Pro-troop group wants McChrystal to 'come clean' Urges him to explain 'frustrations,' 'mismanagement' in Afghanistan conflict
A pro-troop organization says ousted Gen. Stanley McChrystal, if he chooses, could enlighten Americans a great deal over what actually is happening on the Afghanistan battlefields of America's war on terror.
"Now that Gen. McChrystal is no longer part of the military chain of command, he is free to expose the mismanagement of the war by the Obama administration, which is what got him in trouble in the first place,” said Danny Gonzalez, director of communications for Move America Forward.
"President Obama fired General McChrystal, saying he could tolerate "debate, but not division". Looks like Obama is pretty tolerant of delay, departure, and defeat, too." - Fred Thompson
Good ol' Fred.
The Prez did the right thing in firing McChrystal. I'm not seeing much opposition about that from Repubs OR Dems. From what McChrystal says, Obama and he shared the same policy about Afghanistan. They differed on details that MC that was critical. This has happened quite often in history.
THis thread will be hijacked by conspiracy theorists before sundown
Sounded to me like a frustrated general. I think it's a wonderful thing to allow them room to express these frustrations, unfortunately, this general went over the line to this Rolling Stones reporter.
Maybe he wanted out of Afghanistan?
I disagree.
I think SM was simply frustrated by the on again off again support he was getting. Obama gave lipservice to the plan but put civilians in charge that worked at cross purposes to the stated stratagy.
In the aftermath, what we see is, more of the same from Obama. he has not dealt with Holbrook and Eikenberry at all. they are still in place and still not on board with the plan.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
I too would be interested to know why he feels the way he does. Not so much why he said it, that part is obvious, as it has been said, he was apparently frustrated with the plans the administration is putting into place. Any administration would do well to heed the advice of the commanders on the ground in any theater of war. Especially a president with no prior military experience, training or even scholarly learning of war strategies whatsoever. I want to know exactly what the general disagreed with and why. But that will not likely be known until his retirement.
__________________ You can't reach the world with your talents. People are sick and tired of religious talents. People need a Holy Ghost annointed church with real fruits to reach out and touch their lives. ~ Pastor Burrell Crabtree
In fact I think that the insinuation of "hateful" Pentecostals is coming mostly from the fertile imaginations of bitter, backslidden ex Apostolics who are constantly trying to find a way to justify their actions. ~ strait shooter
The Prez did the right thing in firing McChrystal. I'm not seeing much opposition about that from Repubs OR Dems. From what McChrystal says, Obama and he shared the same policy about Afghanistan. They differed on details that MC that was critical. This has happened quite often in history.
He didn't say anything that over the top. Obama fired him because of his arrogance, that is it. He didn't give one care about our troops. I'm also hearing that he took the opportunity to keep Patreus tied up for the 2012 election. Not saying that was his main reason, but the word/speculation is going around.
I too would be interested to know why he feels the way he does. Not so much why he said it, that part is obvious, as it has been said, he was apparently frustrated with the plans the administration is putting into place. Any administration would do well to heed the advice of the commanders on the ground in any theater of war. Especially a president with no prior military experience, training or even scholarly learning of war strategies whatsoever. I want to know exactly what the general disagreed with and why. But that will not likely be known until his retirement.
I think SM was simply frustrated by the on again off again support he was getting. Obama gave lipservice to the plan but put civilians in charge that worked at cross purposes to the stated stratagy.
In the aftermath, what we see is, more of the same from Obama. he has not dealt with Holbrook and Eikenberry at all. they are still in place and still not on board with the plan.
That's one perspective.
Guess we'll know when he speaks, which probably won't happen anytime soon, unless he retires suddenly.
He didn't say anything that over the top. Obama fired him because of his arrogance, that is it. He didn't give one care about our troops. I'm also hearing that he took the opportunity to keep Patreus tied up for the 2012 election. Not saying that was his main reason, but the word/speculation is going around.
Not an objective bone in your body is there.
For Pete's sake, even Karl Rove said the firing was the right thing (accepted resignation). Do you have a transcript of the Stones editorial yet?
As far as saying he doesn't care about troops? That's just outrageous.
Speculation going around? LOL I guess ANYTHING and EVERYTHING can be speculated around.
The Prez did the right thing in firing McChrystal. I'm not seeing much opposition about that from Repubs OR Dems. From what McChrystal says, Obama and he shared the same policy about Afghanistan. They differed on details that MC that was critical. This has happened quite often in history.
First of all you quoted Pressing On.
Second of all, I have stated repeatedly that the General had to go.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Linear Mode
