+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: McChrystal on Fox News

  1. #1
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default McChrystal on Fox News

    It's not a question of when, but who's show he'll show up on.

    Does O'Reilly or Hannity snag General Moron's first big Fox interview?

    How long before he becomes a regular Fox "analyst"?

    This doof was looking for a high-profile right-pleasing exit, and he got it.

    Now he's going to be rich.

    I predict:

    Bill O'Reilly appearance within 7 days.

    Book deal announced within 30 days.

    "Regular Contributor" status on Fox within 30 days.

    What an asshole.
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  2. #2
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    Note: My asshole designation is contingent on General Moron actually showing up on Fox. If he doesn't, I take it back. He does remain a moron, however.
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  3. #3
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    Maybe, he might not even be out the door yet. If he is not out the door, no interviews at all from those folks.

  4. #4
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by What Exit? View post
    Maybe, he might not even be out the door yet. If he is not out the door, no interviews at all from those folks.
    If he's not booted today, you're right, complete radio silence.
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  5. #5
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    One more prediction:

    If he's booted today: Presidential candidate.

    You heard it here first.
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  6. #6
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    Someone is printing this bumper sticker right now:

    McChrystal/Palin 2012
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  7. #7
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    Well stop doing that. Are you trying to make me sick?

  8. #8
    Mammuthus primigenius eleanorigby's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Right here, for now.
    Posts
    889

    Default

    What else did he expect? He's toast and well he should be.


    I cannot wait to hear the GOP start to whine that he shouldn't have been let go because he IS the Afghan Initiative or something. Thing is, military discipline is military discipline--it really sucks when it applies to you, a commanding officer.

    I see him on Larry King first, then O'Reilly, then.... Hannity.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,590

    Default

    The problem is he really is the Afghan strategy. Not that Petraeus isn't likely capable of doing the same thing but from what I understand, McChrystal is pretty much the architect of our Afghan policy. So this is a problem for Obama. And yet naturally Obama can't just let a military officer stay in command who is so open in his contempt for his ultimate, civilian commander. It wouldn't look right.

    I don't know, most of what McChrystal said (at least filtered through the media sources I've read) doesn't even sound that bad -- although some of the stuff his subordinates said was fairly problematic, and that reflects on him too. But I think this is an unfortunate spot for Obama to be in, and it probably won't be a positive thing for our success in Afghanistan.

  10. #10
    Mammuthus primigenius eleanorigby's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Right here, for now.
    Posts
    889

    Default

    It doesn't matter if the things said don't seem that bad. The fact that they were said at all demonstrates a lack of discipline and a disinclination to remove personality and opinion from their work. I would fully expect someone in the private civilian sector to be fired after such an incident. Someone at the general's level should know better, and the fact that this sort of disrespect is allowed among his aides shows how pervasive it is. I hope more heads roll.

    So much for the much vaunted "I don't do politics; I serve the CIC, no matter who he (or she) is." that we heard is the ruling thought in the upper echelons of the military. McImmature sounds just that--a blowhard, sophomoric jerk who has so bought into the macho bullshit of being Mr Soldier Man, he's forgotten he plays more than one role. Grunts on the ground I can forgive for being provincial about France (or any other country) and DoD people--commanding officers, no and no and no.

    No one is irreplaceable, either. If McGeneral had died in the field, someone would have to take his place. I thought that was one reason for military discipline--so that men were replaceable to some extent....
    Last edited by eleanorigby; 23 Jun 2010 at 08:16 PM.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,590

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by eleanorigby View post
    It doesn't matter if the things said don't seem that bad. The fact that they were said at all demonstrates a lack of discipline and a disinclination to remove personality and opinion from their work
    Yeah, I agree with this, and it's particularly bad when it's a military leader questioning his ultimate authority -- the Constitutionally-required fact that the military be, ultimately, under civilian control.

    It's just unfortunate, is all.

  12. #12
    Mammuthus primigenius eleanorigby's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Right here, for now.
    Posts
    889

    Default

    True, dat. Then again, perhaps it is time for a new leaf? Dunno--do know that Obama didn't need this kind of shit on top of everything else going on.... No President needs this kind of nonsense.

  13. #13
    Free Exy Cluricaun's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Elgin IL
    Posts
    3,641

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Exy View post
    So this is a problem for Obama. And yet naturally Obama can't just let a military officer stay in command who is so open in his contempt for his ultimate, civilian commander. It wouldn't look right.
    Look right? It's blatantly fucking illegal under Article 88 of the UCMJ.

    Quote Originally posted by UCMJ
    “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 Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
    He's not a private citizen voicing his opinion, he's a military officer; undermining the democratically elected government through the media. It's not a bad decision on his part, it's a fucking traitorous act, which by the way is punishable by dishonorable discharge, forfiture of all pay and allowances and one year confinement.

    Fox News? If I had my way he'd be breaking goddamned rocks at Leavenworth this time tomorrow.

    You can dislike the man, but how a four star general somehow forgot something that's drilled into a recruit on day one, that you HAVE to respect the office of the president is beyond me.

    And someone asked me earlier if I'd have felt the same way had this happened under Bush II. Yup. Treason is treason and McChrystal is a fucking scumbag.
    Hell, if I didn't do things just because they made me feel a bit ridiculous, I wouldn't have much of a social life. - Santo Rugger.

  14. #14
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    Cluricaun, what did he say that treasonous? Nothing I saw about Obama and the one joke about Biden did not seem to rise to treason. Keep in mind I agree he should not have done the interview, should be let go and was an idiot but I don't see treason in what he said. Maybe some of his aides, but not him.

  15. #15
    Free Exy Cluricaun's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Elgin IL
    Posts
    3,641

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by What Exit? View post
    Cluricaun, what did he say that treasonous? Nothing I saw about Obama and the one joke about Biden did not seem to rise to treason. Keep in mind I agree he should not have done the interview, should be let go and was an idiot but I don't see treason in what he said. Maybe some of his aides, but not him.
    Ok, I got a little fired up and treason is much too strong a term for what happened.

    Quote Originally posted by General McChrystal
    "I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration."
    He also referred to Joe Biden as "Joe Bite Me", which I admit is kind of amusing since I think Biden is kind of a goofy dipshit myself, however
    his contemptuous demeanor and attitude to towards the Vice-President are more than enough to qualify.

    An officer undermining the chain of command in wartime should be enough to get you a quick 9MM to the back of the head, but I still vote that he stand before a court marshal and lose everything afforded to him by his rank and service for what he said.
    Hell, if I didn't do things just because they made me feel a bit ridiculous, I wouldn't have much of a social life. - Santo Rugger.

  16. #16
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    OK that quote from General McChrystal is something you, I or any civilian has a right to say and he is actually 100% correct except that especially as a General, he does not have the right to publically debate and disagree with this administration. He must know this and I missed that particular quote. I'm not sure the Bite-Me joke was a problem however.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,590

    Default

    It's not like he sat down for an interview and declared that Obama was mishandling the war. In fact I don't think he said anything about Obama at all -- although obviously the fact that his aides have said some negative things indicates that he's not maintaining proper discipline. But I think it's going a little overboard to talk about court-martialing him.

  18. #18
    Free Exy Cluricaun's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Elgin IL
    Posts
    3,641

    Default

    The only direct reference to the president himself was stating he appeared "uncomfortable and intimidated" by senior military officials.

    That's still unacceptable verbage to use regarding the commander in chief, especially by an officer, especially by an officer engaged in forward operations, and especially when that officer is the general who's been appointed to lead said forward operations.

    When the words that you use are weakening words, words that suggest that the commander in chief is not competent to handle said job, you've shot yourself in the foot. I don't find it to be a great leap of logic or reason to say that the words "uncomfortable" and "intimidated" are contemptuous in the context in which they were said. Speaking contemptuously of any of the offices mentioned above in the passage about article 88 of the UCMJ is a court martial offence. Even if you wanted to argue against the intent there's still an obvious case of article 133 Conduct Unbecoming of an Officer, which is also a court martial offence and which also carries the same penalties.

    If he'd had said those comments privately at home it wouldn't be as big of a deal as when he said them on record, in uniform. While in uniform you're not just the man you were when you woke up that morning. It's not that HE said it so much as that the UNIFORM said it, and that's simply not acceptable in any circumstance and as a matter of fact is a big enough deal that there's a specific article in the laws by which he is governed to address exactly that situation.

    He either knew it and acted contemptuously himself, or he didn't know it and therefore is unfit to hold the rank that he did.
    Hell, if I didn't do things just because they made me feel a bit ridiculous, I wouldn't have much of a social life. - Santo Rugger.

  19. #19
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    This from The Huffington Post:

    "Even more about McChrystal: now it can be told. The story about him voting for Obama is not contrived. He is a political liberal. He is a social liberal. He banned Fox News from the television sets in his headquarters. Yes, really. This puts to rest another false rumor: that McChrystal deliberately precipitated his firing because he wants to run for President."

    So, seems I am way, way off base.
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  20. #20
    Mammuthus primigenius eleanorigby's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Right here, for now.
    Posts
    889

    Default

    Treason is too strong a word, but is sedition? Or seditious?


    I dunno. I'm not up on my rebellion fomenting. IMO, the ex-gen is an ass of the highest order who needs to seriously grow the fuck up already. He'll have lots of time to think about his actions in civilian life. I'm sure he'll write a book and do the lecture circuit--much like Ollie North did.

+ Reply to thread

Posting rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts