McChrystal Apologizes for Insulting Obama Team to Magazine

[babylonsister]

Too little, too late. And I am anxious to hear VP Biden's reaction/response to all this. I bet he's telling the Prez to can McCrystal's ass.


http://washingtonindependent.com/87922/mcchrystal-apologizes-for-insulting-obama-team-to-magazine

McChrystal Apologizes for Insulting Obama Team to Magazine
By Spencer Ackerman 6/22/10 7:37 AM


A not-yet-released Rolling Stone magazine profile of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, quotes him and anonymous aides expressing anger, disrespect and derision at various members of the Obama administration, including Vice President Biden, Amb. Richard Holbrooke and Amb. Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador to the country.

The profile itself isn’t out yet. But reporters have gotten its flavor. “Who’s that?” McChrystal is quoted as saying about Biden, who in 2009 didn’t favor McChrystal’s preferred strategy in Afghanistan. Eikenberry, a retired war commander himself, authored cables to Washington questioning whether counterinsurgency can work in the nine-year war and whether President Hamid Karzai is a reliable ally. McChrystal apparently told the magazine, “Here’s one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, ‘I told you so.’”

Last night, McChrystal released a statement to reporters taking responsibility for the profile, while not addressing any specific quotes attributed to him. Here it is in full:

“I extend my sincerest apology for this profile. It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened. Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard. I have enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his national security team, and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting this war and I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome.”

Update: According to the AP, McChrystal is getting summoned to Washington to be called on the carpet. In the White House, many senior officials still have a bad taste in their mouths over McChrystal’s leaked strategy review — McChrystal and his staff did not leak it — which they considered part of a pressure campaign to get Obama to escalate the Afghanistan. Obama did, and McChrystal testified to Congress in December that he fully endorsed and will faithfully execute the administration’s strategy.

It’s perilous for Obama to fire McChrystal now, with only a year remaining before the July 2011 date for beginning to transition to Afghan security responsibilities and consequently beginning troop reductions. But it’s going to be on McChrystal to repair the trust with the White House this profile has clearly damaged. If McChrystal keeps his command, that Rolling Stone reporter got the general’s last big interview.

[Connie_Corleone]

1. It may be perilous, but I still say fire him.

Not just him, but those "anonymous" aides too. They all need to go.

[loudsue]

35. No! No!! He's TOO BIG TO FAIL!!!

There's a lot of that going around in this country these days. Way too many things/people/companies/wars are too big to fail.

I say, we should clean house and fail the whole lot of them.

[impik]

2. He should be fired today. No excuses.

[babylonsister]

4. If he had any 'personal honor' or 'professional integrity', he'd

resign in disgrace.

[impik]

9. True. Obviously, he has none, and the president

simply can't let a soldier calling him "wimp" to stay.

[vaberella]

42. That's what I was thinking. n/t

[flpoljunkie]

48. Perhaps eating one meal a day and sleeping only 4 hours a night makes you say stupid, immature stuff

The general is obviously lacking in the mature judgment required for a commanding general--particularly one in charge of all our forces in Afghanistan.

[kiranon]

52. And, allegedly being drunk didn't help either. n/t

[WeDidIt]

3. He should be court martialed and dismissed from the service

Humiliate and disgrace him.

Because failure to fire him makes Obama weak, which was the accusation this fucker was making any way. Obama should demonstrate true strength and have Patreus form an Article 32 hearing as soon as McChrystal arrives in D.C.

[Jennicut]

5. I would love to know the VP's reaction to this.

McChrystal will never be subordinate to President Obama. He thinks he is a "wimp". Obama should fire his ass and leave Afghanistan at the proposed deadline. Gates is saying how that deadline is not written in stone. Time to gain the upper hand here, if that is what Obama truly wants. Listen to Biden (and Rahm, of all people) and get us out.

[babylonsister]

8. And it's odd that the pull-out date is 'etched in stone' per

Petraeus. They need to get their collective acts together imo...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=343210

To gop senators' dismay, Petraeus affirmed that “July 2011 is etched in stone.”

[Jennicut]

11. There is an internal fight and there has always been one.

Obama knows the two sides. It is up to him to decide. I know which side I would go with. The perfect opportunity to say McChrystal's plan is not working. Gates tried to say the other day that we are making progress. I am not seeing it.

[bigdarryl]

6. Hate to say this but Obama should have FIRED his ass the last time he spoke out on him

[AtomicKitten]

29. Absolutely. nt

[dgibby]

7. It's MORE perilous for Obama if he doesn't fire him.

It would only reinforce the idea of the "whimps" in the WH.

McChrystal is clearly in violation of the UCMJ, and as such, should be Courts Martialed.

[no_hypocrisy]

10. McChrystal shouldn't have apologized. He said it and he meant it.

And let him accept the consequences from The Commander In Chief like the officer and gentleman that he is.

[Beacool]

17. I agree.

He appears to have meant what he said. He should stand by his statements and take the consequences. I bet the WH is furious, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when he meets Obama.

:D

[AtomicKitten]

26. Your emitcon says it all.

As does this excerpt from the Rolling Stones article in a kind of two a-hole peas in an a-hole pod kind of way:

The Secretary of State is the only member of Obama's staff to get good reviews from McChrystal's people:

"Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.' "

[Beacool]

31. Ahhh, you're so predictable.

Attack Hillary no matter what the subject of the article. As for the a-hole remark, you're classy as usual.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

32. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[vaberella]

40. How is it an attack? It's a fact based on McChrystal's statements.

I don't see it as an attack.

[Beacool]

45. The a-hole remark was part of McChrystal's statements?

:eyes:

[vaberella]

51. So the OP when she stated a-hole

One of the a-hole's is HRC? When I first read it, that's not what I understood it as.

[karynnj]

50. Where is the Hillary attack here?

The fact is we knew a year ago that Clinton supported McChyrstal's policy and backed a large increase in troops. There have been tons of posts on that. That McChrystal likes the person who most agreed with him is not too surprising.

[kjackson227]

12. The following remark by McChrystal is very telling:

The article also claims McChrystal has seized control of the war "by never taking his eye off the real enemy: The wimps in the White House."

So, to McChrystal, the White House is the enemy. Sounds like a traitor to me.

[vaberella]

41. Big time. n/t

[democrank]

13. Why was Torture McChrystal chosen in the first place?

[AndyA]

14. Perhaps this is the perfect time to replace McChrystal.

With just a little more than a year to go, perhaps a fresh perspective on the situation is what's needed. McChrystal seems to have some issues, so it might be the best thing to have new eyes and ears on the ground in Afghanistan.

[Raine1967]

15. He called the WH Wimps.

He has to go, not just for what I believe was insubordination, but also for the fact that politically, the GOP will use this as alleged proof that Obama is not a strong leader.

He's gotta go. This undermines the Commander in Chief, and should never be acceptable.

[Kber]

16. This is the second time he's done this.

The first time, he was given the benefit of the doubt based on his supposed inexperience with the national press.

To do it again implies either:
1. He won't or can't learn from past mistakes.

or

2. His original apology was disingenuous and he can't or won't support his Commander in Chief's civilian authority.

In either case, it's time to accept the resignation I'm sure he's going to offer. Then he can get an "armchair general" position on Fox News and retire in comfort.

[harun]

18. Obama has to fire him, otherwise the rest of the Generals will see it as a green

light for them to be insubordinate.

[Vattel]

19. His remarks were no accident.

This wasn't a leak. It was an interview! His remarks were aimed at making Obama look weak on national security if he withdraws the troops as planned. McChrystal knows that his strategy in Afghanistan can't succeed in the time frame that Obama has established. He's trying to extend the timeline. It's all politics.

[Duppers]

20. get him outta there.

for a lot of reasons.

[kestrel91316]

21. Can his ass, and launch an investigation. I bet he has been working

overtime behind the scenes to undermine Obama's plans and sow dissent among the ranks, if not actually plotting a coup.

[Milo_Bloom]

22. Hopefully Obama is smarter than to fire him over "remarks".

[TwilightGardener]

24. Do you have any grasp of how the military works? At all?

[Milo_Bloom]

54. Yes.

[Hutzpa]

25. Wasn't Gen. Shinseki fired over remarks?

Yes? No? :shrug:

[FourScore]

34. And didn't we hammer that decision? n/t

[Milo_Bloom]

55. Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding! +1 for a good memory!

[AtomicKitten]

28. A full access interview can hardly be construed as simply "remarks." nt

[glitch]

23. Apologies are for wimps.

Sorry, channeling Reagan. I'm back now.

[polichick]

27. If President Obama wants to be a respected CinC he needs to fire McChrystal immediately. nt

[AtomicKitten]

30. McChrystal can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

K&R

:hi:

[flyarm]

33. ahhh but he did ..he was kept on by Obama,when it was known world wide he lied about the Tillman

death..McChrystal lied about the Pat Tillman death ( or murder) and this was the pig who was running torture jails..whotf didn't know that..oh yeah..some of the new democrats that told those of us who were speaking out about this pig being put in charrge of Afghan...we were told to stfu..or that we were haters..or give Obama more time..how's that time working out?????????

funny how this stuff comes back to bite ones ass eh?

[AtomicKitten]

36. my point re: this Rolling Stones article

yours? off target and down the road a piece

[flyarm]

37. was this or was this not the man who lied about Tillman? who in their right mind would keep this pig

in their new administration?

This was the man who was running torture in Iraq..who would keep this man on and not expect some kind of fall out from this pig and most likely war criminal???????

Why all this feigning surprise or emotional upset now??????? where was the upset when he was put in this position by Obama?

Why only now..that is my question..i have no surprise..none at all..I was mad as hell though when Obama kept him on and out him in charge of our troops in Afghan..i can tell you that..but i was called a hater when I said keeping him on and putting him in charge of the operations in Afghan was wrong wrong wrong..and insane!

And anyone who broached the subject was shouted down that we were haters..or worse.

[AtomicKitten]

38. Well I fully support his dismissal. We shall see. nt

[flyarm]

39. Oh i do to..but I spoke out when Obama put him in charge of Afghan operations..

did you?

My point is ..it didn't take a Rolling stones article for me to know who and what this pig was..why are so many surprised now????????? Why all the outrage now????????

[AtomicKitten]

43. I read Krakauer’s book, "Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman"

Jon Stewart's interview here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/watch-krakauer-and-jon-st_n_305949.html

As an aside, is this a contest or something? Are you fishing for an "attaboy" and a pat on the back? In my world, McChrystal's treachery goes waaaaay back. How'd I do? Do I win a prize?

---> :shrug:

[Steve20]

44. re

Not a big Obama fan but McChrystal has to go.....clear insubordination.

[Uzybone]

46. I think he must be relieved of his command

A general should not behave like this.

[Phx_Dem]

47. Apologies after-the-fact don't always matter. Certainly not in this case.

He knew damn well he was talking to or in front of a reporter.

And it's not time he publicly dissed the administration. He's a loose cannon and he needs to go.

[Thrill]

49. Obama has to axe this guy. Or he will come off looking weak

.

[O is 44]

53. The article is astonishing and revealing .......

I love Obama but he made a huge mistake in appointing this guy. He knew his history with Tillman and torture and yet he appointed him despite his huge failures. The actions outlined in this article welcome a court martial! I agree with the comments made above by another poster in that Obama should have fired him the first time he stepped out of line in London. We have got to get out of Afghanistan, it’s a no win situation.