Obama to Fire His General ??????

That right. He must be removed from his position in Afghanistan.

I wonder if the general would allow such talk to go unpunished by someone under his command. I seriously doubt it.

 

I share the General's view of the President, but no President can allow that kind of talk to go unpunished. The US position as always been and should be civilian control and oversight of the military.

The general's first stupid decision was to allow a reporter to hang around while he and his men were drinking and thinking that something said by his aides or himself would not go unreported. Once it was in the press, the President had to respond.

 

From today's New York Times:

---

What Would Lincoln Do?

IF Abraham Lincoln’s experience is any guide, Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s fate will be determined by President Obama’s judgment of how his firing would affect the war in Afghanistan

For months during the Civil War, Lincoln chose to ignore insolent behavior by Gen. George McClellan, who served at times as the commander of the Army of the Potomac and the general in chief of the Union Army, arguing that his breaches of protocol were worth tolerating as long as he was exerting a positive influence on his forces.

For example, one night in 1861, Lincoln went with his secretary of state, William Seward, and his young aide John Hay to McClellan’s house. Told that the general was out, the three waited in the parlor for an hour. When McClellan arrived home, the porter told him the president was there, but McClellan passed by the parlor and climbed the stairs to his private quarters. After a half hour more, Lincoln again sent word, only to be informed that the general had gone to sleep.

Hay was enraged, writing in his diary of the “insolence of epaulettes” and “the threatened supremacy of the military authorities.” To Hay’s astonishment, Lincoln “seemed not to have noticed it specially, saying it was better at this time not to be making points of etiquette and personal dignity.” He would hold McClellan’s horse, he’d once said, if a victory could be achieved.

McClellan’s bad behavior did not end. In letters to his wife, he regularly referred to Lincoln as “the original gorilla.” He considered the cabinet “some of the greatest geese I have ever seen,” and called Seward “a meddling, officious, incompetent little puppy.” Still, Lincoln kept him on

When a critic in Congress demanded McClellan’s firing, Lincoln asked who should replace the general. “Why, anybody,” the senator replied. “Anybody will do for you,” Lincoln said, “but not for me. I must have somebody.”

So McClellan remained, until in November 1862 Lincoln finally lost faith in his commander’s commitment to the mission, his fighting spirit and his ability to prosecute the war to ultimate victory. Only then did he fire “the young Napoleon.”
---

 

My thoughts as well Tom.

 

And Lincoln's failure to act cost the country dearly.

 

It certainly did. McClellan turned out to be a dud.

In our case the general failed to maintain adequate command and control of his subordinates. The trash talk could be a court martial offense, not to mention unprofessional, and at the very least the general should have suppressed his subordinates.

Most likely he will resign and President Obama would be wise to accept his resignation.

**Just read on FOX News that the general was relieved of his command.**

Personally, I fail to understand why we are even still in Afghanistan.

 

Anyone smart enough to be a general should be be smart enough to refuse the job.

 

Good history. Too bad the south lost the war.

 

I don't think the "joke" was funny and if I were POTUS I would have done the same thing. The military is no place for such disrespect.

 

The key here for many is that if President Obama does it it must be bad. No matter what.

 

I wonder of a post like this is how you wish to be treated yourself.

 

Not exactly, although I can't find much to like about the man. My concern is that Obama will try to make people accountable to HIM instead of the constitution, that people will be forced to chose between the two. Remember Joe the plumber? He voiced his opinion and basically got crucified for it. I hope we're not seeing a pattern here, that anyone who disagrees with Obama must be silenced.

I understand that the military must follow orders, but I think there's a fine line between exercising free speech and failing to comply with orders, that's all.

 

A Commander-In-Chief can never allow insubordination. Remember Truman and MacArthur?

 

Can you give a single time in history where a military commander has shown this kind of disrespect for his Commander-in-Chief and survived?

Okay. McClellan above, but that almost ruined the country. Obama's generals ARE accountable to him. He IS their commander-in-chief!

What would happen if every officer and NCO allowed this kind of disrespect in the ranks?

If an officer cannot respect his commander-in-chief he needs to resign. General MacChrystal did the right thing. I respect him for that.

 

I don't know why this is so hard to understand?

 

========================================================
I would be interested to know how you lead pastors would handle an associate pastor, music director /worship leader or a youth minister who publically criticised your decisions and actions.

 

In a rare occurrence in his presidency so far, President Obama did the right thing by replacing this general.

 

Where is the 'like' button ?

 

Tweeted by @newtgringrich -

Sadly I do not believe the President had any choice except to relieve General McCrystalThe rolling stone interview was too destructive

I agree

 

I agree. There was no excuse for the Rolling Stones article. While he may have substantial disagreements with the Administration and he may believe the Administration is completely wrong, there are better and more productive ways to express his view.