[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets

Egypt Amasses Forces on Israel’s Southern Border | World War 3 About to Start?

"Trump wants to dismantle the Education Department. Here’s how it would work"

test

"Federal Workers Concerned That Returning To Office Will Interfere With Them Not Working"

"Yes, the Democrats Have a Governing Problem – They Blame America First, Then Govern Accordingly"

"Trump and His New Frenemies, Abroad and at Home"

"The Left’s Sin Is of Omission and Lost Opportunity"

"How Trump’s team will break down the woke bureaucracy"

Pete Hegseth will be confirmed in a few minutes


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bush Wars
See other Bush Wars Articles

Title: US general [McChrystal] summoned to Washington
Source: ALJAZEERA.NET
URL Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/a ... 10/06/2010622111222326834.html
Published: Jun 22, 2010
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2010-06-22 07:56:15 by Fred Mertz
Keywords: None
Views: 110839
Comments: 99

The top US military commander in Afghanistan has been summoned to Washington after criticising the administration of Barack Obama, the US president, in a magazine article.

The White House recalled General Stanley McChrystal from Afghanistan on Tuesday to explain comments he made in a Rolling Stone magazine interview to be published on Friday, military officials said.

The order came after McChrystal apologised for the controversial comments in the profile, in which he is quoted denouncing a top diplomat while his aides dismiss Obama and mock his deputies.

"I extend my sincerest apology for this profile," McChrystal said in a statement issued ahead of the article's release.

"It was a mistake reflecting poor judgement and should never happened."

McChrystal, a former special operations chief, usually speaks cautiously in public and has enjoyed mostly sympathetic US media coverage since he took over the Nato-led force last year.

"Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honour and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard," he said.

Strategy debate

In the profile, McChrystal jokes sarcastically about preparing to answer a question referring to Joe Biden, the US vice-president, known to be a sceptic of the commander's war strategy.

He also told the magazine that he felt "betrayed" by Karl Eikenberry, the US ambassador to Kabul, in a White House debate over war strategy last year.

Referring to a leaked internal memo from Eikenberry that questioned McChrystal's request for more troops, the commander said that the ambassador had tried to protect himself for "for the history books".

"I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal said in the article.

Eikenberry, himself a former commander in Afghanistan, had written to the White House saying Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, was an unreliable partner and that a surge of troops could draw the US into an open-ended quagmire.

The article revisits the friction between the White House and the military last year as Obama debated whether to grant McChrystal's request for tens of thousands of reinforcements.

Al Jazeera's James Bays, reporting from Kabul, said that McChrystal managed to offend every single one of his key bosses with the statements in the article.

Our correspondent said that the Rolling Stone reporter managed to get high level access: "I met the reporter in Washington, DC, over a month ago after he came out of a meeting inside the White House with McChrystal's advisors.

"This incident shows the tensions that exist between the top advisors here in Afghanistan. What will happen now is how this agreement is viewed on Capitol Hill and on the Afghan street.

"The Taliban is also trying to win over the Afghan people. There is certainly very little disunity normally in the Taliban."

Further turmoil

Meanwhile, as foreign forces in Afghanistan marked another grim milestone in their war against the Taliban, signs of cracks in the alliance surfaced.

After 10 soldiers were killed in a single day, there was further turmoil for Nato as Britain announced that Sherard Cowper-Coles, its special envoy to Afghanistan, was taking "extended leave".

William Hague, Britain's foreign secretary, is to review the post of special envoy to Afghanistan, the BBC reported.

The news of Cowper-Coles's departure came amid reports that he had clashed with military officials over strategy, just a month ahead of a crucial international conference in the Afghan city of Kabul.

The Guardian newspaper reported there had been serious disagreements in recent months between Cowper-Coles and officials from Nato.

It said that Cowper-Coles was convinced the military-focused counter-insurgency effort was headed for failure and wanted talks with Taliban fighters to be a priority.

The Taliban, however, has so far rejected a plan drawn up at a landmark Kabul peace meeting to give jobs and money to those who lay down arms.

Last month they promised a new campaign of attacks on diplomats, lawmakers and foreign forces.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 97.

#8. To: Fred Mertz (#0)

McChrystal fucked up here. If you are going to trash the Commander in Chief, you resign first.

Badeye  posted on  2010-06-22   9:26:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Badeye (#8)

I don't see how he did that. He made an off the cuff remark about Obama seeming unprepared in their first meeting; that's not trashing the president IMO. Of course, I doubt McChrystal ever expected his comment to see the light of day.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2010-06-22   9:35:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Fred Mertz (#9)

Of course, I doubt McChrystal ever expected his comment to see the light of day.

Riiiight. He gave an interview to ROLLING STONE, and didn' think his comments (plural, freddie) wouldn't see the light of day....(eyes rolling)

Stick to taunting our host til you actually catch up on the details of this particular story, freddie.

Badeye  posted on  2010-06-22   9:38:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Badeye (#10)

Do you think he'll be fired?

Right now I don't think so.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2010-06-22   9:40:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Fred Mertz (#11) (Edited)

Do you think he'll be fired?

I think he should be.

I don't think Obama will, tho. I do expect the wheels to be set immediately into motion for his replacement and he resigns just before Labor Day when no one is paying attention to anything.

war  posted on  2010-06-22   9:56:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: war (#13)

I'll say around Thanksgiving time. I'm sure they already have his replacement selected though I'm not sure who it might be.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2010-06-22   10:02:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Fred Mertz (#14) (Edited)

I find active duty officers going off the reservation to be one of the more disturbing aspects of "politics"...

war  posted on  2010-06-22   10:07:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: war (#15)

I find active duty officers going off the reservation to be one of the more disturbing aspects of "politics"...

If by "going off the tracks" you mean publicly protesting the orders,tactics,and strategy of their civilian masters,I disagree.

There is not only nothing wrong with it,but they have a OBLIGATION to do so.

Their loyalty is to the US Constitution,the country itself,and the men and women under their command,not any political leader.

sneakypete  posted on  2010-06-22   21:44:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: sneakypete (#18)

They swore an oath to the USCON under which the POTUS is their commander and their rules of behavior [UCMJ] are set by Congress.

Look...I have respect for both his uniform and his rank and I have respect for his opinions as well. I just get uneasy. What happens when we get a general who can convince soldiers under his command that the USCON is just a "goddammed piece of paper"? He has to be fired. And then given a parade.

war  posted on  2010-06-22   22:12:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: war (#20)

They swore an oath to the USCON under which the POTUS is their commander and their rules of behavior [UCMJ] are set by Congress.

PARTIALLY true. They swear a oath to the country and the US Constitution. There is no such thing as a loyalty oath to a president.

sneakypete  posted on  2010-06-23   10:20:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: sneakypete (#29)

I never said that there was.

Again, the USCON - to which they've sworn the oath - designates POTUS their Commander in Chief and the same USCON designates the Congress as the rule making body for the military. What does the UCMJ demand in this regard?

war  posted on  2010-06-23   10:30:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: war (#31)

What does the UCMJ demand in this regard?

The maximum is dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-06-23   10:52:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: lucysmom (#35)

What does the UCMJ demand in this regard? The maximum is dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

WRONG!

We do NOT live in the leftist police state that you admire so much. We live in a free country (barely) where the military take loyalty oaths to the Constitution,not a political leader.

Your idols Adolph,Mao, and Uncle Joe had the system you think we have and that you admire,though.

sneakypete  posted on  2010-06-23   11:10:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: sneakypete (#39)

WRONG!

The UCMI has been around since the founding fathers and that's what it says.

Your idols Adolph,Mao, and Uncle Joe had the system you think we have and that you admire,though.

What a pile of poop!

lucysmom  posted on  2010-06-23   11:22:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: lucysmom (#40)

The UCMI has been around since the founding fathers and that's what it says.

Huh? The UCMJ wasn't put into law until Truman.

no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-06-24   14:46:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: no gnu taxes, badeye, lucysmom, fred mertz, war, sneakypete (#73)

Huh? The UCMJ wasn't put into law until Truman.

that's true, but it is derived from the articles of war passed by the 2nd continental congress. She's right again.

see: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/contcong_06-30-75.asp

go65  posted on  2010-06-24   22:05:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#93. To: go65 (#87)

The UCMJ (and the article 88 which was referenced) has only been around since 1950.

It has not been around since the founding fathers.

The statement was false.

no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-06-25   9:27:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#95. To: no gnu taxes (#93)

It has not been around since the founding fathers.

The statement was false.

This article of the UCMJ is relatively new (about 60 years old) but it can trace itself back to colonial times. If you think nobody gets prosecuted under it, think again. Numerous officers have been disciplined for criticizing the president. Two Marine Corps officers were administratively punished for published letters to newspapers that were disrespectful to the president in the 1990s.

Article 134, known as the catch-all article, makes criminal those acts of speech that are prejudicial to good order and discipline or that could bring discredit upon the Armed Forces. This is pretty broad and explains why it is often called the catch-all article. If your chain of command thinks your political involvement has affected your unit or the military, you could be punished under this article.

http://militarytimes.com/forum/showthread.php?1559902-Watch-what-you-say-Speech-limits-under-UCMJ

Beginning with the adoption of the first Articles of War in 1775, Congress and other civilian leaders have sanctioned this restriction in order to prevent the possibility of a military coup. In applying this principle to the Howe case, the court stated:

True, petitioner is a reserve officer, rather than a professional officer, but during the time he serves on active duty, he is, and must be, controlled by the provisions of military law. In this instance, military restrictions fall upon a reluctant "summer soldier"; but in another time, and differing circumstances, the ancient and wise provisions insuring civilian control of the military will restrict the "man on the white horse "

www.airpower.maxwell.af.m...w/1980/may-jun/moran.html

It seems vital to note that, although Article 88 has its roots in a 1776 directive to the Continental Army drafted by none other than Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, there does not seem to have been any similar concern in the minds of the Founders over the exercise of free speech by members of the armed forces.

bobrowen.com/nymas/raykimballadvocacy.html

lucysmom  posted on  2010-06-25   10:31:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#96. To: lucysmom (#95)

Every idiot knows there has been some kind of military justice code since there has been a military. Such a code was not "uniform" before the UCMJ; the standards varied. Your statement that the UCMJ dates back to the founding fathers is false. Admit your error and move on.

no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-06-25   10:38:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#97. To: no gnu taxes (#96)

Such a code was not "uniform" before the UCMJ; the standards varied.

They still do under the UCMJ - as sneaky has pointed out.

war  posted on  2010-06-25   10:39:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 97.

        There are no replies to Comment # 97.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 97.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com