And what kind of new, outrageous details would a McChrystal book potentially offer? McChrystal has not been the commander in Afghanistan that long, has met with Obama numerous times but not had an extensive or particularly close relationship with him, and of the troop request that McChrystal made, Obama only gave him 30,000 instead of the original 40,000 he recommended but otherwise backed the strategy McChrystal proposed. If McChrystal does write a “tell-all” book, the most damaging thing it would likely feature about Obama is just personal details, like his staff’s description of Obama (which they attributed to McChrystal) as being intimidated and not really connected during their first meeting. It wouldn’t make much sense for McChrystal to blast Obama about the war for backing McChrystal’s plan.
McChrystal is well past his 20 and could have retired at any time he chose. But given that McChrystal has been described as having been home less than 30 days a year since 2001, I very much doubt he would describe getting sidelined as him winning the lottery.
A general, particularly one that commands troops from several different countries and must interact closely with one or more foreign leaders, is going to have that much tougher of a job if it is publicly known that he does not have the full support and backing of the president. Any such general can essentially be ignored or by-passed by political figures.
He doesn’t have to blast Obama. He simply has to write a book about Afghanistan which includes information that is unflattering to the President. I don’t know why you and other’s think it has to be a hit piece. He’s going to gain financially from this and there is nothing the President can do about anything negative that comes out of it. He HAD that power before he fired him.
Afghanistan is a hell-hole by any definition. Every day away from that place is a vacation. I’m sure his house is a considerably nicer place to live in than the little metal room he called home in the desert. He will be drawing a pension while getting paid to talk about his experiences
He was supported by Afghan leaders which is an important relationship. I don’t see an problems dealing with other military personnel.
FWIW, that’s what I think too. On another thread, someone remarked that the defense contractors are positively salivating over the possibility of offering him a lobbying job. I think he realized he was in a no-win situation and wanted out. With a bang. There is no way he could have thought that this could have ended without his resignation.
He (through his staff) has already said things that are unflattering to Obama. My point was that there isn’t likely that much more he possibly has up his sleeve, at least about Obama himself. McChrystal’s reputation, at least for professionalism, has taken a hit and writing and releasing a book that has additional anecdotes about Obama’s personality or quirks - with the relatively little time he actually spent face-to-face with him - isn’t going to improve his reputation or credibility. McChrystal may have some financial gain, but he doesn’t have that much ammunition for any book he writes that is unflattering to Obama and he runs the risk of looking like someone with an axe to grind. Paul O’Neill resigned as Secretary of the Treasury in 2002 and wrote a book that was pretty unflattering to President Bush, but it didn’t really damage Bush that much, if at all.
McChrystal is a career Special Forces Soldier who, according to several articles, sleeps 4 hours a night, eats only once a day, and runs 12 miles every day (probably in addition to a more general workout). He likely wants to be in the thick of things, as evidenced by the stories of him dropping in on Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan recently and when he was a 3-star and going on patrols or missions with them on at least two occasions. The Rolling Stone article itself said McChrystal hated Paris and described any restaurants that had more than modest decor as too “Gucci,” with McChrystal’s wife saying he took her to a Jack-In-The-Box to eat when they were in formal evening wear. As commander in Afghanistan, McChrystal banned Burger King and other frequent military-catering fast food places from being on-post, which is one of the few creature comforts from home that deployed service members often have. This doesn’t sound like the type of guy who dreams of living a soft, comfortable life in retirement.
Afghan leaders, or at least Karzai, liked him because he kept Karzai in the loop, tried to build him up as a leader who was in charge, and he personally apologized whenever there were civilian Afghan casualties. But, however nice McChrystal was, his usefulness sharply declines if any commitment he makes to Karzai will potentially not be respected or even acknowledged by Obama, if McChrystal no longer has Obama’s full support. If Karzai wanted to know where the US stood on a particular issue or problem, he would be forced to either ask Obama directly or more likely rely on civilian figures such as Ambassador Eikenberry or Richard Holbrooke.
It could be something as simple as the rules of engagement for his troops or delays in requested armor. It’s too early to predict if there were specific reasons behind the article.
He may very well miss the black ops stuff but he was already out of that realm with his last position.
Prior to his firing the President had the ability to shove a boot up his ass on a daily basis. The shoe is on the other foot now. The best punishment with the least chance of additional public commentary would have been to keep McChrystal under the President’s control.
Except he would be the one, with the assistance of his command judge advocate, making the rules of engagement. And, given the sensitive nature of many of the specific rules regarding when US forces could or could not engage and the differing levels of escalation/air support allowed, much of the ROE is almost certainly classified. Also, while I know you were just trying to come up with an example, armor is of limited usefulness in Afghanistan due to the incredibly mountainous terrain over much of the country. Just transporting it there is a logistical nightmare let alone using it.
That was the point of accepting his resignation. His words, along with those of his staff, reflected that he wasn’t fully under Obama’s control. McChrystal had previously criticized Biden’s proposed plan as “shortsighted” and whether it was or wasn’t doesn’t matter - the president (and his administration) proposes and the military disposes. Obama talked to McChrystal about his comments then and apparently McChyrstal or his staff is suspected of leaking his assessment of the state of the war mid-way through Obama’s rather long deliberations on a new war plan. Once news stories started picking up on a general’s assessment that the war could be lost if 40,000 new troops weren’t sent in, it became almost politically impossible for Obama not to either fully or largely fulfill that recommendation. So, with these two strikes (even if one was only suspected) against McChrystal, this latest one seems to paint the picture that McChrystal thinks he should be dictating war policy without all these pesky civilians trying to fulfill their own objectives.
If he wanted out, he’d easily have found a more marketable way to do it than this petty crap. He is not going to be able to find a way to spin his work as successful and in the American tradition, in spite of near-treasonous interference from weak Democratic leadership, like North was. Just look at the commentary from the Fox side - it’s all about having just another pretext to criticize Obama for, not praising McChrystal. His conduct wasn’t principled, just childish.
In all honesty, if my choice is between having a commander who may well badmouth me to fellow officers and generally question, even theoretically or casually, my orders, and allowing said commander to go off and make a bit of money badmouthing me in public, i’d much rather have the second. I’d rather have a publicity problem than an armed forces one.
Where do I put him? No, really - Do I make him Deputy COS of Joint Taskforce on Parking Lot Speedbump Standards? When a 4-starrer cannot make Permanent Change of Station to a billet that can be looked upon as better or equal in dignity to the one he’s leaving, he is usually expected to call it a career. Make your last post your best post. Or, say as someone else mentioned, “bust” him back to the mission but with the understanding he left his nuts back at the JCS meeting room? Well, that sure makes for a motivated command…
Either way he’s already eligible for retirement; putting a stop-loss on him while figuratively sent to the corner in an nonessential “time out” post would transparently be a move just to “keep him under my thumb”, which makes me look like a spiteful ass who likes to watch people squirm.
You know, people understand venting. They really do. EVERYBODY’S got that boss, that colleague, that acquaintance, about whom they just want to say “God, I HATE that guy/gal!”
But the majority of us aren’t 4-star generals in the public eye in the midst of a shitstorm in the presence of a reporter for a nationally-recognized publication.
And really, MOST of us realize when our venting is likely to result in bad consequences.
However, like getting wasted at an office Christmas party, and making lewd remarks about the boss’ daughter to the boss him- or herself, McChrystal’s actions aren’t just venting. They’re venting in massively, egregiously, outrageously inappropriate ways.
Absolutely incorrect. Petraeus is being demoted to take the slot, and the message to the Army is that there is no general capable of relieving a war commander except Petraeus.
I’ve got to say, I’m–again–disappointed in Obama, though for a far different reason this time. There are fucking oodles of generals in the Army lined up to take command of the Afghan war, and if any one of them cannot–under Petraeus’ leadership–get the task accomplished, then you fire him too, and chose another.
McChrystal is done. He’s not going to write some tell all book. What would he say? “You know that war I was in charge of? Well, we lost it.” - That’s not really going to redeem him in the eyes of history.
McChrystal is not MacArthur. He’s a McClellan. He’s a general who was given his chance and couldn’t get the job done. If he hadn’t been asked to resign over loose talk he was probably going to be replaced by the end of the year anyway.
But the loose talk was a problem. I mentioned Eisenhower earlier. Like Eisenhower, McChrystal was supposed to work with diplomats and politicians and heads of state as part of his assignment. If Eisenhower had said that Churchill was an incompetent drunkard and De Gaulle was a pompous windbag, he wouldn’t have been doing his job because part of his job was to work with these men. And Eisenhower understood that - he once said that if one of his American generals called a British general an SOB he might get away with it but if he called him a British SOB he’d be relieved of command.
What is required right now is the gravitas, experience and familiarity. They can’t take Joe 2 Star and make him head of this operation and expect it to work out. They may be able to maneouver another 3 star into having enough gravitas and respectability to take the position within a couple of months, but right now it is best for all concerned if Petraeus takes over.
I suspect the reason for convincing Petraeus to take the slot is that he will be able to get through Senate Confirmation quickly, and lessen the chance that confirmation hearings will turn into a drawn out proxy-debate for the war itself.