal checks his BlackBerry, according to the article. 'Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke,' he groans. 'I don't even want to open it.' He clicks on the message and reads the salutation out loud, then stuffs the BlackBerry back in his pocket, not bothering to conceal his annoyance.

"'Make sure you don't get any of that on your leg,' an aide jokes, referring to the e-mail."

Both Democrats and Republicans have been strongly critical of McChrystal in the wake of the story. House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, D-Wisconsin, called McChrystal the latest in a "long list of reckless, renegade generals who haven't seemed to understand that their role is to implement policy, not design it."

McChrystal is "contemptuous" of civilian authority and has demonstrated "a bull-headed refusal to take other people's judgments into consideration."

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-North Dakota, became the first member of the Senate Democratic leadership to call for McChrystal to step down, telling CNN that the remarks were "unbelievably inappropriate and just can't be allowed to stand."

Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin, D-Michigan, deferred to Obama on the question of a possible McChrystal resignation. He said the controversy was sending a message of "confusion" to troops in the field. I think it has "a negative effect" on the war effort, he said.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, urged a cooling off period before a final decision is rendered on the general. My "impression is that all of us would be best served by just backing off and staying cool and calm and not sort of succumbing to the normal Washington twitter about this for the next 24 hours."

Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Jim Webb of Virginia -- also key senators on defense and foreign policy issues -- were each strongly critical of McChrystal's remarks, but noted that the general's future is a decision for Obama to make.

Karzai weighed in from abroad, urging Obama to keep McChrystal as the U.S. commander in Afghanistan. The government in Kabul believes McChrystal is a man of strong integrity who has a strong understanding of the Afghan people and their culture, Karzai spokesman Waheed Omar said.

A U.S. military official said Tuesday that McChrystal has spoken to Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Adm. Mike Mullen and other officials referenced in the story, including Holbrooke, Eikenberry and Jones.

An official at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul said Eikenberry and McChrystal "are both fully committed" to Obama's Afghan strategy and are working together to implement the plan. "We have seen the article and General McChrystal has already spoken to it," according to a statement from an embassy official, making reference to McChrystal's apology.

"I have enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his national security team, and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting this war and I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome," McChrystal said in the closing to his apology.

Rolling Stone executive editor Eric Bates, however, struck a less optimistic tone during an interview with CNN on Tuesday.

The comments made by McChrystal and other top military aides during the interview were "not off-the-cuff remarks," he said. They "knew what they were doing when they granted the access." The story shows "a deep division" and "war within the administration" over strategy in Afghanistan, he contended.

McChrystal and his staff "became aware" that the Rolling Stone article would be controversial before it was published, Hastings told CNN Tuesday. He said he "got word from (McChrystal's) staff ... that there was some concern" about possible fallout from the story.

Obama tapped McChrystal to head the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan in the spring of 2009 shortly after dismissing Gen. David McKiernan.

CNN's Suzanne Malveaux, Barbara Starr, Dana Bash and Alan Silverleib contributed to this report.

Richard 06-22-2010 17:16
Lead story on the major news networks tonight - the 'fox' was apparently 'in the henhouse' for so long due to the Icelandic volcano's closing of the European airspace and he couldn't leave.

Here's the front page for tomorrow's Stars and Stripes.

McChrystal forces Obama into a no-win situation

President Barack Obama faces two grim choices on Wednesday: Fire Gen. Stanley McChrystal and risk looking like he’s lost control of the war in Afghanistan. Or keep him and risk looking like he’s lost control of his generals.

http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-e...ation-1.108154

Could this Rolling Stone article be the real reason GEN Petraeus was stressed and fainted before Congress last week? :rolleyes:

If McChrystal is releived/resigns - any thoughts on who'd be his replacement...or is this one of those situations like we used to experience whenever the Soviet Premiership changed hands? :confused:

And so it goes...

Richard:munchin

alright4u 06-22-2010 17:52
Reply:
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard (Post 336199)
Lead story on the major news networks tonight - the 'fox' was apparently 'in the henhouse' for so long due to the Icelandic volcano's closing of the European airspace and he couldn't leave.

Here's the front page for tomorrow's Stars and Stripes.

McChrystal forces Obama into a no-win situation

President Barack Obama faces two grim choices on Wednesday: Fire Gen. Stanley McChrystal and risk looking like he’s lost control of the war in Afghanistan. Or keep him and risk looking like he’s lost control of his generals.

http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-e...ation-1.108154

Could this Rolling Stone article be the real reason GEN Petraeus was stressed and fainted before Congress last week? :rolleyes:

If McChrystal is releived/resigns - any thoughts on who'd be his replacement...or is this one of those situations like we used to experience whenever the Soviet Premiership changed hands? :confused:

And so it goes...

Richard:munchin
Frankly,. I would not have the Gen's job. I would refuse to work for this admin. That is me. Who wants to be the next Abrams?

abc_123 06-22-2010 19:27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete (Post 336187)
were the statements true?

Don't see much chatter about that one.
If they are denied and called "misquotes" or "misinterpretations" that doesn't necessarily mean that they are not true. But, when no sort of rebuttal is offered, well that speaks volumes.

Ret10Echo 06-22-2010 20:00
Every been in one of those "We won't let you quit and we aren't going to fire you" jobs?

Perhaps the General did not care to be the one to lower the American flag and depart IAW the "rigid timeline".

An exit strategy.



(this of course is a massive stretch)

Penn 06-22-2010 20:29
Quote:
Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement that "it would be a grave mistake" to allow the controversy over the article to distract attention from the war effort. "Now is not the time for Washington to be sidetracked by chatter," Kerry said. "Everyone needs to take a deep breath."
Kerry as peace maker; You now are 100% assured that the General stays, and the WH redirect the possible failure on to the General/Military, thereby, clearing the path to the 2012 elections with a story that allows"The O" to side step responsibility. The prize isn't Afghanistan, its being reelected and having the ability to create policy.

head 06-22-2010 20:41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 336213)
So could Biden have had the right plan all along, or is that just the author's opinion...?
You can sense that it is the author's opinion.

From what I recall, VP Biden's plan was to have his cake and eat it too - he wanted to start decreasing troop levels in A-stan and abandon COIN/FID, but still support the war by increasing the use of drones and CT assets. IMO, this would've just turned into a bigger game of "Whack-a-mole" worse than what we are already doing.

As for the author's opinion, his opinion on counterinsurgency strategies means as much to me as Britney Spear's opinion on alternative fuel sources.

SF18C 06-23-2010 00:01
I worked for Stanley and his professionalism, patriotism and selfless –service are beyond reproach!

Hmmmm… how to say this, I think Stan KNEW/KNOWS exactly what he was doing all along! Stan is very astute to reporters, the press, and the scuttlebutt. His SA is Jedi-like! I think this is a one man exit strategy from a no-win situation combined with red star clusters over the problem area!

But whadda I know???:confused:

akv 06-23-2010 00:38
Brer Rabbit?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF18C
I worked for Stanley and his professionalism, patriotism and selfless –service are beyond reproach! Hmmmm… how to say this, I think Stan KNEW/KNOWS exactly what he was doing all along! Stan is very astute to reporters, the press, and the scuttlebutt. His SA is Jedi-like! I think this is a one man exit strategy from a no-win situation combined with red star clusters over the problem area!
This makes sense. McChrystal's writings seem to indicate a shrewd, disciplined, and calculating mind. I think the choice of Rolling Stone is actually a deliberate shot at Obama's " Rock Star" image. IMHO, the General decided he wasn't going to get the support or the time he needed from this administration, he knows his adversary is a patholgical Narcissist and will bite. ( In contrast to Obama's tizzy, imagine if the POTUS instead of taking the bait, showed some real leadership and just said, " ahh it's a tough war, My man Stan is just blowing off some steam")

Instead, McCrystal has decided to go out with a bang to catch the attention of the American people, and pin the outcome of this war to this administration, He knows there will be a media frenzy, this was an ambush. Obama will look like a loser any way you cut it. He put McChrystal in charge, he can't control him, what a loser, or if they reconcile, then he looks even weaker. At the end of the day maybe this ludicrous pledge to leave by 2011 is addressed.

So maybe I need a pointy tinfoil cap, but I think the General decided to fall on his sword, is trying to setup better ROE for his replacement, and is trying to cost Obama a second term on the way out.

Dozer523 06-23-2010 06:49
Quote:
Originally Posted by akv (Post 336259)
This makes sense. To gain that much spin the rotation of the universe will have to be reversed.
So maybe I need a pointy tinfoil cap . . . Most definitely.
No one is that Machiavellian. This is the same General who kicked ass and took names in the Green Bean coffee shop (how Patton-esque)
Run off at the mouth general and his Imperial staff. (MacAurthur-esque).
I can barely wait for his "Old Soldiers Never Die . . .

JAGO 06-23-2010 06:53
I would like to think Stan planned all of this, but I doubt it. My two cents:

Over the years the PAOs have always come up with media plans that usually ended up with bad results (think Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman, and all the other times you would have hoped the reporter is objective, but they get their jabs in anyway).

Newsweek reported RS (their old reporter) approached Stan's "people" (read PAO) and somehow got in. For the life of me, back in the old days nobody in a command position would trust letting RS or any other similar "journalist" into the circle and even object to having them rammed down the command's throat. My be is, that with the current admin, RS enjoys more of "mainstream" status amongst "journalists". At times I remember, DoD or DA would jam a major ("credible") news source down our throats - but every time bad things happend in one sense or another (typically OPSEC violations - TTP or C2 relationships) and stuff got into the public domain that we couldn't counter or comment upon, because that would only highlight the info.

RS had reservations about the war and hoped to validate those. I am sure that was their intent going in....

RS got in, in Paris. The staff was drinking and they "mentioned" stuff they shouldn't. A big mistake. When it was time to leave Paris, RS was stranded by the volcano eruption and my bet is that the PAO allowed RS to continue to trail. Big mistake. Soon, staff started to overlook RS in the AO (big mistake) RS was able to approach staff during down time and brought up "what you said back in Paris" and develop add'n details. Staff should have refused further comment.

My guess is RS got a couple of 15-30 minute interviews with Stan and a couple of candid comments (that were nevertheless still respectfull to the NCA and POTUS).

The reporter then was able to "weave" the staff comments a(ttributed by staff to Stan) along with those remarks he acutally made, into a typical piece critical of the war effort. The staff comments "sexed up" the article and even though RS is left leaning - they still are after big $. The reporter got them that.

Sadly this has happened before - and is all too typical of how we shoot ourselves in the foot.

Bottom line: Never trust a commie, never trust an ex-wife, and never, ever trust the press.

Again, I hope I am wrong. If this is not a cluster f... but rather part of a grander plan, I will be really happy. Stan is a good man.
v/r
phil

akv 06-23-2010 07:23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dozer523
No one is that Machiavellian.
Fair point, history shows IKE and Truman made the right calls in Sicily and Korea respectively, I guess we will see how Obama is judged in time.

craigepo 06-23-2010 07:32
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF18C (Post 336258)
I worked for Stanley and his professionalism, patriotism and selfless –service are beyond reproach!

Hmmmm… how to say this, I think Stan KNEW/KNOWS exactly what he was doing all along! Stan is very astute to reporters, the press, and the scuttlebutt. His SA is Jedi-like! I think this is a one man exit strategy from a no-win situation combined with red star clusters over the problem area!

But whadda I know???:confused:
It would be a helluva way to kick off a political campaign.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:13.
Page 1 of 4 1 23 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®