Comments on: McChrystal Teetering Towards Insubordination?

By: MichaelHarold

MichaelHarold — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:17:04 +0000

General staff are politicos by nature. They have political aspirations (how do you think they got to be generals in the first place) and they are programmed from the beginning to support the unlimited expansion of the military budget. You make money as a general, but you make your real money working in executive level positions in major corporations after you leave the military.

This is not almost subordination. It is subordination.

Obama should get Gates on the phone, line up a series of loyal successors and rotate these rogue generals out of the military and into their cushy corporate jobs as quickly as possible. Once firmly ensconced in their new corporate offices, they will be forced to keep their mouths shut for the sake of their stock options.

When in Rome . . .

By: SomeGuy

SomeGuy — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:09:16 +0000

When you look at the actions of President Obama and President Bush (instead of looking at their supporters) it is clear that he is more committed to bringing Osama bin Laden to justice than President Bush was. It is just an assumption that all these leaks are coming from the Military.

By: researcher

researcher — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 06:29:05 +0000

send more troops it is the american way

also send more money ie cash for the tribal leaders

buy them off like we did in iraq

the americans love to buy their way out of everything

works like a charm everytime

look at the great shape the nation is in

self destruct time in america

the the politicans call this a recession

it is look into a mirror time in america

naw easier to print money and borrow from the communists and then brag how great our capitalism is. pure arrogance.

vietnam all over again generals saying the same stuff. ie send more troops and win over the locals. yea that worked in nam.

capitalism a love story.

By: DetroitSam

DetroitSam — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:54:14 +0000

Can someone explain to me where we are going to get 500,000 troops? Where we are going to get 40,000 troops? Reinstitute the draft, which I favor, by the way.

Are their troops currently stored in suspended animation waiting to be re-animated?

For those who are clamoring in support of this traitorous general, why aren’t you in the military? I’m sure that among your families and friends or within your neighboohoods or within your teabagging groups there are a few hundred abled bodied men (??) who are just waiting for the opportunity serve their country in it’s fight for freedom and democracy in foreign countries.

You should be lining up even now outside of the military recruiting offices to be first in line to sign up. I have never seen a line or even a single person standing outside of the two recruiting office that I pass by daily.

What is the problem?

Afraid that you won’t be able to wear your pink panties under your uniforms?

By: earlofhuntingdon

earlofhuntingdon — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:16:30 +0000

If we significantly withdrew from Iraq and Afghanistan, Gen. McChrystal might rather sooner become Mr. McChrystal, and then no one would pay him much heed anymore, except weapons makers asking him to be a salesman. There might be a lot less to sell then, though, and even Blackwater/Xe might be giving its mercenaries pink slips.

I don’t doubt Gen. McChrystal’s expertise or his integrity or patriotism. I do wonder how he defines the limits of protecting America and whether he appreciates that the commander-in-chief can choose both to listen to and ignore even the most heartfelt advice from his generals.

The buck doesn’t stop with the general; it stops in the White House. Thankfully, it no longer stops at the OVP’s door, but once again goes all the way to the Oval Office. Pres. Kennedy’s toughest job his first year in office was to learn when to tell the generals, “NO”, and he had his brother watching his back. Obahma has Rahma doing that. Ooops.

By: earlofhuntingdon

earlofhuntingdon — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:08:52 +0000

Counter-insurgency strategy is not just for foreigners anymore.

By: macaquerman

macaquerman — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:00:02 +0000

I’m not sure where you might be living, but calling somebody your boy sure seems a lightweight basis for being branded racist.
Out here in NYC you can probably here that term used every ten minutes and applied to about everything bipedal and no one finds it offensive.

By: secularhuman

secularhuman — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:55:13 +0000

Plenty of the “guys” here disagree with Obama’s policies because they’re not liberal enough. According to your reasoning they’re all racists.

By: macaquerman

macaquerman — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:15:21 +0000

In case anybody here would like to read the report, here is a copy of the unclassified version.
http://media.washingtonpost.co.....id=topnews

There’s little in it that’s radical. Mostly it calls for COIN strategy to protect the civilian population and a rapid build-up of Afghans fighting the insurgency.
The 500,000 pair of boots called for are to come with 400,000 pair of Afghan feet in them.

By: Frank33

Frank33 — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:12:43 +0000

So Striz is part of the “White Culture”. That explains a lot.