General McChrystal - Hero or Villain?

[Madbob]

As everyone knows General Stanley McChrystal has been summoned by President Obama (his C-in-C) to the White House to explain his recent well publicised remarks expressing, shall we say, less than 100% confidence in certain parts of "the Administration".

The question no one is asking is whether his opinion is well-founded or questions whether Gen McChrystal has the confidence of his subbordinate commanders and troops under his command?

What should be the outcome of his hat-on interview? Should he be compelled to resign or be replaced in post, or should his grievances be acknowledged, investigated and action taken?

I am not condoning his indiscretion to the media but there is seldom "smoke without fire" and he wouldn't have said what he has without justification. The bottom line is....is it ever reasonable for a militayr commander (on active service) to point the finger at his political masters or blow the whistle?

Many may feel that Gen. McChrystal is the "right man in the right job" having the 100% confidence of his men, and would be a hard act for anyone to follow. If his un-guarded remarks are correct surely he should get support from his C-in-C and not a public bo**ocking?

MB

[Pontius Navigator]

....is it ever reasonable for a military commander (on active service) to point the finger at his political masters or blow the whistle?

Yes, to point the finger but in private not in public.

Then comes the difficult decision - resign or stay

[BIGBAD]

They chopped him !

[PPRuNeUser0139]

For those who haven't read the Rolling Stone article, here (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236) it is..
Wonder who the former head of British Special Forces is?
PN, think there's a third option - resign, stay or be sacked..
sv

[vecvechookattack]

I have to say that I think Obama has made a big mistake here.... a very big mistake.

[Top Bunk Tester]

No bigger mistake than the American people made in 2008 by electing him in the first place, surely :ugh:

[glad rag]

Michael Yon?s criticism of McChrystal deemed prophetic (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/michael-yons-criticism-of-mcchrystal-deemed-prophetic.htm)

[OFBSLF]

While I share his opinions of Vice President Biden and Anthony Holbrooke, he was way out of line expressing those opinions to the press. And was not doing a very good job leading his subordinates by expressing his contempt in that fashion.

[Neptunus Rex]

Totally out of order and sacking him was a given.
Will the redoubtable General now run for office as a Republican?

[Wyler]

Like it or not, he works for the politicians.

If you don't like it, hand in your notice and go tend your garden. To make those comments in the media showed a serious lack of judgement and he deserves the push.

Not sure he will be bothered though. He knows the war will not be won in any military sense, he gets his pension and his troops will idolise him. Would not be surprised to see him pop up as a republican candidate in the next few years.

[Pontius Navigator]

SideValve, be sacked is a consequence of STAY and not a personal decision that he could make.

Have not had similar issues recently but where the person concerned has publicly apologies or what was said was spun?

Maybe McC had a choice after all recant or be dismissed.

[Double Zero]

While I have to agree with Wyler, one has to admire a top Officer who dares not to toe the line as his people die; a few like that in Britain would be a good idea.

I wish him an illustrious retirement or political career, and Obama has dropped to sub-zero in my estimation ( which must really worry him ! ) with his handling of this and the BP ' seize on the foreigners, ignore what we do ! ' incidents.

[glad rag]

More to the point this will give massive succour to the taliban et al.

[BlindWingy]

This is an intelligent man here, by virtue of his long career, rank and experience - these comments were not a "mistake/slip of the tongue/misjudgement" - he will have known the consequences!

So why did he do it? In my opinion he must have wanted out.

The question is why?

[Blue Bottle]

SV - Thanks for the link, very intresting to see his own troop's no longer belive in him, even if he did take the time to go and see them after they e mailed him, wonder how many of our 4*'s would do that.
But from that artical I belive it is time for Gen Stan to go as his plan is not going the way he thought it would...his CinC knows that as well

[Jumping_Jack]

I bet Petraeus is well chuffed.....not....:{

[Low Flier]

I agree that he knew exactly what he was doing by such gross insubordination. He certainly knew that he would be fired, just as he certainly knows that his war is unwinnable.

It was his only way out. This way somebody else will lose his war, not him.

Their respective post-dismissal statements were characteristically limp and non-credible.

He claimed that he's "leaving" because he wants to see the mission succeed. His boss, meanwhile, lied through his teeth and said that he didn't fire McC because of the personal insults. Yeah, right.

[Union Jack]

Coupling all this with the sidelining of HBM's Ambassador in Kabul and the General's view of the US Ambassador in Kabul and there is clearly something very very wrong afoot.

Jack

[Geehovah]

All I'd say is McChrystle is a master of information Operations. Wait and see.

[4Greens]

Why the 'Rolling Stone mago' and not a more reputable news outlet?

[Low Flier]

Maybe there were no reputable news outlets embedded at the time.

Maybe he wanted to time the release of the interview with the monthly meeting in Warshington.

Maybe the other embeds were on a 24 hour news cycle and the only weekly or monthly embed was the one he chose.

He's a chess player and a highly skilled manipulator. He chose his weapon carefully. He knew exactly what he was doing and he knew how to do it.

[Pontius Navigator]

Why the 'Rolling Stone mago' and not a more reputable news outlet?

Political leanings perhaps? I don't know US media but it may be that in RS the article would be published whereas in another it might have been spiked.

[Finnpog]

There was an interview on R4 this morning with a US talking head suggesting that as the good General had spent most of his career working on 'the dark side', that he was not as media savvy as other, more green army types would be.

I thought that that sounded like bunkem.

Whilst Occam's Razor would propose that this was an unguarded cock-up - I tend to agree with the comments above about this being a considered action.

[fincastle84]

All officers study military history during their initial training. The history of military campaigns in Afghanistan makes for sad reading.

If politicians did similar studies we wouldn't all be in this mess & Mac's frustration at bl**** interfering politicians wouldn't have resulted in his being fired.

No Neptunus, he won't stand as a Republican. He'll quietly write his memoirs & publish them during the next Presidential elections to ensure that the useless Obama & his limp wristed left wing buddies doesn't get re-elected.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I'm with the McChrystal wanted out crowd.
McChrystal has been pushing the limits of the military top brass since birth, literally (his dad was a 2*). He knew very well he'd get sacked for this. We must ask why he wants out. His COIN strategy is predicated on a credible government of Afghanistan (any COIN strategy is). I don't think he thinks this is possible now. Ergo the war will be lost, and I don't think he wants to be around when it is. It is not McChrystal's job to provide a credible Afghan government, but Washington's. However good his plan, it can't work without this. I think he's lost faith in Washington; I certainly have!
The Rolling Stone bit gets him some cool points :cool:for when he runs as Senator. More importantly, the Rolling Stone reporter was far more likely to print it without asking him the difficult questions he doesn't want to answer.

[Chugalug2]

Evidently the extended time Mr Hastings spent with McChrystal owed less to the latter's Machiavellian plotting and more to the logistical problems created by a certain volcano. As to whether the good General be Hero or Villain, I suspect that depends on who is making that judgement. If it be his own troops I'll go with their verdict, for any commander who loses the trust of those he leads should get out pronto. Perhaps that was his motivation. If it be his own commander, ie President Obama, then I would be less willing to be so compliant. The Rolling Stone article is above all else a searing condemnation of the dysfunctional US higher command, be it in Washington or Kabul, be it civilian or military. Sure it savages General McChrystal, but far more damning is its denouncing of the overblown incompetent bureaucracy of which he was but part. That remains in place and seems to be sleepwalking towards another end of campaign scenario reminiscent of that last shameful day in Saigon. Never mind Obama's reaction to this piece, time for our dear coalition partners to put their thinking caps on and get us out of there before that event. I notice that the article bemoans the paucity of support for the US from its Nato allies, listing them in turn without any mention of the Brits. Strikes me that says a lot about Mr Hastings strategic take, and maybe of a lot more others as well.
In the meantime is that a band playing "Nearer my God to thee"?

[Lonewolf_50]

Reports in the past weeks show bitterness and frustration among the troops due to McC's tight RoE, which he is aware are politically required. I don't see the soldiers idolizing him. I don't see him running for Congress, as I doubt he wants to, and he has no "victory" to use for laurel resting.

I share the criticism of his example in leading the staff, and not ensuring that his Chief of Staff ride herd on the loose lips of mouthy staff officers (been around a few ... ). Maybe he forgot the basics. "If you have time to bitch about the VP, you had time to actually try to solve problems instead. Get your focus on, gentlemen!"

Intrigued by the idea, Fox3, that he saw this turd as not worthy of polishing, and so used media as avenue to force his own relief. I don't think that's what he's made of, but it is plausible. He's a SOF guy ... they do strange things frequently.

Patreaus will probably forward LT GEN Allen's name soon to Congress as actual replacement, so he can go back to being CENTCOM, which is his billet.

Meanwhile, Pres Karzai is pissed because he seemed to have found that he could work with General McC.

Pres Obama was facing a lose-lose situation, so he did what he had to do. Fire the General. Had to show he was tough for domestic political reasons.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Thanks for the view from the States, Lonewolf.
He's had interviews without coffee with Obama over Afghanistan before, and he's politically astute enough to know the President would have to sack him. I think that his sacking was a given, so why?
He knows Karzai (or at least Karzai thinks he does), so would he know that Karzai isn't credible?
He knows he has to apply those ROE, so maybe he thinks these are too big of a handicap? Did he think he could cope with these restrictions on GI Joe as long as his SF dudes could do all the dirty work at night when 'no-one's looking'?
I don't buy his believing that his own COIN strategy is wrong.
I think he thinks no laurels are to be had. I think Petraeus thinks this too, which is another possible reason why he'll hand this one off sharpish.

[D120A]

Silly me. I dreamt last night that the President had the General on the carpet this morning, listened carefully to what he had to say, asked many very sharp questions, then fired all the people in his Administration of whom the General was critical and sent him back to Afghanistan on the afternoon plane.

Silly me.

[Earl]

Sorry but I disagree with Obamas firing of this General.
Being retired USAF and flying cargo into this area, Baghram, Kandahar etc in the civilian world now.
This General called a Duck a Duck.
Yes he was wrong to do so in public.
But as an American I can say this Obama welfare man is the biggest idiot we have ever elected to office.
I think that if memory serves me correctly the General under the Clinton administration called the President a dope smoking, draft dodging womanizing idiot.
He hit the nail on the head and had to resign also.
But we were not at war then.
Sorry if the Truth hurts.
Ones that voted for Obama are already backtracking.
One thing for sure come 2012 Obama and bite me are history.
Just as the midterm elections are showing now with the congressman in every state.
Many are losing positions as we speak.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Earl, we've no doubt you believe that Obama and Biden are a big enough pair of t1ts to get a job at Hooter's, but do you really think:
a) McChrystal didn't know what he was doing with the reporter (he was with him for a month)?
b) Any President would have been able to let any general off for being so publically critical?
What's the real story here? Why did McChrystal want out?

[Andu]

I agree with those who think he knew exactly what he was doing and wanted out because he could see the writing on the wall with political support from home drying up - or not lasting long enough to win.

The shame is, no one in navel-gazing Washington will choose to read it that way and we'll see a repeat of Vietnam. The 'Vietnamisation/(= Afghanisation)" phase, the declaration of succes, the face-saving pull out of coalition troops... and then 1975 and the "T54 through the palace gates moment" (or its equivalent) all over again.

As the Taliban leadership (and, I suspect, the Pakistani Government as well) knew it would go from Day 1.

The big question is: how many full scale military defeats can an empire withstand before it goes the way of all empires?

[Low Flier]

McChrystal's War isn't being lost because the Empire is collapsing and the Empire isn't collapsing because it is losing the war.

The war is being lost because the war is unwinnable. That's all.

The Empire is collapsing because no empire in history can survive in a state of negative wealth. The $13Tn debt is massively unaffordable and everyone knows that there is neither willingness nor ability to repay that debt. They've reached a position of terminal decline where they have to borrow more and more simply to service the unaffordable debt. It's like a family household taking out a new credit card to pay the minimum payments on their already maxed out credit cards.

McChrystal merely recognised that his war is already being lost. His idea that he could roll up Helmand through massive firepower didn't work and his idea of sending in the puppet Afghan army to sort out downtown Kandahar for him won't work either.

Quite understandably, he doesn't want to be remembered by History as the man who lost McChrystal's War.

Petraeus doesn't either, which is why he will delegate the job to an underling pdq.

[Lonewolf_50]

His idea that he could roll up Helmand through massive firepower

Blythe mischaracterization, to put it charitably. Were that his aim and his strategy, he'd not have spent so much effort to get more people on the ground. Firepower aplenty is available without the request for 10, 20, 30, or 40 thousand more bodies in country.

Other than that, some of your points make sense.

[OFBSLF]

I disagree with those who suggest that McChrystal did this deliberately in order to get a way out. If he wanted an honorable way out, he could have simply resigned and offered up an excuse -- spend time with his family, health, etc.

McChrystal began believing his own press, and his staff reflected his arrogance. The reporter was around long enough for McChrystal and staff to forget to watch their mouths. Given the long hours and extreme frustrations involved in the war, it is not surprising that they made some impolitic remarks.

[alfred_the_great]

Former DSF is Lt Gen Graeme "Mad Dog" Lamb.

Graeme Lamb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeme_Lamb)

Before his got the job with Afg, prob best known within US Military circles for showing his 6-pack to Pres G W Bush and SecState Rice on his last VTC from Iraq....

[Lonewolf_50]

From a wiki article .... Lamb has always acknowledged the importance of targeted force in warfare; Lamb has been quoted as describing McChrystal (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Stanley_A._McChrystal)'s forces in Iraq as being "absolutely essential to setting the conditions that allowed the Awakening (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Sons_of_Iraq) to move forward". Nonetheless, he has also stressed the importance of timing in the final outreach process. Lamb is quoted as suggesting that the timing of his strategic engagement initiative in Iraq was critical, stating that if "we tried to do it in mid-2004, it would have crashed and burned... [b]ecause at the end of the day, people hadn’t exercised their revenge. They hadn’t stood at the edge of the abyss and looked into it." In a similar vein, Lamb has stated that "certain things were possible in 2006 that would not have been possible in 2004 or 2005".
I expect General P will hope to keep him on ...

[Low Flier]

President Obama has nigh on tripled the firepower on the ground that he inherited. Much of this was at the beckoning of McChrystal. The increase in boots/firepower on the ground has not worked and it will not work. It didn't work in Majan and it won't work in Kandahar. The problem isn't with the the US grunts, either qualitativey or quantitavely.

The problem is the abjectly ****e Afghan "national" puppet army and the shower of crooks dressed up in police uniform. McC's dream that he could send those wallies in to fight his fight was dumb and dumber, in that order.

McCrystal was savvy enough to recognise that, albeit far too late to extricate his career from the current and even worse impending disaster. He didn't want to go down in history as either a quitter or a loser, so he took a sideways exit.

Pres Obama, meanwhile, has played an equally good chess move in appointing Petraeus to replace McC. Very clever move, actually. It has completely stymied any hopes that General P might have had of tilting his lance at the presidency in Nov '12.

[Lonewolf_50]

The problem is the abjectly ****e Afghan "national" puppet army and the shower of crooks dressed up in police uniform. McC's dream that he could send those wallies in to fight his fight was dumb and dumber, in that order.
I find that a rational analysis, but it is useful to recall that the thrust of the nation building exercise in Afghanistan significantly predates Obama's arrival in the White House, and indeed goes as far back as the interim government (hey, it was our dear friend Karzai at the head of that), followed by one election (surprise, Karzai wins! ) and then another (much criticized, of course) and we see some more Karzai.

One wonders why he was the only flavor of the month.

Since his first arrival as interim, the American objective has been, politically, to empower and leave in place a government (almost to the point of an anyone but you, Taliban! government) which by structure and definition comes with associated soldiers and cops. That choice is bound by a number of constraints, one of which is the decision that the lines on the map, as drawn, are sacred, regardless of how "unified" the collection of peoples actually is.

The dream you mention did not originate, as far as I can see, with General Stan. :cool: It's part of the American policy continuum since ... well, since the Taliban were tossed out of the driver's seat.

[fincastle84]

Overall, as Empire builders, I hope that you will agree, that we Brits made a reasonable job of it. Afterall, we quickly let go of those stroppy Americans!

However, although India has been reasonably successful, we never, ever got a grip on the Muslim people, just as America screwed up in the Far East. Therefore I unfortunately have to conclude that it is extremely unlikely that there will be LONG TERM solution to the Afghan conflict.

The career of Gen Stan M is just one casualty of this unfortunate conflict. Sadly there will be 1000s to follow.

[Lonewolf_50]

fincastle, I've seen various criticisms of the American approach as not being ruthless enough to be a proper empire, to include comments from American academics, Brits, Japanese, and Russians.

Quite possibly true.

Maybe hegemon is the best we can arrange, given our ideological baseline.

[weido_salt]

Villain

In the military, you do as you are told. That goes right from the second from the top, to the very bottom.

[glad rag]

Work in a sawmill do ya?:suspect::suspect:

[fincastle84]

I proffer Oman in the early 1970s as an example of how to do it right.

Congratulations on your excellent post, it brings back many memories of my limited role in that conflict.

However, I would like to add that our politicians & military leaders did have one major advantage over the present lot. The Oman conflict was fought in secret, away from the spotlight of the world's media. Therefore the politicians weren't constantly looking over their shoulders checking the opinion polls.

[Wiley]

Some of the frustrations expressed here are covered very well in a book I’d highly recommend to anyone even remotely involved or interested in our current involvement in Afghanistan (and elsewhere). ‘The Accidental Guerrilla – fighting small wars in the midst of a big one’ by David Kilcullen (ISBN 9781921372537) is a very well written treatise on the current style of warfare Western armies are forced to fight against irregular Islamic forces. The book is newly published, and so is quite up to date with some of the examples he uses in his arguments.

Kilcullen was a special advisor for counterinsurgency to Condolezza Rice (who?) and senior counterinsurgency advisor to General David Petraeus.
In a very early chapter, he cites an incident in Afghanistan in 2006 where an American Special Forces patrol was ambushed by a very large force of very competent and extremely professional Taliban. (When Coalition forces returned to the valley some time later, they were surprised at the sophistication of the ambush position and the high level of preparation that had been put into establishing it.)

As the patrol attempted to fight its way out of the valley, they came under fire from a large number of local people who were not part of the ambush, but simply farmers and villagers who rushed home to get their guns to join in the fight when it became apparent a fight was in progress. Interviewed afterwards, villagers said that it was the most exciting thing to happen in the valley in years and there was no way they could bear not to have taken part in it. (Bragging rights around the camp fire?)

It is from incidents like this that the book derives its name – many of the people Coalition forces find themselves fighting are not Taliban per se, but simply people who resent foreigners coming into their valleys and killing them. If it was my valley in rural Australia and an American military patrol came into it (as far as I was concerned) uninvited, I’m not sure whether I wouldn’t be dusting off my old .303 if I had one.

[Clockwork Mouse]

John Masters, in his excellent book "Bugles and a Tiger" about his service with the Gurkhas between the wars, tells a pertinent story. After one of the periodic punch-ups on the NW Frontier, the local tribesmen turned up at the British base and demanded to be given the campaign medal. After all, they had been fighting too!

[Q-RTF-X]

I don’t really understand why some people are surprised at the outcome.

The General stepped out of line BIG TIME. Within a military framework his actions were inexcusable. His reasons for doing so are irrelevant

The President/Commander-in-Chief had no option but to let the General go. Realistically, no President, irrespective of his political leanings, would have any option other than the direction just taken by the present incumbent.

End of Story.

[jungle drums]

It seems that western forces are having Charlie Wilson's 1980s Afghan efforts returned in kind.

Where are the Taliban arms, supplies and expertise coming from?

And how?

[ORAC]

Where are the Taliban arms, supplies and expertise coming from? And how?
Channel 4 news: Exclusive: Iran supplies weapons to Taliban (http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/world/asia_pacific/exclusive+iran+supplies+weapons+to+taliban/3582967)

The Times: Taliban fighters being taught at secret camps in Iran (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7069817.ece)

etc, etc......

[fincastle84]

The General had to go

Yes he did, because by declaring that US forces would start withdrawing from Afghanistan in 2011, Obama made the General's campaign impossible.

Remember the first principle of war; 'Selection & Maintenance of the Aim'. How do you achieve that when you've told the enemy 'oh by the way, we'll start leaving you to it in 12 months time'?

As for the 2nd principle; 'Maintenance of Morale', words fail me.

Obama should stick to what he knows best, making money, & leave the military to fight the wars.

[anotherthing]

Lonewolf

It's doesn't matter a jot that the soldiers are unhappy with McC's tight RoE's - they were brought in because McC was clever enough to realise that to have any chance of winning in Afghanistan (a very big ask), you need to win the hearts and minds of the local population.

Something the UK learned a long time ago, and an area they excel in. US forces have, under McC shown that they are more than capable of doing this - much to their credti.

He wasn't there to be popular - any commander or manager worth their salt know that you don't have to be liked to get the job done. You don't have to be liked to be respected either.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Let's not also forget that the Sultan of Oman was (and still is) 'one of us' (public school and Sandhurst), at least in terms of background, and therefore a lot easier to advise/manage/whatever. He's also got a very mild version of Islam in his country.
I don't see Karzai introducing symphony orchestras or permitting female racing drivers anytime soon. The local imams in Kabul probably aren't quite so tolerant of booze and bikinis on the tourist hotel beaches.
Same goes for the King of Malaya (currently Geelong Grammar and Sandhurst, previous incumbent Wellingborough and Sandhurst).

Best we bell up the HMC, find some Afghani public schoolboy, stick him through Sandhurst and organise a coup. Standard!;)

[Lonewolf_50]

anotherthing: in re post 52

I utterly agree with you. I was responding to the odd idea that General McC would be able to ride his popularity into political success, an idea that had been made a bit further up. (posts 1, 9, 10), and the assertion in the OP that he had "100% confidence of his men."

[JagRigger]

Why, I wonder, does a certain film script keep running through my head over the whole affair ?

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. ....you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. .... And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post.

[larssnowpharter]

Let's not also forget that the Sultan of Oman was (and still is) 'one of us' (public school and Sandhurst)

Not to mention King Hussein of Jordan (possibly the Arab country that has the best civil rights record): ex Harrow and Sandhurst as well as being the direct descendant of the Prophet and a Marshal of the Royal Air Force. King Abdullah also has a Western backgroung; his mum and education.

Isn't there an Afghani old boy from Eton or Harrow? Good grief, we must be slipping up.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Indeed. I once built a suspension bridge for the King of Jordan (Hussein, his dad), also Harrow & Sandhurst.
Bloody nice bloke; called me Sir.
OK, the suspension bridge was on a field at Cranditz (using meninge pine poles and a mile of rope) and King Hussein called everyone Sir, but he was still a great bloke.
Anyway, back to the topic.
Bad Jack Nicholson quotes aren't going to help here. Politicians have every right to impose policy, otherwise there's no point pretending to supply Democracy when we don't have it ourselves. Politicians do not have the right to ignore reality however.
Is this what McChrystal was saying? Mind you, Rolling Stone is still the wrong place to say it.

[dallas]

Channel 4 news: Exclusive: Iran supplies weapons to Taliban (http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/world/asia_pacific/exclusive+iran+supplies+weapons+to+taliban/3582967)

The Times: Taliban fighters being taught at secret camps in Iran (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7069817.ece)

etc, etc......
I love it when we indignantly leap for the moral high ground and cry 'foul!' when 'the [current] bad guys' copy our own tactics. It's like the irony of positioning a US carrier task force off the coast of Iran and then accusing Iran of international meddling!

[larssnowpharter]

The UK have been very successful in counter terror and anti guerilla wars for over 60 years,

Actually somewhat longer.

However, the point I would wish to make is that the Thompson Priciples still need to apply to any COIN operation. They are common sense and tried and tested.

I invite anyone reaing this to research these priciple and ask themselves if they:

1. They can be applied in Afghanistan?
2. If they can, then why the hell isn't it happening?

[OFBSLF]

Is this what McChrystal was saying? Mind you, Rolling Stone is still the wrong place to say it.
He can say anything he wants anywhere he wants after he resigns. But before he resigned, he should have only voiced his concerns privately with his superiors. Once he got his orders, his choices were 1) salute the flag and march as ordered, or 2) resign. The military works for the civilian leadership, not the other way around.

[fincastle84]

The military works for the civilian leadership, not the other way around.

That is exactly what I was taught during my officer training way back in the 60s.

I was fortunate that in my really 'interesting' period, when my decision making was really important, I had Maggie as PM & Ronnie was President.

I was also very fortunate not to have to put my life on the line for a numbskull like Obama. He's so bad he almost makes Carter look like a genius.

[Wiley]

The two elephants - make that 'mammoths' - in the room that no one are addressing are

(1) the definite deep involvement of the Iranian Government in training, equipping and financing the Taliban. They are basically doing to the Americans what the Americans did to the Soviets.

and

(2), the other mammoth in the room that even fewer people want to see is the almost certain fact that the Pakistani Government is doing almost the same thing - while accepting tens of millions of dollars a month from the US for (supposedly) being on our side. I can't say I can blame the Pakistanis for having the bet each way, because they know their history. They know that the West will tire of the blood and monetary sacrifice long before the Taliban do. And they know that any Afghan Government the West sets up will topple within a few short years of an American pull out.

With the Iranians, the Americans could possibly do something. But I don't think they have the political will (or the money) to do it. (For which we should all say a silent 'Thank God'.) For anything they did to stop the Iranian support, to be effective, would have to be the equivalent of Truman having let MacArthur loose with every weapon in his inventory available to him on the Yalu River in 1950-51.

I don't think the world is ready for that.

[Mike7777777]

Unfortunately not surprised to read of US Special Forces underestimating the ambush capabilities of the "the other side", a brief review of Afghan conflicts 1839 to date would have provided the necessary clues. McC retires undefeated, any withdrawal from the conflict without victory by the West will eventually be seen as a defeat, this will tarnish those associated with it.

The current phase of the Afghan conflict has to be open ended, the battles are better fought in Afghanistan than London or New York. Priority number one has to be to ensure that "the other side" does not achieve access to sophisticated SAMs, Westermann's "The Bear versus the Mujahideen" describes how Stingers shifted the balance in a previous conflict.

Re: British Empire and Moslims, see Indian sub-continent 1740 - 1947

[Pontius Navigator]

The earlier comment about ordinary tribesmen joining in the fire fight for bragging rights, or simply because the US SF were intruders or invaders would hold true just about anywhere.

Suppose in UK we asked for French police to help police a football match? (Ouch the RSA did just that).

Having a Scottish PM and Government was not accepted without bitter argument. Cross county boundary angst also exists, look at Lincolnshire and Yorkshire when Humberside was foisted on them. Grimsby only saw this as a land grab by Yorkshire and Hull, especially as Hull wanted to rename Humberside airport.

OK we don't rise up in arms about it (as we have been disarmed) but feelings still run deep.

Even in the US, I suspect, there will be cross-State frictions and certainlt between Federal and State.

After WW2 the Allies provided aid and stability but did not try to impose their ideas of democracy (I think) but helped the European countries re-establish theirs. You cannot impose a Governance system from outside nor overnight.

Rather than try and pacify the middle, I wonder if it would be better securing the borders? Or trying at least.

[OFBSLF]

I was fortunate that in my really 'interesting' period, when my decision making was really important, I had Maggie as PM & Ronnie was President.
Both Ronnie and Maggie had principles, common sense, and large, brass pair of b*lls.

I was also very fortunate not to have to put my life on the line for a numbskull like Obama. He's so bad he almost makes Carter look like a genius.
I agree with your opinion of Obama. While that might explain McChrystal's frustration, it doesn't justify his actions.

[The Old Fat One]

But as an American I can say this Obama welfare man is the biggest idiot we have ever elected to office.



....and I thought the previous incumbent set the IQ bar so low nobody could get under it!

Where do you find these guys?

[OFBSLF]

Where do you find these guys?
From the same place where you lot found Gordon Brown :E

[Clockwork Mouse]

"The same place you lot found Gordon Brown?"
I thought O'Bama was oirish, not scottish!

[fincastle84]

I agree with your opinion of Obama. While that might explain McChrystal's frustration, it doesn't justify his actions.

Please don't misunderstand me. I fully understand that no officer is allowed to publicly criticise a superior, particularly when that superior is a politician. However, such was McChrystal's frustration at the incompetence & scrambled direction from the White House that he felt he had no alternative.

I'm sure he will be very employable now that he has resigned.:ok:

[Lonewolf_50]

Employable as what? He need never work again, as his retirement pay isn't all that bad. He'd probably want to, though, as most flag officers are real go-getters ... which is part of why they achieve stars.

It will be interesting to see if Congress accepts his resignation as a four star, which is a temporary rank, or if his retirement is as a two-star, the last permanent rank. ;) As a point of reference, VADM Dunleavy was retired as a two star, not a three, in part due to the A-12 fiasco, and in part due to the Tailhook fiasco ... not sure if the Congress feels that General M has been involved in a fiasco, or if he's made a lesser transgression.

[OFBSLF]

Employable as what? He need never work again, as his retirement pay isn't all that bad. He'd probably want to, though, as most flag officers are real go-getters ... which is part of why they achieve stars.
As a very highly paid consultant. There are a number of military consulting companies in the DC area that hire such generals. An example would be Military Professional Resources Inc., that was hired by Croatia.

McChrystal would be a huge rainmaker for that sort of company.

[Lonewolf_50]

True enough.

I'd like to ask a question about something that confuses me.

Why in the HELL do Congress need to confirm Petraeus as Commander in Afghanistan? Has something changed since I last checked? He was already combatant commander in charge of two major operations in his theater: Iraq and Afghanistan.

He was confirmed as CENTCOM by the Senate.

CENTCOM is the combatant commander of record. He has two subordinate commanders running operations: Odierno in Iraq, and McChrystal in Afghanistan. If McChrystal is relieved, Petraeus never wasn't in charge of that operation, as McChrystal was his direct subordinate. It defaults to him, or McChrystal's deputy.

What the hell happened to the chain of command?

Obama/SecDEF (National Command Authority) -> CINC -> Theater/Operation Commander.

Is Petraeus being demoted to theater/operation commander, and replaced at CENTCOM?

Can someone help me please? Has some idiot in Washington created stovepiped chains of command that violate everything in the book?

Or has the book changed while I've been gone?

[Thomas coupling]

Lonewolf50 - it is confirmed by the Pentagon that Patraeus has been demoted to be able to backfill this position. But make no mistake - he will be paid back big time for this 'interruption to his career' upon completion - up at the 'hill' at a time of his choosing.
In the meantime - who better to take over from a loose cannon who has been a wild child since military academy it seems.

[Lonewolf_50]

As I understand what you said, Central Command is vacant billet now. Do you have a report or a source I can refer to?

EDIT after some poking around:
OK, I see the reports in a different light now, and notice numerous comments that CENTCOM's new commander is yet to be announced
What is going on here is novel. Patreaus stepped down a chain in command to take command of that war.

As to "wild child" description of General M, I'd be careful of believing the stories you read in the paper. Newspaper writers write stories, and they frequently care not how inaccurate their artistic license renders their final product. :cool: It is my suspicion that the last thing you'd think of General McChrystal, were you to meet him in person, is that he is "wild."

The American military stopped promoting genuinely wild and colorful officers quite a while back. The media still haven't caught up to the current year, preferring to link the men they write about to the colorful characters of yesteryear, and Hollywood's fabricated tales of the adventures in uniform.

Put another way, the Colonel, as played by Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men," isn't somebody you will meet in real life, but instead a caricature created by a writer to make for decent drama and a successful film. Likewise, the only guy I recognized in Top Gun was Goose. He was as close to real as anyone in that film got. The rest were cartoon characters.

[US Herk]

Interesting take for the crowd that believes McCrystal did this on purpose:

The General and the Community OrganizerPublications Family Security Matters (http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6581/pub_detail.asp)

[Thomas coupling]

Lonewolf- let me turn the tables: Why would the author of the article purposefully draw all this fire to the article, if the comments he makes about McC are false? Do you genuinely believe McC would stand by and allow this defamation to continue. He has/was accused of two cover ups in his career to date and the stories surrounding his "personnal team" have been corroborated in other articles. Even his wife agrees that he was/is a 'colourful' character. How sweet.
The modern Command structure may have cleaned up its act, but McC is definitely from the old school, I suspect...........

It's one thing suggesting he did this on purpose - but another watching his personality being dissected in public. IF he was so astute as to plan all this - it doesn't say much for his self esteem does it?

My take on it: This guy thought he was above authority - immune from criticism. Atleast now he only has himself to think about on those lonely 7 mile daily runs.

[Dengue_Dude]

I don't know about the US of A's exit strategy for Afghanistan, but when this happened, I said to my wife that I felt this was the General's exit strategy.

Doesn't help the poor bastards left there of course.

[Lonewolf_50]

Response to Thomas Coupling:
Lonewolf- let me turn the tables: Why would the author of the article purposefully draw all this fire to the article, if the comments he makes about McC are false?
He's a journalist, which means of dubious ethical character. The article does not have to be false to be less than true, not to mention I suspect a great deal of what he reported was true enough. Do you genuinely believe McC would stand by and allow this defamation to continue.
Not sure, but I am pretty sure that if the climate in the HQ is somewhat as the reporter presented, the Chief of Staff of the HQ didn't do what he was supposed to do in terms of what attitude to take in re the political leadership.
He has/was accused of two cover ups in his career to date and the stories surrounding his "personnal team" have been corroborated in other articles.
What has this to do with the RS article? He was vetted, the previous service matter on record, and still selected for command.
Even his wife agrees that he was/is a 'colourful' character.
Good, which may be why he was promoted: he could mix colorful with mission with all else. I've worked with enough drones to prefer not to again .
The modern Command structure may have cleaned up its act, but McC is definitely from the old school, I suspect ...
Heh, I am not sure just which version of "old school" you refer to, as "old school" conventional wisdom was that careers in SF were not general/commander builders. ;) Hugh Shelton was seen by many as an abberation .
It's one thing suggesting he did this on purpose - but another watching his personality being dissected in public. IF he was so astute as to plan all this - it doesn't say much for his self esteem does it?

It says nothing about his self esteem, which I don't see as other than intact, but it leaves open some questions about why his term was so short. It is my suspicion that what we are seeing in the press is only part of the story. A critique of him by Sec Def Gates:
“No single American (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100816/pl_politico/41101#) had inflicted more fear, more loss of freedom and more loss of life” on American enemies, Gates said of the retiring general.
When you boss is generally pleased with your operational bona fides, I don't think your self esteem is going to suffer.
My take on it: This guy thought he was above authority - immune from criticism.
I seriously doubt that, and find your summary both two dimensional and cartoonish.
At least now he only has himself to think about on those lonely 7 mile daily runs.
He doubtless thinks about other things as well, given my small data set on SF officers I have worked with.

You and I are both working with incomplete information.

Yale to take him on: interesting.

[Samba Anaconda]

Wasn't this general also implicated in the Pat Tillman fiasco? There is certainly much more than is let on.

Coming to Afghanistan; will it be another Vietnam? Sure it will be, the question now is how to plot a " graceful " exit? Isn't Afghanistan part of the grand strategy of " choking " and " containing " China?

[reynoldsno1]

The apparent billions of $'s worth of minerals in the Afghan hinterland wouldn't have any bearing on anything, would it? I bet the Chinese will be in like Flynn - I don't think the Taliban policies on education and emancipation will get in the way of business.....