The Community Organizer - vs - 4 Star General

[stebo0728]

Ok so whats yous guys's take on this whole General McChrystal Rolling Stone interview? Today he is being reprimanded by by The Community Organizer. Heres my take on it so far. First of all, I believe he was off base to release criticism against the Commander in Chief in a public forum. With that said, I can completely understand his frustration. He is being asked to do a job, and not being given the tools to do it. That is enough to unnerve anyone. Again, I dont agree with the interview he gave, and he should be held accountable for that. The expected turnout is either his resignation, or him being fired. I dont know if either are warranted, but then I am not military so I dont know what par for the course here would be. If BO has half a brain he will at least take this opportunity to realize that he has virtually no respect from the men he leads. Even if the general must go, there are lessons to be learned on both sides. So any thoughts?

[IBCoupe]

First off, don't be a dumbass. He's the President, not "The Community Organizer." I'm making a point of correcting you because that's exactly the mistake that McChrystal made.

My view is straightforward:

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.

Four elements to the crime to prove, in this case:
1. That McChrystal was a commissioned officer.
2. That McChrystal used certain words against the parties identified by Article 88.
3. That these words became known to someone other than McChrystal.
4. That the words were contemptuous on their own or by their circumstances.

Maximum, he could be dismissed, forfeit his pay and allowances, and be confined for up to a year. Commissioned officers are not allowed to openly (in public or private) disrespect the President. We really don't want an environment where the military starts to think that it doesn't have to take orders from the civilian government, and this is the first line of defense in preventing that kind of behavior.

It's quite simple.

[IBCoupe]

I should note that it doesn't usually come to a court martial, but Ben Smith's blog has a nifty little history that was emailed to him: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ ... ml?showall

[stebo0728]

Well said. I agree he overstepped the line, and am in no way wanting to condone his actions. I do however condone his viewpoints, they are perfectly valid. and as far as ...

I'm making a point of correcting you because that's exactly the mistake that McChrystal made.

I am NOT a commissioned officer, so I can refer to him as the Community Organizer if I so desire. Actually the term seems to not fit as well, seeing how he is grossly failing to "organize" our "national community". Anyone CAN be elected president, but the current POTUS is proof that not just anyone SHOULD be elected president. Fortunately we only have to tolerate the consequences of this election for 2 more years.

In short, McChrystal violated protocol in his actions and should be dealt with accordingly, I just hate that the POTUS is such a miserable Command in Chief that the general felt the need to air this publicly in the fashion he did.

[IBCoupe]

In short, McChrystal violated protocol in his actions and should be dealt with accordingly, I just hate that the POTUS is such a miserable Command in Chief that the general felt the need to air this publicly in the fashion he did.

If memory serves, he never said anything about the POTUS. It was "VPOTUS and the wimps in the White House."

And I was correcting you to make a point about McChrystal, but I also think that we should all show a certain amount of respect for the office. Disagree with him all you want, but he's still the President. I make a point of writing out the title "President" before the names of each of our CiC's. "President Clinton," "President Bush," "President Obama."

Shows a bit of maturity with the subject matter that too often is lost in the internet. Also, the partisan whining gets old, quick.

[stebo0728]

I understand what you mean, respect is important, hard to maintain sometimes though, but I agree. Actually I have heard alot of people complain about news articles or the like not saying "President" when they refer to a president. Actually the rule books on proper citation have been changed. The first time in a piece, the president is supposed to be referred to as President Such and Such, after that Mr. Such and Such is sufficient. Its funny because I never really heard alot of complaining when the news would say Mr. Bush, but I have heard alot more complaining, the word racism thrown around, and the like when someone says Mr. Obama instead of President Obama. Crazy ... anyway true he was really gunning more for the VP, but same concept, he was out of place. Still waiting to hear today what comes of it ...

The point I would like to make is that this is really just another symptom of the massive lack of competence this administration has, from the Wars in Afganistan and Iraq, to this oil spill, the lack of transparency to the media, the chicago politics at play, etc....

[AZhitman]

I'll echo IBC's position on this one... Regardless of the situation, and notwithstanding Article 88, there's a certain professional decorum dictated by high-level positions, and I believe the General was in the wrong.

On a side note, HOW THE HELL did he think it was a good idea to even speak to an anti-military, counterculture ragsheet full of questionable, biased journalism like RS? Come on, General. Think, for f***'s sake.

Given that, if it's found that he didn't actually invoke POTUS in his criticism specifically, and by some small technicality he is spared the consequences of Article 88, I'd be well-pleased. His job, in its simplest description, is to kill people and break stuff, and I could give a damn what he says to a journalist, as long as he's doing a good job out in the sand.

But yeah - Let's not be disparaging the POTUS in public, General. Bad form.

________

Re: proper addressing of people... Mr. Obama is NOT one to talk. Not many noticed, but his arrogance and disdain for others was never more apparent than during the presidential debates when he continually and disdainfully referred to Senator McCain as "John"... over and over again. McCain took the high road throughout, and never once stooped to calling him "Barry". Not once.

Unfortunately, the damage was done. Although the balance of power and experience and service to our country clearly favored McCain, by virtue of that simple manipulative act, BO appeared "presidential", Senator McCain appeared the underling. Impressively devious, but unforgivable nonetheless.

[IBCoupe]

Stebo, yeah, it can be tough. I try to be as skeptical as possible of what anyone says to me, and that tends to help. Saying, "I don't agree with that" or "I'm not convinced" is a good bit different from "I disagree with that," and it's gotten me pretty far. It prompts further discussion, rather than the digging in of heels on both sides. Of course, you can't be afraid to speak of what you do know.

And, actually, I first heard about the rule a a few years ago. I was a little upset when I heard an NPR anchor refer to President Bush as "Mr. Bush," but then did some research into it, and I was dissuaded. What still pisses me off is when people twist the names of the President, or a Congressman, or even a Party. It seems childish and cheap, and does nothing to further intelligent exploration of the issues. Writing "O'Bama," for example, is a way to get on my bad side. Worse is "RepubliKKKan," or, especially when it done by elected officials: "The Democrat Party." That stuff's just not helpful.

Greg, from what I've heard (I haven't read the article; I don't think I can remember the last time I even saw a copy of the Rolling Stone or visited their website), it wasn't even a direct quote from McChrystal. It was one of his aides relaying something McChrystal said to them. While that might excuse him more in the public eye (and even in the President's eye), it still has the same legal effect.

It's absolutely imperative that the Military remain subordinate to the civilian government, especially if the best example, to date, that we can come up with for what defines "tyranny" is "taxation without representation."

[AZhitman]

Well, it looks like the "Community Organizer" stayed home sick, and the "pompous arrogant a$$" showed up for work today.

President Obama... relieved Gen. Stanley McChrystal for disparaging comments McChrystal and his staff had made about senior administration officials in a magazine article.

Obama said he accepted McChrystal's resignation because his conduct "does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general."

Civilian control of the military, not policy differences, required him to remove McChrystal, Obama said.

Nice to see a temper tantrum from a spoiled powermonger ruin a military officer's otherwise stellar career.

[UpStar]

Ok so whats yous guys's take on this whole General McChrystal Rolling Stone interview?

he was clearly out of line with what he said and he should've been fired!

[IBCoupe]

Nice to see a temper tantrum from a spoiled powermonger ruin a military officer's otherwise stellar career.

President Obama did the least he could. Had he refused to dismiss McChrystal, it would look like a general could badmouth the government with impunity. You only get to do that when you retire.


McChrystal did it probably to make his own bid for office, anyways. I'm not crying any crocodile tears over this one. Besides, that stellar career may have some scuffs with the Pat Tillman affair, being that he was the highest ranking uniformed officer involved with the cover-up.

[AZhitman]

I guess you're right. I was hoping they'd maybe take Article 88 in its literal sense, perhaps foregoing a broad-brush interpretation...

Interesting angle on the possibility of a "bid for office". Makes loads of sense, especially if the increasingly anti-Obama rhetoric continues at the current pace - he could be sitting pretty in a couple years.

[stebo0728]

Here is something that has always bothered me. There is a clear distinction between accountability and subordination. Are we to posit that military affairs should be completely subordinate to civilian authority, or that the military should be accountable to civilian authority? I take the 2nd position on this one. I dont believe it to be wise to put someone in the civilian sector in complete tactical control over military affairs. Merely to have them accountable to civilian authority, where if improper lines are crossed, then consequences ensue, otherwise the military does the job it has been assigned, and does it based on their own judgement. There is no time to run campaigns through a beauracratic filter when lives are on the line.

[stebo0728]

So he tendered his resignation, at least he was allowed to leave with some dignity ... this thing keeps getting more interesting ... he was really taking the heat for his aids more than himself it appears, which is admirable. So now Gen. David Petraeus will be taking over, which surprises me somewhat, props to Presbo on that one, Petraeus is a commendable general, and once hes aprised he should do as adequate a job or more so than McChrystal had been doing. I commend Presbo because Petraeus seems an odd pick for him seeing as most of the left has labeled him "Petraeus Betray Us". I dont remember the argument, but the left dont seem to like him that much so for Presbo to choose him, shows a bit more backbone than I typically attribute to him.

[mattblancarte]

I'm pretty much aligned with everything IBCoupe has said here.

McChrystal did it probably to make his own bid for office, anyways.

Maybe, maybe not. My impression of Gen. McChrystal is that he has absolute disdain for politics. This quote is in regards to meeting a French Minister:

I'd rather have my a** kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner... Unfortunately, no one in this room could do it.

I guess to be a general you have to be the ultimate badass.

[AZhitman]

THAT is awesome.