Just a Thought!!!

United States
June 23, 2010 1:16pm CST
US Afghan commander Stanley McChrystal fired by Obama The top US military commander in Afghanistan, Gen Stanley McChrystal, has been dismissed by President Barack Obama after he criticised leading administration officials. He had earlier agreed with Mr Obama that his statements in Rolling Stone magazine showed "poor judgement". News that Gen McChrystal was standing down came after he met Mr Obama at the White House. He will be succeeded by General David Petraeus, US officials say. Mr Obama said he had made the decision as Gen McChrystal had failed to "meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10395402.stm My thought is: If each member of our military was to give their HONEST PERSONAL opinion of Obama and any negative opinions would result in them being fired. Would we have any military left to fight in Afghanistan???
3 people like this
11 responses
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
23 Jun 10
this is where I will find myself in agreement with those on the left. Not because I disagree with the generals remarks (I do agree with them), but because discipline and chain of command in the military is essential and must be preserved. McChrystal's comments were a clear violation and I am surprised being relieved of command in Afghanistan was all that happened to him. Were this a lower ranking individual he likely would also be facing court martial as well. Now, all that being said. I can't WAIT to hear what Moveon.org or MSNBC has to say. Will the guy they all called General "Betrayus" now suddenly be their "good guy"? This is gonna be RICH!!!!
1 person likes this
• United States
23 Jun 10
I was a civilian employee and also a military wife for many years and I know that we had to watch our mouths especially in foreign countries. I think he should have been fired not for what he said but for being so stupid as to have made it publicly. I was being rather facetious in my topic as I am sure there were many military who agreed with the content of the remark but not where it was said..
1 person likes this
• United States
23 Jun 10
x- after your comment I turned to MSNBC....you are right. THey are definately playing it just like you said. The anchor just said something to the fact that Obama is taking the war in Afghanstan very seriously by putting in "one of the most popular and respected generals" to replace McChrystal. So ya...General "Betrayus" is now being protrayed as the greatest general in the world now..lol. You called it right.
• United States
23 Jun 10
Kennyrose great comment, thanks.
1 person likes this
@Lakota12 (42600)
• United States
24 Jun 10
My thoughts too I dont think I ever heard of an officer standing down like this might be bad for moral of the troups over there what if they like him?
1 person likes this
@Lakota12 (42600)
• United States
25 Jun 10
I am sure that is true! I would hate to think all comanders would be let go for bad mouthing
1 person likes this
• United States
24 Jun 10
Many of the Military did not like or respect Obama before this happened. Now I am very sure that number has increased. However what happened to McChrystal is an good example to keep their mouths shut until Obama is no longer pretending to be a good President.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
23 Jun 10
Well it was no surprise that he felt the way he did. Most military people don't think to highly of our current president and many hate politicians in general. What he did though was blatant insubordination and frankly, if I'd been president, I'd have fired him outright instead of allowing him to resign. The thing that gets me most though is that he did this with Rolling Stone. I mean Rolling Stone? WTF? Why talk to some left wing entertainment rag about how much you hate the president? Couldn't he just talk to a respectable, or at least semi-respectable news outlet? I have to believe that he knew this would get him fired. If some burger flipper or shift manager at a McDonald's does an interview badmouthing the CEO of McDonalds he'd get fired even faster. Personally, I don't think McChrystal was really a good choice for the job in the first place, but Obama has only himself to blame for that decision. I actually read the article before commenting on this. It was excessively long and really not entertaining. My time would have been better used taking a nap.
• United States
23 Jun 10
tgd Actually I do not think anyone is too upset at all over Obama's firing of McChrystal I get the impression that most people (including myself) are more upset at a Commanding General being so stupid as to insult the Commander-in-Chief in public irregardless of how his personal feelings are. There are just some things military personnel do not do.
2 people like this
• United States
23 Jun 10
The thing that I find funny is that for the most part Obama is doing what Bush did. Everyone in the military was happy when Bush did it, why are they upset now? I agree with you on the corporate firing as well, I was just doing to refresher on Carly Fiorina, and McChrystal is just lucky that she wasn't president. I must admit I haven't read the entire article, but I did hear it was very long, and boring.
1 person likes this
• United States
24 Jun 10
I agree Whiteheather. I think most people understand and agree he should have been fired. if any of us talked about our bosses like that publicly or in an interview iwth the press...we would be fired in a heartbeat too. But it does make me wonder. This guy was not stupid. You have to be smart, professional and very politically savy to get where he is....so it makes me think what was said and done during that interview could have been on purpose. It was a stupid mistake not even a rookie would have made. Which makes me wonder why? Why did he do it? Did he want to be fired? Is he trying to bring our attention to something? Or was he just being stupid?
1 person likes this
• United States
23 Jun 10
White, I remember a president once said: "you are either with us, or against us". McChrystal's comments show that he is against us, according to George W. Bush. Isn't this an act of treason as well? Isn't he giving comfort to an Enemy during a time of war? I am not accusing him of this, I am just wondering.
1 person likes this
@epicure35 (2814)
• United States
24 Jun 10
Just a thought: The disgusting audacity of a criminal imposter imposing sanctions upon a defender of America who has simply told the truth is enough to make me wretch. For an illegal alien, deceptive usurper, who will NEVER meet the standard that should be set by a commander-in-chief, to open his lying mouth and demean an America hero saying he "doesn't meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general" is the height of scurrulous villainy. My hope is that McChrystal and others in the military will reveal the truth about this monster. He has no business giving orders to anyone, much less our military, because he is not the rightful commander-in-chief. Our military should be the ones to lead him to jail for the crimes of high treason and fraud. Then Pelosi, Reid, and all the Democratic Socialists, party to aiding and abetting this crime of the century should go with him.
• United States
24 Jun 10
Sounds good to me!
@millertime (1394)
• United States
27 Jun 10
I guess I disagree with most people about this subject as I am one who believes that General McChrystal should not have been fired. While I realize the need to maintain a chain of command, I don't think what appeared in a magazine article is reason enough to remove the commanding general in the middle of a major military operation. I've heard many analysts state that he is the best man to have in command over there and I think that pulling him out at this point is a major blunder. First of all, most of the comments in question were not made by the general himself, but by his aides. While he is still responsible, that fact alone could have been reason enough for the president to only chastise him and send him back to the battlefield. Then again, I didn't really expect Obama to have the capability to set aside his gigantic ego long enough to rise above the fray do what was right. No, he had to wield his power to show the general and everyone else that he is the boss and nobody had better say anything bad about him or they would have to face his wrath. I would venture a guess that most of the military don't have much respect for their so called commander in chief. One need only watch a few videos on youtube and compare the cheers and enthusiastic applause given to Bush whenever he visited a base to the stony silence that greets Obama. It's also a pretty safe bet that most military personnel will have an even dimmer view of our illustrious leader after this seemingly petty move and I can guarantee they won't have any qualms about voicing their opinions about it either, they'll just be a little more careful about doing it around any reporters.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
23 Jun 10
heather - in response to your thought - you are right, if they all voiced their opinions, we would not have a military left. That, in my opinion, explains what a wonderful military we have. Even though they may disagree with our president, they are still putting our country first. Regarding McChrystal being shown the door, I actually believe that the President is right. I may agree with his comments and those of his aides, he is a General who accepted the position to answer to this President. If he was so frustrated, he should have stepped down. It was infraction enough just to say these things to his men. But to a reporter? Bad judgment indeed!
@sierras236 (2739)
• United States
23 Jun 10
Okay I understand McChrystal's firing. I really don't have a problem with that. Personally, I think his remarks were made due to frustration about the war and President Obama. But I am a little confused. Didn't General McChrystal replace General Petraeus in Afghanistan originally? If I am remembering right, General Petraeus was appointed by Bush to run the war in Afghanistan after Iraq stabilized somewhat. Then General McChrystal was put in by President Obama. So now we are back to General Petraeus again? Not that is a bad thing, but are we coming back full circle?
• United States
23 Jun 10
Yes you are correct. Petraeus previously served as Commanding General of Multi-National Force - Iraq (MNF-I) from January 26, 2007 to September 16, 2008. It appears that this is the second time Petraeus has replaced a Commander who had supposedly problems with the then Bush administration. "Petraeus would replace Adm. William Fallon, who said last month that he was resigning. Fallon said widespread, but false, reports that he was at odds with the Bush administration over Iran had made his job impossible." http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/23/petraeus/index.html
1 person likes this
@patms1 (521)
• United States
24 Jun 10
I understand that a person in the military must remember that the President is the Commander in Chief and as such must be respected even if they don't think he deserves it. What McChrystal did was not very smart but maybe he was just fed up with O not only doing nothing to win the war but shaming America by apologizing to every one of our enemies. What I am hoping is that he will run for office. To me a dream team would be Palin and McChrystal. As for others saying negative things and getting fired the war would be over because there would not be any one to fight. Its funny O saying Mc. had failed to meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general when more then half of America is saying the same thing about him.
@rodney850 (2145)
• United States
23 Jun 10
I agree with everything McCrystal said. That said, saying it publically was not the way to go for a commanding general. It violated the code of conduct for all military personel and this will be one of the few times I will agree with Obama, he had no choice. The problem is, we who understand the military mind know how frustrated McCrystal must have been to have vented in that way and he knew the probable consequences of his words. He was having to answer to a bunch of bozos who wouldn't understand military stradegy if it bit them in the but!
• United States
23 Jun 10
Thank you! I totally agree.
1 person likes this
• United States
23 Jun 10
As you military wife you have to know the military is VERY political. YOu watch what you say and do..because it will effect your career. think about it...if you did a interview for a newpaper and trashed your boss and he or she read it...would you keep your job? Heck I have heard of cases of people being fired for just putting up something negative about their bosses on facebook or twitter much less an interview for a big magizines. He may be right. Obama and his admin may be stupid idiots. Who knows. But you don't say it in public and exspect to keep your job. Which is why most of them in the military are just keeping their mouths shut. LOL