Thursday, June 24, 2010
Obama's war with His military
6/24/2010 11:28:00 AM |
Posted by
JoeSettler |
Edit Post
The whole McChrystal-Obama thing is very interesting on so many levels, I can't even begin to touch on most of them there are so many.
I read the Rolling Stone article. I read an interview with the author of the article.
The impression I got out of it is that many if not most of the “best” quotes came from when McChrystal and his friends were out plastered in a bar.
Regardless of when/how it was gotten, it’s clear that many in top military leadership positions don’t think much of Obama.
It’s also clear that Obama doesn’t think much of his military men.
He and Biden certainly didn’t think much of General Petraeus before they came into White House power when Obama publicly lambasted him in typical Obama fashion - telling him he did a great job while simultaneously telling him he (and everyone else) failed. Biden also didn't think to highly of Petraeus either.
But now Obama has appointed General Patraeus to replace McChrystal, also leaving a hole in the job Patraeus was previously doing, but more importantly, giving Patraeus the same mission that Obama had called a failure just a few years before (when Bush was president).
Everyone seems to be intent on building intentions onto the article. The leftwing Rolling Stone wanted to attack the war in Afghanistan. McChrystal didn’t have confidence in the White House to properly support them, or in the new Rules of Engagement his soldiers had to follow and political suicide was the only way he saw to get the problems the attention they needed.
What’s interesting is that it was the Petraeus-McChrystal partnership that came up with and implemented the successful surge in Iraq. And with McChrystal’s resignation/dismissal it isn’t clear that half a team will be successful this time in Afghanistan.
McChrystal is the kind of general that soldiers like. The kind that goes out into the field and fights alongside his men. A true leader. He also is not a political animal, which worked to his detriment, but you don’t find the two mixing that often.
Conclusions? How is this related to Israel?
Perhaps another time.
I read the Rolling Stone article. I read an interview with the author of the article.
The impression I got out of it is that many if not most of the “best” quotes came from when McChrystal and his friends were out plastered in a bar.
Regardless of when/how it was gotten, it’s clear that many in top military leadership positions don’t think much of Obama.
It’s also clear that Obama doesn’t think much of his military men.
He and Biden certainly didn’t think much of General Petraeus before they came into White House power when Obama publicly lambasted him in typical Obama fashion - telling him he did a great job while simultaneously telling him he (and everyone else) failed. Biden also didn't think to highly of Petraeus either.
But now Obama has appointed General Patraeus to replace McChrystal, also leaving a hole in the job Patraeus was previously doing, but more importantly, giving Patraeus the same mission that Obama had called a failure just a few years before (when Bush was president).
Everyone seems to be intent on building intentions onto the article. The leftwing Rolling Stone wanted to attack the war in Afghanistan. McChrystal didn’t have confidence in the White House to properly support them, or in the new Rules of Engagement his soldiers had to follow and political suicide was the only way he saw to get the problems the attention they needed.
What’s interesting is that it was the Petraeus-McChrystal partnership that came up with and implemented the successful surge in Iraq. And with McChrystal’s resignation/dismissal it isn’t clear that half a team will be successful this time in Afghanistan.
McChrystal is the kind of general that soldiers like. The kind that goes out into the field and fights alongside his men. A true leader. He also is not a political animal, which worked to his detriment, but you don’t find the two mixing that often.
Conclusions? How is this related to Israel?
Perhaps another time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2012
(1)
- ► December 2012 (1)
-
►
2011
(44)
- ► October 2011 (1)
- ► September 2011 (3)
- ► August 2011 (5)
- ► April 2011 (5)
- ► March 2011 (7)
- ► February 2011 (6)
- ► January 2011 (6)
-
▼
2010
(109)
- ► December 2010 (4)
- ► November 2010 (7)
- ► October 2010 (10)
- ► September 2010 (8)
- ► August 2010 (9)
- ► April 2010 (11)
- ► March 2010 (9)
- ► February 2010 (12)
- ► January 2010 (12)
-
►
2009
(277)
- ► December 2009 (14)
- ► November 2009 (14)
- ► October 2009 (17)
- ► September 2009 (19)
- ► August 2009 (17)
- ► April 2009 (18)
- ► March 2009 (34)
- ► February 2009 (32)
- ► January 2009 (29)
-
►
2008
(390)
- ► December 2008 (47)
- ► November 2008 (24)
- ► October 2008 (33)
- ► September 2008 (41)
- ► August 2008 (20)
- ► April 2008 (27)
- ► March 2008 (40)
- ► February 2008 (29)
- ► January 2008 (28)
-
►
2007
(318)
- ► December 2007 (14)
- ► November 2007 (26)
- ► October 2007 (25)
- ► September 2007 (20)
- ► August 2007 (32)
- ► April 2007 (31)
- ► March 2007 (34)
- ► February 2007 (28)
- ► January 2007 (18)
-
►
2006
(333)
- ► December 2006 (16)
- ► November 2006 (19)
- ► October 2006 (12)
- ► September 2006 (21)
- ► August 2006 (54)
- ► April 2006 (11)
- ► March 2006 (25)
- ► February 2006 (22)
- ► January 2006 (52)
-
►
2005
(88)
- ► December 2005 (32)
- ► November 2005 (18)
- ► October 2005 (5)
- ► September 2005 (12)
- ► August 2005 (21)
0 comments:
Post a Comment