tagged w/ General McChrystal
-
"General Stanley McChrystal’s recent comments about his civilian peers in the Obama administration have left the sometimes-controversial former commander of the war in Afghanistan standing in the unemployment line. To be sure, McChrystal did cross the threshold of professional decorum in today’s military and for that, he needed to be held accountable. But the General was not insubordinate. In fact, his perspective on the troubled situation within the Obama administration’s foreign policy team should be considered--and not overshadowed by its delivery or the firing."
Read more: http://www.ypnation.net/mcchrystal-and-king-who-had-no-clothes-flopping-foreign-policy-obama-administration"General Stanley McChrystal’s recent comments about his civilian peers in... more
-
-
"I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says.
He pauses a beat.
"Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it.""I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this... more
-
-
An angry President Obama removed Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal from his position as Commander of American forces in Afghanistan on Wednesday, and named as his replacement the architect of the 2007 surge in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus. President Obama said he had done so because an article in “Rolling Stone” magazine featured contemptuous quotes from the general and his staff about senior administration officials, threatening to erode trust among administration and military officials, as well as to undermine civilian control of the military.
“War is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general or president,” President Obama said. “As difficult as it is to lose General McChrystal, I believe it is the right decision for our national security.” “I welcome debate among my team,” he said, “but I won’t tolerate division.”
This piece includes color photographs, as well as the full video of President Obama's remarks.
http://disembedded.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/an-angry-obama-relieves-runaway-general-mcchrystal-of-command/An angry President Obama removed Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal from his position as... more
-
-
the current white house drama
-
-
General McChrystal’s Burning Contempt for the Puppet Obama
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 22, 2010
The farce that is the war in Afghanistan is coming apart at the seams. General Stanley McChrystal’s sharp comments about Obama, Biden, and the administration published by Rolling Stone are not so much about disrespect, as the script-reading corporate media talking heads would have it, but rather about a policy in disarray in Afghanistan.
It’s The Troops Stupid! General Stanley McChrystal’s Burning Disgust for the Puppet Obama…(VIDEO)...http://ctpatriot1970.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/its-the-troops-stupid-general-stanley-mcchrystal%E2%80%99s-burning-disgust-for-the-puppet-obama-video/
Obama the wunderbar teleprompter reader (and little else) is instructed to push the completely untenable prospect that the United States can win the so-called war in Afghanistan, a country often referred to as the graveyard of empires.General McChrystal’s Burning Contempt for the Puppet Obama
Kurt Nimmo... more
-
-
To enter and win, you must be a member of The Politicus. "Click here to create an account ". Once you are a registered member, insert your cartoon caption entry by clicking the “Add New Comment” tab in red or just by posting a comment.To enter and win, you must be a member of The Politicus. "Click here to create an... more
-
-
-
President Obama’s top commander in Afghanistan was flown to Washington on Tuesday to find out whether he will be fired, after an article in “Rolling Stone” quoted him and his staff members speaking critically about top members of President Obama’s team.
With the war effort faltering, the comments by General Stanley McChrystal illustrated the disarray and spitefulness that exists among the Afghanistan team, as well as the tensions between the president and the military. In the magazine article, General McChrystal or his aides spoke derisively of Vice President Biden, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, National Security Adviser General James L. Jones, Richard C. Holbrooke, the special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and even President Obama himself.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs refused to say outright whether General McChrystal would lose his position. Gibbs questioned the general’s judgment, calling the comments an enormous mistake, adding that military parents need to know that “the structure where they’re sending their children is one that is capable and mature enough in prosecuting a war as important as Afghanistan.”
This piece includes color photographs, a link to the “Rolling Stone” article and two videos.
http://disembedded.wordpress.com/2010/06/22/the-runaway-general-gen-mcchrystal-summoned-to-washington-over-remarks/President Obama’s top commander in Afghanistan was flown to Washington on... more
-
-
"We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat," says Afghan commander McChrystal.
March 31, 2010 |
"We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat," says top American commander.
President Obama's sneak visit to Afghanistan this weekend, although shrouded in secrecy, still received lots of prime press coverage.
At the same time, an astonishing open admission of possible US war crimes by Obama's man on the ground in Kabul, senior American and NATO commander in Afghanistan General Stanley A. McChrystal, was reported by Richard A. Oppel Jr. in the New York Times... and then promptly ignored by the rest of the mainstream media.
"We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat," McChrystal said during a recent video-conference to answer questions from troops in the field about civilian casualties.
According to the military's own figures, American and NATO troops firing from passing convoys and military checkpoints have killed 30 Afghans and wounded 80 others since last summer, but as McChrystal noted, none of the victims proved to be a danger to the troops.
Despite new rules put in place by McChrystal, aimed at reducing the killing of innocents, such shootings have not dropped off. Although fewer in number than deaths from air strikes or Special Forces operations, their continuance, as the Times noted, "has led to growing resentment among Afghans fearful of Western troops and angry at what they see as the impunity with which the troops operate -- a friction that has turned villages firmly against the occupation."
These persistent "escalation of force" episodes have "emerged as a major frustration for military commanders who believe that civilian casualties deeply undermine the American and NATO campaign in Afghanistan."
A case in point: the murder of Mohammed Yonus, a 36-year-old imam killed two months ago while commuting to a madrasa where he taught 150 students. As Oppel noted, "a military convoy raked his car with bullets, ripping open his chest as his two sons sat in the car. The shooting inflamed residents and turned his neighborhood against the occupation, elders there say."
Although General McChrystal has reduced the number of civilians killed overall — deaths from aerial attacks, for example, fell by more than a third last year — shootings from convoys and checkpoints involving American, NATO and Afghan forces continue to plague the coalition. Shooting deaths caused by convoys guarded by private security contractors - not part of the calculation — make the total number of "escalation of force deaths" far higher than just those decried by McChrystal.
As noted by blogger Allison Kilkenny - one media observer who wrote about McChystal's statement — what the general admitted to may be a war crime:
“Military brass and the warmongering elite usually skirt war crimes accusations by saying the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations aren't conventional warfare. That is to say, the US is not at war with an official army, so anyone picked up on the battlefield (which is the entire world in the War on Terror) isn't a POW. They're an enemy combatant who does not have access to the protections afforded to enemy soldiers under the Geneva Convention.
This is a tricky way to circumvent accountability, but even this clever interpretation of international law can't cover the stink of McChrystal's admission. The US is occupying Afghanistan, and while there, they are killing innocent civilians, says the highest ranking military official in the country.
So, to recap: the President of the United States visits Afghanistan to deliver personally "pointed criticism to President Hamid Karzai in a face-to-face meeting," after flying in "for an unannounced visit that reflected growing vexation with Mr. Karzai as America's military commitment to defeat the Taliban insurgency has deepened."
The president's visit comes only days after his highest ranking military official confirms in the “Paper of Record” that his military forces have killed dozens of people, none of whom posed a threat -- and other media doesn't see fit even to mention that fact?"We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever... more
-
-
Joe Biden met with CENTCOM chief Gen. David Petraeus this morning to talk about Afghanistan -- an issue that has pushed the vice president into the spotlight, landing him on the cover of the latest Newsweek.
I have an idea for how he can capitalize on all the attention, and do what generations to come will always be grateful for: resign.
The centerpiece of Newsweek's story is how Biden has become the chief White House skeptic on escalating the war in Afghanistan, specifically arguing against Gen. McChrystal's request for 40,000 more troops to pursue a counterinsurgency strategy there.
The piece, by Holly Bailey and Evan Thomas, opens with details of a September 13th national security meeting at the White House. Biden speaks up:
"Can I just clarify a factual point? How much will we spend this year on Afghanistan?" Someone provided the figure: $65 billion. "And how much will we spend on Pakistan?" Another figure was supplied: $2.25 billion. "Well, by my calculations that's a 30-to-1 ratio in favor of Afghanistan. So I have a question. Al Qaeda is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. And yet for every dollar we're spending in Pakistan, we're spending $30 in Afghanistan. Does that make strategic sense?" The White House Situation Room fell silent.
Being Greek, I'm partial to Biden's classic use of the Socratic method -- skillfully eliciting facts in a way that lets people connect the dots that show how misguided our involvement in Afghanistan has become.
It's been known for a while that Biden has been on the other side of McChrystal's desire for a big escalation of our forces there -- the New York Times reported last month that he has "deep reservations" about it. So if the president does decide to escalate, Biden, for the good of the country, should escalate his willingness to act on those reservations.
What he must not do is follow the same weak and worn-out pattern of "opposition" we've become all-too-accustomed to, first with Vietnam and then with Iraq. You know the drill: after the dust settles, and the country begins to look back and not-so-charitably wonder, "what were they thinking?" the mea-culpa-laden books start to come out. On page after regret-filled page, we suddenly hear how forceful this or that official was behind closed doors, arguing against the war, taking a principled stand, expressing "strong concern" and, yes, "deep reservations" to the president, and then going home each night distraught at the unnecessary loss of life.
Well, how about making the mea culpa unnecessary? Instead of saving it for the book, how about future author Biden unfetter his conscience in real time -- when it can actually do some good? If Biden truly believes that what we're doing in Afghanistan is not in the best interests of our national security -- and what issue is more important than that? -- it's simply not enough to claim retroactive righteousness in his memoirs.
Though it would be a crowning moment in a distinguished career, such an act of courage would likely be only the beginning. Biden would then become the natural leader of the movement to wind down this disastrous war and focus on the real dangers in Pakistan.
The number of those on both sides of the political spectrum who share Biden's skepticism is growing. In August, George Will called for the U.S. to pull out of Afghanistan and "do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent Special Forces units."
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/why-joe-biden-should-resi_b_320929.htmlJoe Biden met with CENTCOM chief Gen. David Petraeus this morning to talk about... more
-
-
President Obama told Congressional leaders that he would not substantially reduce American forces in Afghanistan or shift the mission to just hunting terroristsPresident Obama told Congressional leaders that he would not substantially reduce... more
-
