general stanley mcchrystal, president obama's hand-selected commander in afghanistan, along with his aides, made shocking comments to rolling stone. according to the washington post, they called the national security adviser a "clown," described the president as intimidated and disengaged, disparaged allies and top u.s. diplomats and converted vice president biden's surname to "bite me." the article, whose accuracy mcchrystal has not denied or challenged, has been called an "enormous mistake" by the white house. they also said mcchrystal showed "bad judgment."
at the time of this blogs posting, the president was awaiting mcchrystal's arrival at the white house. speculation has begun that he is prepared to give the president his letter of resignation.
my point, and i do have one...is, as a citizen of our country, we have a fundamental right to freedom of speech. i personally value and treasure this right. however, when you talk about the military, they live and die by a code of conduct and ethics. at its core it prides itself on honor, respect, order, chain of command and discipline. for any solider, let alone one as high ranking as mcchrystal, to outright and publicly criticize the commander in chief during a time of war goes against everything the military supposedly stands for. as a solider, it is not your job to agree with or even respect your commander in chief, it is however your job to respect his rank and carry out his orders. mcchrystal could have first retired or quit and then run his mouth, but he didn't. instead he made the conscious decision to do this interview while actively leading men into battle.
in my opinion mcchrystal's alleged resignation should be rejected so that the president can outright fire him. additionally, i think mcchrystal should be court-marshaled. according to article 88 of the u.s. uniform code of military justice, “any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the president, the vice-president, congress...shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
at the end of the day the president needs to be able to trust his commander of u.s. forces in afghanistan. how is that possible any more? many are saying that it could do the operation more harm than good by replacing him. but if they don't, what message does that send to the rest of the military? if a general at mcchrystal's level can blatantly disrespect the commander in chief with no consequences, it sets a precedent that others, at every rank, can disrespect their commanding officer and expect no repercussions. i am not sure that is something i would be comfortable with.
general mcchrystal should feel ashamed that by granting an interview with rolling stone, he has smeared what, to this point, was a highly respected military career. (and if i can speak directly to the general for a sec... really? rolling stone? that is the publication that you choose to give the story that will haunt you the rest of your life? my friends and i have played the game, "if you are the lone survivor of a plane crash, who would you give your interview to?" i gotta tell you general, rolling stone never makes anyone's top ten. do you not have any media advisers around you at all? i'm just sayin'...)
what is your point?
i agree. when it comes to people who generally are thought to affect thier country or people, they should not take any unthoughtful action. even though they are like us, human being, they surely took their carrer or chose their life with limited rights in public. if they claim their rights to speek or express themself freely, they had a choise before choosing their career. this really "what-are-you-thinking" situation, and he is going to ruine his entire life. i am glad that i am one of ordinary people:)
ReplyDeleteHe just wasn't thinking right? I mean this makes him look worse than any person he defamed. And I agree...Rolling Stone?!! Was he high?
ReplyDeleteyeah, i also agree. the military is a whole different entity. he is being insubordinate and just plain rude. obama should throw the book at him. other than the military though, people should be allowed to say what they feel, so long as it doesn't interfere with their work - like helen thomas - but that's an old can of worms that i probably shouldn't re-open!
ReplyDeletealso, i agree, rolling stone was prob not the best choice but they actually have a long history of political coverage starting with hunter s thompson to today where i've read great exposes on the wars and voting booth issues in america...
Yes, I agree it's a slippery slope and McChrystal should have known better. However, by all accounts he's a very smart man (he ran special ops for pete's sake), so he had to know what his comments could mean for him and his career. That being said, *why* did he make them anyway? That's the million dollar question. Raw hubris alone can't explain what he did.
ReplyDeleteI'm hearing many accounts that our military in general has deep disdain for Obama and his administration (much more so than prior administrations, both Republican and Democrat). Let's just hope we don't go Argentina and have juntas in our future.