Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can someone give me the Cliff notes on this? I have the impression that General Stanley McChrystal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 01:20 PM
Original message
Can someone give me the Cliff notes on this? I have the impression that General Stanley McChrystal
leaked or arranged for someone to leak his recommendations in order to force Obama's hand in Afghanistan. I also have the impression that since the elections in Afghanistan, there is serious discussion in the White House about whether we should even be in Afghanistan, and if so, what our goals should be.

So, is this the story thus far? Were classified documents leaked? If so, shouldn't someone be arrested? Given that they appear to have been leaked by a general officer in order to influence overall policy, shouldn't this motivation also be investigated as a separate issue, possibly a criminal act in and of itself? If I'm correct, McChrystal is pulling the same kind of stunt that got McArthur canned by Truman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hansel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. I don't think it's going to make much of an impression on Obama.
McChrystal is a military man so everything looks like a nail to him. Just because he can't imagine other options, doesn't mean there aren't any. Obama is going to get advice from many sources including other military strategists, world leaders, diplomats, law enforcement, historians, etc. and then make his decision. Just like he said he would in the campaign.

I doubt very much Obama has any intent of solely going with an on-the-ground military assessment. That is an awfully myopic viewpoint. McChrystal's input is important, but it is just that, his input. McChrystal is about to find that out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. I wouldn't put it past McChrystal to have done the leak in order to undermine
his CIC during wartime, and you don't want to know what I think should be done to him if he did.

Is the word "treason" familiar?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. That is exactly what I thought when I first heard the story.

McChrystal may think he is MacArthur.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dgibby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. McChrystal is Cheney's military BFF.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
4. Close
The leak and the revisiting are right, but there is no one speaking of getting out. Biden, who is the Obama administration person most in favor of not escalating the war favors a counter-terrorism approach rather than the current counter insurgency approach. (Here is a link to the SFRC which looked at both alternatives - http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/2009/hrg090916p.html )

The reason for the revisiting is the elections there have shifted the opinions of some on the viability of counter insurgency, which may not be possible with a corrupt, unpopular government (see Vietnam)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. McChrystal lied about enemy forces, used NATO forces as a lure, then tried to nuke Afghanistan?!?
Edited on Thu Sep-24-09 02:41 PM by ieoeja
MacArthur lied to Truman when he claimed the first Chinese offensive never occurred, explaining away the 10k+ Chinese prisoners as volunteers descending into Korea without the knowledge of their own government.

Knowing the Chinese were in the mountains, MacArthur knowingly sent UN forces into a trap hoping to force Truman into war with China.

24 hours before the trap was sprung, the local US Marine Corps commander formally removed his Marines from MacArthur's command.

When the trap was sprung, he ordered those forces to turn tail and run. He then ordered the local SAC commander to drop atomic bombs behind the fleeing UN forces. He even claimed to have authorization "lying around here somewhere" to use atomic bombs. Fortunately, the SAC commander didn't believe him.

Immediately afterward all of our UN allies, except Turkey, informed Truman their troops were no longer taking orders from MacArthur, and would be withdrawn altogether if Truman left MacArthur in command of US forces.

No US Army division commander formally stated they were no longer under MacArthur's command. But they routinely ignored his orders between the second Chinese offensive and MacArthur's eventual firing.


So, unless McChrystal is a madman using his soldiers as bait, attempting to launch nuclear weapons against orders, has already lost formal command of NATO forces, and has lost de facto command of all US forces ... then, no, he is nowhere near to pulling the same kind of stunt that got MacArthur canned.

The great political firing that never was. And kept secret for decades because we didn't want the world knowing Dr Strangelove was a documentary.

Source: The Forgotten War (the book, not the film) written by some retired US Army General using the FOIA to finally release this information



On edit to your primary point ... is the report classified?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC