DescentBB

According to the Constitution, the President is the Commander in Chief of the Military and all those below him in the chain of command are supposed to follow his orders and respect them without question. So after what he opined to a few around him at a formal dinner, should General Stanley McChrystal be fired, demoted or respected. In my opinion, he is aiding and abetting the enemy with his blatant disrespect to our Commander in Chief of the Military and at the very least he should be demoted to some backwater sh*t hole to serve out his remaining service.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38837.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236

You mean like Former marine and Senator Jack Murtha or General Clark Did to Bush?

In my opinion, he is aiding and abetting the enemy with his blatant disrespect to our Commander in Chief of the Military and at the very least he should be demoted to some backwater sh*t hole to serve out his remaining service.

and how is this different than anyone in congress does to our Current and past president (BUSH) everyday???


now in all Honesty he should probably receive a repremand to his record

Need to becareful there TC. that \"Commander and Chief\" has done a number of things that are WELL outside his perview of powers. Firing the pres of GM is one of them. That was not his place. Ever. There are others.

Guys, I'm talking about a 'General' that is directly under Obama's command, not some Senator or other outside of the military flunkie and not some corporate president. This is the military command structure I'm referring to, which last I heard, required that an officer followed orders from a superior officer without question, even if they didn't like those orders. Aren't there consequences when a subordinate 'mouths off' or calls into question the orders of a superior officer? Isn't that a Court Martial offense? Same with the work place. Call your boss a disparaging name and you risk getting fired.

tunnelcat wrote:...In my opinion, he is aiding and abetting the enemy with his blatant disrespect to our Commander in Chief of the Military and at the very least he should be demoted to some backwater sh*t hole to serve out his remaining service....

I agree in the sense that the Pres is the boss so the General can be fired but the comments he's made that I've read so far are not nearly as outrageous as the hype I'm seeing in the headlines. And as far as aiding and abetting....I really wish you and other liberals were consistent with your concern about statements made by those with the power to make policy and how it affects the enemy's plans and morale! Hell I wish the current Pres had the balls to call the enemy the enemy!! At least you are willing to do that...in this case anyway.
I could quote you plenty of statements by democrats that, with out a doubt, gave more hope to the enemy than the Generals comments will have. You don't have to be President to have sway over Americas war policy and everyone knows that. There is absolutely no comparison so where were you guys then?!?
It makes me think your concern isn't at all about our chances to win or our troops safety but rather all about supporting your politician of choice...!!

which last I heard, required that an officer followed orders from a superior officer without question, even if they didn't like those orders

lawful orders only

FYI I do not know the full scope of this issue and if he disobeyed any orders(which I dont believe he did) or if he is just making comments about some of those orders or the president in general

Isn't that a Court Martial offense?

potentially. depends on the offense. it could mean a Courts martial. it might just be a verbal repremand. it could mean nothing.

Having read his and his staff's comments they are without a doubt stupid.

Aiding and abetting the enemy??? Far from it.
I would say the poltical rift during Bush's administration did more to Aid and abet the enemy than this. the Political will to fight is not the same as a Career Military man following his orders. which apparently he has done.

Courts martial offense?? HIGHLY unlikely.

Will he be removed??? I would think that would depend on the quality of the Job that the President thinks he's doing and how much he pissed the President off. this is no where near the scope of what MacArthur did to Truman.

Will Robinson wrote:I agree in the sense that the Pres is the boss so the General can be fired but the comments he's made that I've read so far are not nearly as outrageous as the hype I'm seeing in the headlines. And as far as aiding and abetting....I really wish you and other liberals were consistent with your concern about statements made by those with the power to make policy and how it affects the enemy's plans and morale! Hell I wish the current Pres had the balls to call the enemy the enemy!! At least you are willing to do that...in this case anyway.
I could quote you plenty of statements by democrats that, with out a doubt, gave more hope to the enemy than the Generals comments will have. You don't have to be President to have sway over Americas war policy and everyone knows that. There is absolutely no comparison so where were you guys then?!?
It makes me think your concern isn't at all about our chances to win or our troops safety but rather all about supporting your politician of choice...!!

You know, you keep labeling me as an Obama suckup, when I really don't think he's done anywhere near a bangup job as I'd hoped. In fact, he's done a downright LOUSY job. He made big promises to his base to get elected and has since become a big disappointment in his leadership abilities, choices and corporate/Wall Street butt kissing. So no, he's not MY president anymore. If he had followed a more liberal agenda as was promised during his campaign, all you righties would REALLY be screaming about now. You're all pathetic to be whining about the pantywaist stuff he's already done! He's been downright condescendingly tame compared to what you would've gotten if a true liberal was in office right now!

HOWEVER, I think that he deserves respect from those under his command, whether they like him or not. This is a connected world now and public comments like McChrystal's get around freely and only serve to show our enemies that there is discontent between our country's leader and it's military. Our leadership needs to look like a cohesive machine, not a bunch of b*tchfighting pansies, and McChrystal's whining looks JUST like that. He may not like Obama's decisions and our military may not like Obama's decisions, but he is the top dawg, so he should either keep his trap shut and follow orders and grumble to himself or resign and let someone else take the job if he doesn't think it's being done right. I'll bet McCain wouldn't have taken any guff from his generals and HE would have been expected to hand out a disciplinary response. But in my opinion, we should be the hell OUT of Afghanistan and Iraq anyway. That's the ONE BIG mistake Obama's made, continuing Bush's f*ckup!

Some people just don’t understand politics (inter-office and such) and when to keep their mouths shut.

But as far as aiding and abetting the enemy…that’s a huge stretch.

As far as heads rolling, I would have to look at who the idiot who gave this guy a public* job…and start there.

* Job that has to deal with said and such.

TC unless there are other comments that he's made and I've not seen. the only thing he said about the President was that he was unprepared when they met and he didnt even know who the General was. it seems to me your getting all fired up over nothing.

if there are additonal comments about the pres please post them for me.

Let clear one thing up, McCrystal did not say any of those things in a public forum. Somehow a Rolling Stone reporter got hold of the comments and pushed the bobsled down the ramp. Now the sad part is, what the good General said is true. The libs are going to start seeing more and more of such comments of their flop eared worship figure as evidenced by the MSNBC talking heads view on Obama's oval office speech.

TC, what is really giving the enemy aid and comfort is the withdrawal deadline Obama has set for Afghanistan. I suggest you look at how the coalition troop casualty rate has increased since Obama took office. The rules of engagement is such that our troops are getting sent home in body bags in ever increasing numbers. Case in point a young marine was killed entering some building after the recommendation to bomb the building was rejected due to the ROE. So I ask you TC, do you enjoy seeing our young soldiers come home maimed and deceased just because we want to be viewed as compassionate? I say if the ROE continues we should just pull everyone out now as the war has become more of a Hello Kitty style game.

After the Taliban then take over, I don't want to see you or Bee complain about how the afghan women are treated.

tunnelcat wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:I agree in the sense that the Pres is the boss so the General can be fired but the comments he's made that I've read so far are not nearly as outrageous as the hype I'm seeing in the headlines. And as far as aiding and abetting....I really wish you and other liberals were consistent with your concern about statements made by those with the power to make policy and how it affects the enemy's plans and morale! Hell I wish the current Pres had the balls to call the enemy the enemy!! At least you are willing to do that...in this case anyway.
I could quote you plenty of statements by democrats that, with out a doubt, gave more hope to the enemy than the Generals comments will have. You don't have to be President to have sway over Americas war policy and everyone knows that. There is absolutely no comparison so where were you guys then?!?
It makes me think your concern isn't at all about our chances to win or our troops safety but rather all about supporting your politician of choice...!!

You know, you keep labeling me as an Obama suckup, when I really don't think he's done anywhere near a bangup job as I'd hoped. In fact, he's done a downright LOUSY job. He made big promises to his base to get elected and has since become a big disappointment in his leadership abilities, choices and corporate/Wall Street butt kissing. So no, he's not MY president anymore. If he had followed a more liberal agenda as was promised during his campaign, all you righties would REALLY be screaming about now. You're all pathetic to be whining about the pantywaist stuff he's already done! He's been downright condescendingly tame compared to what you would've gotten if a true liberal was in office right now!

HOWEVER, I think that he deserves respect from those under his command, whether they like him or not. This is a connected world now and public comments like McCrystal's get around freely and only serve to show our enemies that there is discontent between our country's leader and it's military. Our leadership needs to look like a cohesive machine, not a bunch of b*tchfighting pansies, and McCrystal's whining looks JUST like that. He may not like Obama's decisions and our military may not like Obama's decisions, but he is the top dawg, so he should either keep his trap shut and follow orders and grumble to himself or resign and let someone else take the job if he doesn't think it's being done right. I'll bet McCain wouldn't have taken any guff from his generals and HE would have been expected to hand out a disciplinary response. But in my opinion, we should be the hell OUT of Afghanistan and Iraq anyway. That's the ONE BIG mistake Obama's made, continuing Bush's f*ckup!

TC, I said the Pres could fire him if he wants, the Pres is the boss over the General. I don't criticize him for firing him...so quit your bitching.
As far as Obama not being very liberal...LOL! Just because Ted Bundy didn't kill enough people to please every fan of serial murder doesn't mean he wasn't every bit a full on serial murderer!!

Tunnelcat, I respectfully disagree with you. Obama's \"leadership\" of the military has repeatedly disappointed me and I do not think Obama or Biden have earned much respect with regards to military matters. Obama's photo-op with the General instead of getting real work done is just one example.

However, Obama is this country's President and as such should be always spoken of with respect and honor, even if it isn't earned or deserved. In that regards, if the General and his staff did in fact refer to the President and Biden in that manner ... they were way out of line.

CUDA wrote: Courts martial offense?? HIGHLY unlikely.

Uniform Code of the Military

Sec. 888. Art. 88. Contempt toward officials

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/us ... -000-.html

woodchip, the Rolling Stone Reporter was embedded with McChrystal for one month because of the Icelandic volcano, so there was plenty of time for off-the-cuff honest comments. If Obama draws the ire of his generals, Bush must have been a real hard case to please, because he fired quite a few generals that he deemed no longer loyal to him, usually for dissing HIS Iraq War policies. Obama has given McChrystal 2 passes already, the 3rd time may not be the charm.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00891.html

As for the Taliban, I would just as soon shoot one of them on sight myself if I got the chance, but we invaded their country, so they have the right to shoot us on sight if they want. We're foreigners in their land. We went in there originally to get Bin Laden and now we're mired in an insurgency we can't win no matter how many troops we throw into it, all in our usual failed efforts at nation building. And by the way, Al Qaeda is located in Pakistan now, essentially unreachable, unless you want us to invade them too. If you want to point out repressive societies to women as a justification for invasion, why don't we go after Saudi Arabia and topple their little cruel religious regime?

The Taliban are mostly Arabs, and not exactly indigenous to Afghanistan. And it is highly doubtful that you will see a court martial with any real consequence in this case, demotion is not out of the question tho.

It’s going to be up to the prez, and I haven’t seen any sign of those kinds of stones. (except when his advisors told him to look more angry, last week…lol)

“If you want to point out repressive societies to women as a justification for invasion, why don't we go after Saudi Arabia and topple their little cruel religious regime?”

Huh…are you forgetting something?

Well, he's been relieved of command and replaced by General David Petraeus.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stanley- ... d=10989038

Spidey, I know that the Saudis are \"allies\" to the U.S., but they certainly aren't an ally of mine. I don't like the Taliban either, but I don't think it's our place to nation build Afghanistan in our image. If the locals don't like them, let them fight for their country. We were NEVER invited in. Hamid Karzai is a corrupt thief and slimebag and we're just throwing our good solders into this cesspool to die for this moron. As much as McChrystal knew about counter-insurgency, I don't think we would have ever come out victors, no matter how hard he tried the good fight. We don't have the money or the will. I do blame Obama for continuing to smooze up to Karzai by allowing him to stay in power in Afghanistan, all the while keeping us in the longest war we've ever fought.

Gen. David Petraeus gets Gen. Stanley McChrystal job. How will the Left react to this. Didn't moveon.org attack Petraeus during the Iraq war?

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Mov ... us_NYT.PDF

Yup. The left can throw up the sleeze too. MoveOn's no better than FreedomWorks. Each side uses their tools of the trade to get their point across.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoveOn.org_ad_controversy

tunnelcat wrote:Well, he's been relieved of command and replaced by General David Petraeus.

Is this satisfactory?? or did you want more??

To be honest Commanding Officers are changed like most people change their underwear. in my 4 years in the Navy, I served under 5 Commanding Officers on 2 ships. so if all he got was relieved with no repremand then this is no big deal.

Actually tc, I was referring to the fact that we are in Afghanistan because of a certain attack…not to protect women against oppressive regimes.

I don’t care if we are “allies” with Saudia Arabia, in fact…well I don’t want to drag that up again.

………………………….

I think the prez has to tread very carefully here…I mean, how many of the people serving in the military agree with what the general said. (troop morale)

Obama is screwed if things go poorly in Afghanistan now. Lol, imagine having to have things go well in that hell hole for you to come out looking like you made the right move!
If things get worse the General looks like he was right and Obama was the reason he couldn't win.

If McChrystal decides to do like Wesley Clark and get into politics he could bury Obama....

Personally I think it will be Gen. David Patreaus' war to win now. The man is well qualified to conduct this overseas contingency operation. However he would be a fool to do it without the consultation of one Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

Maybe McChrystal was right after all. at least about VP Biteme anyways

Biden Calls Custard Shop Manager a 'Smartass' After Taxes Comment

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06 ... s-comment/

CUDA wrote:Maybe McChrystal was right after all. at least about VP Biteme anyways

Biden Calls Custard Shop Manager a 'Smartass' After Taxes Comment

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06 ... s-comment/

I think Biden was trying to have some friendly back and forth with the guy like you would with someone you've known for a long time so I don't think he used the "smartass" comment in a mean way, however, it clearly shows he thinks a taxpayer has no place suggesting they lower his taxes and/or shows how he thinks the taxpayer shouldn't say anything on camera that questions the wisdom of the administration...

Biden is a typical example of the elite ruling class and has no empathy for the average Joe, he merely tolerates us for the votes he needs every 4 or 6 years.
There should be a clause in the law that allows citizens to punch guys like Biden in the mouth without suffering any repercussions, kind of like the unwritten law of the playground when the coach wouldn't punish you if you stood up to a bully and punched him.

He should have charged the vice prez based on his income…no wait, that would be illegal.

Will Robinson wrote:Obama is screwed if things go poorly in Afghanistan now. Lol, imagine having to have things go well in that hell hole for you to come out looking like you made the right move!
If things get worse the General looks like he was right and Obama was the reason he couldn't win.

If McChrystal decides to do like Wesley Clark and get into politics he could bury Obama....

I'm afraid I agree. Obama promised to "finish the job" in Afghanistan and if he screws it up after all these convolutions, it's now on his watch.

As for McChrystal, if Obama and his team are even remotely half-assed savy politically (not likely given past events), they would have made sure there were strings attached to his 'retirement', like NOT speaking to the press about anything that transpired during his tenure over the war or maybe speaking disparagingly about the president on talk shows.

Will Robinson wrote:There should be a clause in the law that allows citizens to punch guys like Biden in the mouth without suffering any repercussions, kind of like the unwritten law of the playground when the coach wouldn't punish you if you stood up to a bully and punched him.

I'd like that! Then I could punch elitist, money grubbing 'Miss Bendy Straws' right in her flap trap kisser and wipe that smirk right off her face!