Mixman34, Have you ever been military?

Military brat all my life. You?

Do you still listen to the Dixie Chicks? This type of talk is far more dangerous than anything that they said...and paid a high price for. I don't see Obama as a dictator, and to think that there are not competent Generals to carry forth this mission doesn't speak to highly of our armed forces.

Dangerous? Dixie Chicks?! HUH?

was your parent court martialled?

THIS issue does not perpetuate my Dictator in Chief "title". So you all can take it easy. That stems from his thinking the government can run around meddling doing whatever it pleases. You know exactly what I'm talking about. Obviously I understand he's not a Dictator because of our system.. However I wouldn't put it past his aspirations one second.

Yeah Mix-up-man34 that makes you well qualified. hehehe!

Mixman, I did 23 years, my wife is active now. Regardless how we feel about this whole stupid faux war, we did our duty and asked questions later. What this General did was wrong, worst, he allowed his subordinates to spoil the culture of military discipline. That cannot be tolerated.

Having been a "military brat", you should know that the chain-of-command is inviolable. If McChrystal does not agree with the President, he should have gone through the proper channels (SECDEF or the Joint Chiefs). He should not have gone to the press.

Insubordination cannot be tolerated, whether it comes from a private or a general. In fact, Article 88 of the UCMJ specifically says that a commissioned officer who uses "contemptuous words" about the President, Vice-President, or other elected official can be court-martialed.

Thanks for your service.

Hey, Obama didn't start this war, the dictator before him did. Obama's pledged to finish it which is a much harder task, since it's not really a military problem, nor is it really a war, it's expected that a general like McChyrstal would cast blame, after all it can't be his fault that Afghans are still walking on the earth. He gave the specific orders to all his troops that they were to die before any innocent Afghan did. No wonder Karzai wants him over Obama. Hey, think about that for a minute. Do we really ever ever ever want anybody in a position of power that Karzai actually likes? Why did Karzai like McChrystal? Because he enabled Karzai to pursue his dictatorship and Opium trade? Was McChrystal really a wannabee drug lord in the service of a greater drug lord?

Bull@!$%#. The military has every right to question their commander. Their oath is to the people and the Constitution. Not the POTUS/dictator. Tell me where in the Constitution they CAN'T question.

My hat is off to Obama. Just cannot tolerate "lack of discipline" from a soldier regardless of the brass he has earned.

Sad to see a revered general go but no room for rogues in the military not for a democracy.

This whole intolerable talk about questioning the Chief is insane. So if he ran us into Russia tomorrow, we should all just "fall in"? Give me a break. The general was given his orders of less boots more drones.. it is Bidens strategy. I dont recall the numbers of boots he asked for but it was significantly higher than the 30,000 given (as a capitulation).

The military swears oath to the constitution and NOT the POTUS. With that said I understand hierarchy and why it may have needed to be done. I just think it's a terrible move and the General was really never in a position to succeed.

Too bad the United States doesn't have a leader at this point and time. Just a spineless oil-filled jellyfish that likes to throw his weight around.

Truman fired MacArthur for the same thing - arrogance.

Hey "American Nazi for Israel"

They have no right to question it in Rolling Stone magazine, nor in the National Enquirer, etc. McChrystal was just plain stupid. Do you really want that level of stupidity directing and controlling the life and death of your children? Do you really want a pissing match in the media between a government and the nazi military egotistic leader that believes he should be warlord of America!?

If McChrystal was a real leader, he would have been working in Afghanistan, not slumming and clubbing in Paris with his Rolling Stoned pals.

I also hope McChrystals entire staff is sent to Alaska to monitor Russian military activities for the rest of their careers.

Cheney was the dictator-in-chief.

I agree that the General was never in a position to succeed...but I think the impossibility to succeed goes back to an earlier time..far earlier than this POTUS.

So his canning is already a done deal. What irks me is that he will still get his retirement, he should be spending time in Leavenworth, with loss of pension

r u kidding? if you are a military brat then you should know you don't talk about the commander and chief. you want a dictator look back 8 years.

He DESERVES his retirement and pension. Obama is an idiot.

Then, again, you clearly don't understand the role of the armed forces. The main point of Article 88 is so that we don't have open insubordination. You really want the army deciding what they want or don't want to do? You want privates openly disagreeing with Colonels, talking in the paper about them? If you were a brat, your daddy didn't impart much knowledge of his workplace or it's culture. Bush ran us into Iraq and Afghanistan, and the army fell in, dispite knowing that there was no exit strategy. So, yeah, we do "fall in". If the Commander in Chief leads the army astray, it is up to Congress or the People to act, not the generals. The only times that MAY not be the case are on domestic military actions. Get an education and some common sense.

Mixman:

No, they don't have to just "fall in line". They can make their case to their superiors, or if failing to do that resign in protest.

They cannot go to the press to air their greivances . MacArthur's failing was not that he was critical of Truman's policies - it was that he was critical of them in public.

As a military brat for 19 years (you can't be one for life - unless you are still living at home with mommy & daddy) and not a fan of President Obama, McChrystal deserved to be fired. You might privately disagree with your superiors but to do so publicly is outrageous. As all the other military personnel have stated - chain of command - you do not disrespect.

Mixman - I am guessing that your military parent did not instill those principles in you.

He wasn't doing anything that Dems didn't do for 8 years against Bush, Powell, and Rice. At least Bush could handle criticism without making a public spectacle and firing people left and right because they spoke out against him.

Our leader egopresident had his little feeling hurt but it's ok for him to do his stand up crap at other expense. What a small small man our president is. He puts his ego ahead of the men and women serving in a war for him. (Not like he cares about them or those that gave there lives if he did, he would have been in Arlington on Vet day.) What a shame he is taking this country down faster then even the creeps on wall street could.

rrobeson i hope you did time in the service if not shut up. Yep I can talk my son give his life for this fool till you have paid the price I did don't even go there with me .

@ American for israel: are you a nut or something....the military has NO right to question the commander in chief, President Obama.

You have never been in the military so you don't know what the UCMJ is, try googling it and you will see.BTW "who got fired...who's got the power.....its not some general, its our President, President Obama.

I am a 22 year vet, can't stand Obama, but he did exactly the right thing in this case.

American for Israel: You have no idea what you're talking about. The UCMJ, which guides the military, clearly forbids insubordination, and this is clearly a case of insubordination.

I'm with you all the way Mixman. Don't let them get you down.

Does anyone remember when the troops were talking on face book or other social sites about how screwed up things were during Bush the Sons war(s) and Bush the Son put an end to it, and said that any troop doing so in the future would be court marshaled.

You're right... military brat until about 19 years old.. Now I'm just a tax paying, hard working, HEALTH care due paying, UNDERWATER MORTGAGE paying citizen.

And no I don't think my government owes me a stinking dime.

That is funny I thought my son died protecting our rights and freedom of speech is one of them or have you all forgotten what they are fighting for it sure as hell is not ego man it's for this country to stay free.

Oh that right ego man does not read the bill of rights or cons. He does not read much before running his mouth kind like his att. general. so he did not know that .

@ rrobeson: Nice to know, if your given an order to send Americans to camps or to fire on them; that you will obey without questioning or making a comment.

I'll trust someone in the military BEFORE someone that has NO military experience.

Let the military do their job. Obama is just being another Hitler. There are plenty of examples where Nazi generals questioned Hitler and his policies on killing people in the camps and how he ran the country. What happened to them? Hmmmm.....

My god. Those of you beating down Obama because you don't like him, and couch it in terms of him being a dictator, really ought to get a life. Do you also believe Bush was a dictator for going into Iraq in the first place? Oh, yeah, that doesn't count cause he was going after weapons of mass destruction. Well, shouldn't Colin Powell have "said sumpthin" about that? Oh, no, that was OK, too. After all, it's just rag heads ....

Suppose you are a general who thinks he's indispensible, and has lied to the President, telling him you could win the war with a mere 30,000 more troops, and you promised to begin withdrawls by July. Quite a pickle.

But if you are publicly insubordinate, its a win-win; if the President fires you, you're off the hook for the outrageous lies and can always claim you could have won. If the president allows the abuse, you've proven you are indispensible and you can conduct the war any way you please, demanding all the time and resources you want.

Generals will always lie, always tell the president we can win with just a little more resources. And a little more. And a little more. And ...

You werent in the military saying something like that. You know how it goes, behind closed door disagreements are one thing. But to go on a non - military affiliated publication like Rolling Stone and blast the CinC is insubordination plain and simple. Or did you forget that?

mixman - Are you really that stupid?

Good morning another_oldguy

@ Robert Perkins and @ spider-737231: Go look up the definition of insubordination. The general didn't do any of that. Him and his people gave their opinion. If the POTUS starts to lead the military astray, it is the right of the generals to do 'whats right'.

W. Goin

"Mrs. Georgia Peech - your an idiot. He will get his retirement and pension. He relieved him of his command over Afghanistan. Do you even have a brain?"

NO W.Goin... you seem to be seeing only part of the picture. Mrs Georgia Peach was responding to one of your communist friends;

#1.34 - Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:15 AM PDT

MarkLHolland

"So his canning is already a done deal. What irks me is that he will still get his retirement, he should be spending time in Leavenworth, with loss of pension"

#1.23 - Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:10 AM PDT

Truman fired MacArthur for the same thing - arrogance.

Wrong. You need to do your homework.

And to "stupid" above -

We don't think Obama is a dictator but we are sure he wants to be one. As to WMD in Iraq - you need to google "550 tons yellowcake uranium". Even the liberal, Obama-supporting, MSNBC had the story:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

That said - Obama certainly had the right to remove/replace any General. And many of the "remarks" that seem to be attributed to this general by viners were actually said by others.

American for Israel: Yes they gave their opinion. In public. To the press.

McChrystal and his staff are lucky they aren't facing court-martial. They certainly could, and quite a few soldiers have been punished under Article 88 for far less.

@ Clone: WOW really? "If the Commander in Chief leads the army astray, it is up to Congress or the People to act, not the generals."

OH WOW. Think what you just said? So........if Congress and the People said the CinC is wrong in what he is doing, would he really care, since the military HAS to do what he says? Because the way you are going, its giving the CinC dictator powers? Are we in Rome now?

There are checks and balances with the goverment and the military and WHAT powers the President has.

Also, I'm PRETTY sure the Constitution overrides the UCMJ.

And did you ever think that maybe POTUS WANTS to get rid of all military personnel that has a negative opinion about him? I sure as hell would, would be alot easier to take a country over and install yourself and the Supreme Leader.

USSA anyone?

This was very unfortunate, McChrystal was a good General. But it was necessary. Insubordination is a problem in the military. He has the right to question the Commander in Chief. But you do that through the proper and appropriate channels, not the way he did it. Grievances go up the chain of command, not to the press.

And, McChrystal as an American has every right to speak his mind freely, but that does not mean he is free of the consequences of his speech. Insubordination is not tolerated in the military.

I still think there's a problem when there is such distrust and misgivings between the military and civilian command. And I'm still not happy with the way the war is being prosecuted from the top. And I'm not at all happy with Obama and the collectivist and statist pushes that are coming out of the Democratic party.

But this was the correct course of action, as unfortunate as it may be. McChrystal had to know this was a possibility, and even the likely outcome when he spoke to the reporter though, he's an intelligent man. Maybe he was just tired of it. It sounds as though he believe he was being set up to fail. That's a difficult and really untenable position to endure.

Obama (and his minions) is the worst thing that has ever happened to our great country! He is scary! He does not have America's best interests at heart. Being half Negro and half Caucasion has nothing to do with my feelings, but his actions bear out his intentions. Being a Democrat has nothing to do with my feelings, but every aspect of his prior life is questionable, as is his agenda. Too bad we did not force him to explain what "change" meant to him during the elections. Please pray for our country and its people.

Mixman, i think maybe your title should just remain 'brat' and NOT 'military brat'...

I have a very hard time believing you were 'in' the military.

From my understanding, military 'brat' implies being a CHILD of military.

Ah, indeed - looks like someone is still very much a child...

This is what is wrong with the military. Civilians should not run the military. America has not won a war since WWII. This is a long loosing steak and it is because Civilians are running military campaigns. Soldiers are trained personnel for war. Doctors are trained to operate and take care of patients. Can you imagine if we called in a professor of history to remove your appendix? Well to have civilians run military campaigns is like having the history professor do an operation on a patient. Most people would rather a trained Doctor do it.

Why is it in civilian life we expect only qualified people to do jobs and get hired but for the military we expect someone with No experience to run the army? That does not mean that a civilian can not make a useful suggestion to the military or CIA and so on but to totally run the military is another matter. If the President and the Military had an understanding that would work well. This is why some people wish a soldier were President because he would at least have military experience and understand the workings of the military.

American for Israel, how about reading Article 88 of the UCMJ so you actually know what your are spouting off about, it states specificly "contemptous words" against the POTUS, the VP, SECDEF, or any military Secretary.

It's also enlightening that you'd rather see the military in charge of themselves. Sound to me that you don't want to live in America, 'cause those are not the ideals our country was founded on.

And for crying out loud, get off the Glenn Beck "send American's to camps" BS. There are very specific limits regarding "in home" actions, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 being one (the military cannot exorcise police actions in this country). Get an education from a book, my friend, not secondhand bad knowledge from right wing loonies.

Spotts: "No, they don't have to just "fall in line". They can make their case to their superiors, or if failing to do that resign in protest."

What about the Pentagon Papers or the insider that turned Nixon in? The press is the greatest place to air your grievances. If you truly believe something is wrong, then you have a duty to do what you think is right. It was the president's perogative to fire the General.

He should still be treated respect. He sacraficed a lot throughout his career for every person, liberal/conservative/moderate, to sound off on this board. Insulting one another is one thing, but insulting a man that has done more with his life than most people on this board, is pure arrogance.

Anniek: Thank you for your son's sacrafice. You are right the liberals don't like the bill of rights much. Including the 2nd Amendment and forcing every American to pay for his health care bill. The man makes me sick.

This only applies if there is a president worth any @!$%# at all in charge.

Obama is a Chicago Thug, NOT a commander in chief. He does not deserve any respect at all. He is a disgrace to the name "Commander in Chief", just like Clinton was a disgrace. BOTH are not worthy of any respect from the troops in the military.

Trumpets, Never said I was 'in' the military. Only raised in the military environment up until about 19. Check your facts.

See post 1.37

"This is what is wrong with the military. Civilians should not run the military. America has not won a war since WWII. This is a long loosing steak and it is because Civilians are running military campaigns."

And if the "civilians" weren't running the military, then who would they answer to when they are in the wrong?

That kind of thinking is incredibly dangerous. Civilian command-and-control is necessary to avoid the kinds of coups that have toppled democracies the world over.

One of the first things that came to my mind was when the Dixie Chicks opened their mouths and insulted President Bush. They were ostracized!! People couldn't stand them!! And what they said might have been true, but you just don't do it in public!! He can think what he wants, he can say it to his wife! He can tell his kids! He just doesn't say it to the WORLD!!

He just said what he was thinking. What happened to free speech?

Well, let me ask you? If you said things about your boss, true or not, you'd lose your job too!!

What makes this situation different is that the military is tied. We are sending in troops under new guidelines to fight a war that is bascially unwinnable. The President's #1 job should be the security of our people, both at home and in the military in Afghanistan.

Rules of engagement make this war impossible for anyone to run. Obama needs to free the hands of his military commanders, or get out entirely. Our brothers, fathers, mothers, etc are putting their lives at risk every day unfairly due to those rules.

So much better than the Bring em' on and Mission Accomplished mentality of Good Ol' Boy W!!!

Mixman and Friends...All this talk about Hitler, Dictator, etc. tells me that a poll test is in order.

Some people are just too dumb to be allowed to vote. A dumb voter tends to ignore competency and favors those candidates who are equally dumb. They prefer someone they feel a kinship with and with whom they would like to share a beer. Maybe we should establish a Poll Test for certain suspect voter groups and require proof of passage before allowing them the privilege of casting a vote. The suspect voter groups would include; (1) anyone who has not completed the 6^th grade or has an IQ less that 65, (2) anyone who thinks planet Earth is flat or is located at the center of an unchanging Universe, (3) anyone who believes the Book of Revelations is an unassailable and certain predictor of future events, (4) anyone who gets most of their news and current events from Fox News, Limbaugh, or politicians, (5) anyone who has voted a “straight ticket”, (6) anyone who claims to have the exclusive ear of God, and (7) anyone who believes that a person who is conservative or liberal is inherently evil. I would volunteer to develop the test questions, pro bono.

Mixman34 - Ego? By that you must mean McChrystal.

Maybe you should take a class in US History. The Constution mandates that this is a nation in which the civilian leadership is in charge of the military not the military in charge of civilians (that is why in our entire history we have not had a military takeover). The chain of command is central to that premise. The President, no matter who that might be, cannot tolerate any insubordination on the part of his military officers. The President did the right thing.

Good riddance to bad rubbish. This arrogant ass is lucky he wasn't prosecuted for treason. He is a dishonorable soldier and man and should be ashamed of his actions. He is a true threat to the security of our country.

Just two cents, I understand why things worked they way they did but this is not the 1st time a President has been wrong. As someone has pointed out Truman did it to MacArthur. This why the Korean Pennisula is the mess it is in, also my dad a Korean veteran believes that if Truman had let MacArthur go there would not have been a Vietnam. As everyone continues to point out tha Military is just supposed to do what the Politican tells them to do but the politican life is not on the line like our troops are. Another president to make a mistake was Lyndon B Johnson tell the to fight but put your arm behind your back. This is going to be the same situations as the other two with young Military men and women who pay the price for the Politicians decision. There will not be any resolution and the situation in Afghanistan will continue to grow.

BTW as I said in the beginning understand the Chain of command but don't any of you think the fact that our President will not do anything to protect our border despite how most of us feel he should up hold a law on the books. He is not doing his job shouldn't he be impeached!!!!!

Yes! In the military you do not ask questions! You follow orders! Period! If told to blow up a village despite collateral damage, do it! Shoot a 10 year old in the head because he is a security risk, pull the trigger! Usher thousands of innocents into a gas chamber, the more the merrier! Follow orders! Do your job without asking "is this right?"! Kill! Kill! Kill!

I think I'm forgetting something. Oh ya, Heil Hitler!

See, now you're confusing the issue. A soldier has a duty to follow all lawful orders.

An order is presumed lawful unless it is blatantly illegal. An order to blow up a village may be lawful, and will be presumed so even if it causes collateral damage because the soldier on the line does not have all the intel that his superiors have.

An order to shoot a child or to gas civilians would be a blatantly illegal order, and a soldier then has a duty to disobey it.

But we are not talking about orders. We are talking about good order and discipline. A soldier who enlists, or one who is commissioned, accepts that their First Amendment rights may be abridged in order to preserve the capability of the military to fight.

Again, would McChrystal tolerate any officer under his command going to the media and being publicly critical of him? Absolutely not! So why should the President (McChrystal's superior officer) tolerate it from him?

Dictator in chief? What an over reaction statement and disrespect of the office of presidency! Like it or not Obama is the president and has every right to fire whomever he chooses. You evidently really don't what a dictatorship is.....

He should be fired. He sounds like to me McChrystal thought he was bullet proof. When someone thinks that it is time for him to go. He was in charge, sounded like to me he couldn't handle it and decided he needed to start blaming other people. Let's just wait and see what happens. You people that said "NO" are not a True American or you would never think he should have stayed. He knew exactly what he was doing.

The military is a Dictatorship by necessity. I was there; WERE YOU?! When a commander loses respect for his higher-higher, he also loses respect of his troops. It becomes a gang, not a uinit for the mission. The troops respect a commander who respects the Chain of Command. That's how it works. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice McChrystal could have been court-Martialled, bust to Private E-1, and dishonorably Discharged. There goes his entire life! the President did him a favor by not humiliating him. Never Forget that.

Anniek, my heart goes out to you. Your son was a special person. God comfort you.

What I don't understand is where McCrystal's head was at! (I know the obvious answer to that on this board :) ) Why did he ever agree to an interview with Rolling Stone, of all media, and then come off sounding like he and his aides where in the midst of one heck of a wild party? It's scary to think that he didn't worry about the consequences of that decision.

For those who complain about President Obama "running" the military --

Yes, he is the Commander-in-Chief, but it's not as if he personally makes all of the decisions. There seems to be a convenient tendency to forget about the Defense Department, advisors, etc. who all contribute to the decisions that determine the actions being taken. Like all "corporations", someone has to be at the top of the pyramid. Along with the position comes the honor of putting up with the heat guaranteed to be generated by every choice you make.

It will be nice when all of those who hate the American system start their own country somewhere else. I wonder what form of government they will choose?

I voted yes under principal, But Obama looks weak anyway you look at it. The questions are very slanted..Buisness as usual at MSNBC

Mixman there's a difference between being a military brat all your and being in the military. So you're telling me General McChrystal would have done nothing to any of his subordinate officers or enlisted men if they had given an interview critical of him and his policies? Stop spewing Obama hate on this one, you're wrong. Find another issue to hate.

And here is the oath taken by service members. Note the part about obeying the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! So yes, the general swore to obey the president, his boss, in accordance to the regulations of the UCMJ. You Obama Haters just can't stand it him Obama is right.

In the Armed Forces EXCEPT the National Guard (Army or Air)

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

I wish we had the power to FIRE the Ego in Chief . The dictator in the white house is a control freak jacka**!!! I hope that the people who voted for hope and change are happy with the idiot they hired now fire his worthless butt.

Ian

That is the enlisted persons oath not a commissioned officers it is different , alot different

Oh Mixman, how intelligent you sound.

Here is what your beloved General is being ousted for:

Newsweek called his version of the army "the most secretive force in the U.S. military".

McChrystal's Zarqawi unit was also well-known for its interrogation methods, was accused of abusing detainees. And, after Abu Ghraib, 34 members of the task force were disciplined.

McChrystal was also criticized for his role in the aftermath of the 2004 death by friendly fire of Ranger and former professional football player Pat Tillman. Within a day of Tillman's death, McChrystal was notified that Tillman was a victim of fratricide. Shortly thereafter, McChrystal was put in charge of paperwork to award Tillman a posthumous Silver Star for valor. On April 28, 2004, six days after Tillman's death, McChrystal approved a final draft of the Silver Star recommendation and submitted it to the acting Secretary of the Army, even though the medal recommendation deliberately omitted any mention of friendly fire, included the phrase "in the line of devastating enemy fire", and was accompanied by fabricated witness statements. On April 29, McChrystal sent an urgent memo warning White House speechwriters not to quote the medal recommendation in any statements they wrote for President Bush because it "might cause public embarrassment if the circumstances of Corporal Tillman's death become public." McChrystal was one of eight officers recommended for discipline by a subsequent Pentagon investigation but the Army declined to take action against him.

What's all this silliness about Obama having an Ego?

The only Ego he has is the one you people are blogging about.

Obama is one of the most casual presidents we have. He has a calm demeanor and is about 5,000 times better a speaker than anyone from the last administration.

well now it seems that obama wants to grant amnesty ot the illegals using an executive order - totally bypassing congress!

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/

we have civilian command for a reason? ......or are your 2nd amendment recourses more important?

we have civilian command for a reason......or are you 2nd amendment recourses more important?

McChrystal seems to be the one with a dictatorial approach, much like the Al Haig "I'm in charge" type. Remember, McC "handled" the Pat Tillman coverup and we know how well that turned out. McC went through the media to push his plan when Obama was considering the alternatives for Afghanistan. There seems to be a pattern here that suggests the Gen. can be a bit pushy and not used to anyone questioning his decisions - until now.

McC's view of Obama, according to the article, was that he was tentative and weak, but others have also underestimated this President. Ask Hillary Clinton or John McCain. So Obama's way of gathering information and putting a plan together has worked for him at least some of the time; he became President; he got a health care package. He has other initiatives that he's working on. Perhaps Obama is a bit like a duck on water - a calm appearance, but a lot happening out of sight. So - those who are quick on the name-calling make themselves look like know-nothings.

It would be interesting to know why McChrystal agreed to this article and why didn't anyone realize the chain of command problem that was put into play. One thing is certain: Obama was quite certain of his and McCrystal's roles and now the Gen. will have time to think about that.

Certainly Not !!

Obama has not served in this nations' military, has he ? and certainly has never had "boots on the ground" Nor has he been shot at by raving lunatics.

Someone with his glaring lack of any military experience whatsoever, should not even be "Commander in Chief "

That awesome responsibility should be relegated to a civilian cabinet post, along with some seasoned military advisors, answerable directly to the American People !!

Wars should be fought on the battlefield, not in some remote thinktank 10,000 miles removed from the action.

"Rules of engagement" must reflect the lunacy of our opponents in any given conflict, based on "shoot first and ask questions later"

Any combatant observed running around with his/her features concealed by nothing more than a rag, carrying an AK, an RPG, or any other weapon, is a legitimate target, and needs to take one in the melon. Same goes for the fool that steps up to retrieve the weapon of the fallen combatant

Islam aside, NO ONE runs around totally concealed in anything remotely resembling a " burka "

Rant over ........for now

Agreed, but what does that tell you when war wary Generals oppose the top down strategy?

How could he oppose the top down strategy? It was his strategy that the President agreed too. Not him agreeing to the Presidents.

Insubordination - sadly, I feel like the one that should be charged with that would be Obama - by the American people.

Stupid Sarah is that you playing dumb again.

I would like to know why all the people on here are saying he should have been fired? If that were true there sure as heck wouldn't have been many people left after they finished all their Bush bashing. It's alright to bash someone you don't like but if you like them it's insubordination. I understand the military and the chain of command but when you have no military experience you should trust your people with many years experience. You can't risk our men and women's lives over pride. Semper Fi

Kim: Whether you like it or not, Obama is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. You don't shoot your big mouth off as McChrystal did and expect to get away with it. The Taliban is probably laughing their asses off at the dissension among our ranks. Disagree in private; stand together in public. Here is a quote taken from the Rolling Stone article with regards to "loose cannon" McChrystal:

"The entire COIN strategy is a fraud perpetuated on the American people," says Douglas McGregor, a retired colonel and leading critic of counterinsurgency who attended West Point with McChrystal. "The idea that we are going to spend a trillion dollars to reshape the culture of the Islamic world is utter nonsense."

The COIN strategy is one that is embraced by McChrystal. He is basically saying that we need to stay in Afghanistan another decade...we've already been there since 2001. I for one don't see trying to forceably change a culture as worthy of killing thousands of Americans. Obama already doubled the number of troops in Afghanistan...something that Americans were bitterly opposed to doing. We are trying to prop up a puppet regime with a weak and ineffective leader in Hamid Karzai. This war is costing us billions of dollars, loss of life. Word has it that we have "weakened" the Taliban...hardly...they have just move their base of operations to Pakistan...wanna start another war over there?

as commander n chief obama nor his administration is not above criticism from the upper echelon of the military, it is not an offense that one can be court martiald for as some would have you believe, they oath made by everyone in the military is to protect and defend the constitution not the president. although generally frowned upon by the establishment to make such public remarks it is not illegal. you would take away the freedom of speech from those that preserve that same freedom with their lives for us all. granted it is not usually a career growth opportunity for those that speak publically about the president or his administration it has pointed out how the administration would rather play politics then win the wars in iraq and afghanistan, sounds rather familiar, can you say vietnam all over again? let the military do what it is supposed to do, obama has never spent one minute in the military, he has not clue, just being the president does not make him a military genius to be followed blindly. the military has not only the right but the moral responsibility to question, advise, and show their approval or dissent if need be in the decisions made by the president and his administration even though the president has the final say in all matters military

Sadie, there is a reason we have a Civilian in charge of our military. They are not a fourth branch of government and we elect our Presidents KNOWING that they will lead the military. There may have been Bush bashing, but it wasn't by active service members or theatre commanders talking to public media. That is the difference. You keep it in the chain of command. It's not like the POTUS acts alone, he works with the JCS and SECDEF as well as the field commanders. McCrystal advises and implements, that is the job he signed up for when he accepted the position. He at least knew that, unlike half of the loonies on here who don't know word one about the UCMJ, the Constitution or simple civics.

I think many of the posters don't understand or refuse to accept that soldiers are not just any American. They are part of the military and have taken oaths the rest of us don't. They are required to abide by much stricter codes of conduct than we are.

My sister was in the Air Force and was written up because a sunburn she got (on her free time) restricted her ability to perform her job. A sunburn?!? It's a different world for our soldiers and they accept it when they sign on.

Do any of you believe the general would have tolerated this insubordination toward him for one minute? He knew it could affect the morale and discipline required.

Freedom of speech is a luxury we Americans expect. Our military knows you can speak whatever you want in public, but to go off on the president/etc to Rolling Stone magazine?!? What were these guys thinking? If their judgment was this poor, I don't want them in the position to be making life-threatening decisions.

My father was also disciplined for a sunburn he received on his head (brush cut in the 60's). Military life is not like main street. If any of us kids got into trouble - my father would have to appear before the base commander and explain our behavior. My husbands father had to go before his superior and explain why his son got a speeding ticket on base.

To give an interview and disparage the President of the US is insubordination. This might be the only thing I have agreed with President Obama on.

McChrystal knew he had lied to the president, told the President he could win with 30,000 more troops and could begin withdrawls in July. That lie was about to be shown for what it was. What better way to get out of this pickle than to publicly confront the President, who would have to fire him.

Now we'll see McChrystal on Fox news, whinning that he could have won if the President hadn't been so thin skinned.

McChrystal should be court marshalled and stripped of his pension, and a dishonorable discharge.

In the United States, the military is subbordinate to civilian authority.

No.

Since when should you be punished for telling the truth? This admin is a bunch of clowns and our pretender in chief doesn't seem to like people who oppose him.

I vote for Obama to take up arms and fight in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Obama is a putz.... Even if you agree on this issue, doing it with such publicity is epic fail.

The stupidest president just got rid of a great General. I just hope that the American public fires the "me$$iah's a@@, come Nov 2012, and make him a lame duck in Nov 2010. There isn't any military experience in the White House, so why should we expect any in the war zone? I think McChrystal just had enough of military incompetence in this administration, that he was willing to sacrifice his job to get the news out about this dolt of a president. God Bless you, Billy, and thanks for your splendid service in a very dangerous job (Special OPS). One of your t--ds has more knowledge than this imposter in the Whitehouse.

Mixman - it tells us that if the general is that opposed, he should resign his command and his commission and run for the presidency.

JustThinking #2.9

When Gen."Boss" McCrystal heard disparaging comments reported to him about not knowing what his troops were having to go through, he didn't court marshall anyone. He went out, in gear, on patrol with them. Without an entourage or reporters to do photo ops.

Insubordination is not following a direct order which freedom of speech is not the same.

Truman (D) fired MacArthur in '54 for going around the president and talking about Truman's reluctance to whipe out the N Koreans up to the Chineese boarder.

We're still dealing with them and have troops in Korea.

I agree with 7matthew court martial - busted in rank for violation of UCMJ. Air Force Gen got busted from two star to Colonel for having an affair.

blue-iris - your talking points have been debunked along time ago.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/braziloil.asp

Well, if National Security is the real reason for his dismissal, then I would suggest Obama resign for the same reason

Mixedup,

The counter insurgency program McChystal has been pushing is his baby, not Obama's. Any failure in that plan lays at his feet. Obama has done exactly what we should expect from our civilian leaders, he has supported this plan and acted as a lightning rod for McChystal allowing him to operate. However, he is now doing what we need our civilian leader to do when a MILITARY LEADER oversteps his station, he is relieving him. McChrystal is lucky that Obama did not push for a Court Marshall for insubordination.

Further to act as if this was the politically prudent thing is absolutely ludicrous. Obama could have kept McChystal's resignation in his pocket and made him his whipping boy and snuffed the right wing response with a protecting his General approach. He chose instead to protect the standards that have kept this Democracy functioning for over 200 years.

McChrystal lied and said we could win this conflict at a price the nation could afford. Petrayus is tells the same sort of lies. Generals will never be truthful about a botched war; they will always double down, always say that with a few thousand more soldiers, another year, and another trillion they could win this thing. A year later, all they need is another few thousand soldiers, another year, and another trillion. In Afghanistan we've been hearing this story for 9 years now.

I think it is UNFORTUNATE that McChrystal made the remarks he did out of, I suspect, frustration. I certainly understand that, and disagree with setting timelines which were simply to appease the opponents of the surge. He was a soldier and what he did was nothing less than insubordination bordering on treason. Treason was the outing of Valerie Plame in response to her husband's editorial questioning the invasion of Iraq. Scooter Libby fell on his sword over that one, but it had Cheney/Rove's fingerprints all over it.

IMO we should NEVER have invaded Iraq. I opposed it in 2002-3, and everything that's happened since has simply validated what we knew all along back there, but despite that I knew that once we went in there, we had to attempt to put in a stable government. Nonetheless, a trillion dollars later and massive instability in the region, we're still struggling.

Iraq was a war of CHOICE based on Cheney/Krystal/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld's (and others) agenda. Look up Project for the New American Century and their document written in 2000 (long before dubya was selected) called Rebuilding America's Defenses or the NPR interview in which Krystal was asked how he felt about having his Iraq strategy implemented and he was pleased and gratified.

Afghanistan was where Bin Laden was hiding, where Al-Quaeda had their base, and was a danger to all of us, never mind the horrific human rights abuses perpetrated by the Taliban. Even Jimmy Carter, the most liberal president in my memory stated publicly at the Democratic Convention in 2004 that Afghanistan was necessary. It still is, and now that they've found and publicized the mineral treasure trove there which could permanently alter the economic and political landscape of Afghanistan, it's even more critically important that we succeed in Afghanistan and permanently remove the Taliban from the face of the Earth. To fail in Afghanistan would be a disaster of monumental proportions, given its proximity to Pakistan, Pakistan's instability and the fact that Pakistan POSSESSES nuclear weapons.

I hate replacing McChrystal, but he made his bed with his comments. Hopefully Petraeus can finish this mission and have a successful outcome.

For those of you bashing Obama for removing McChrystal, I dare you to tell me that Bush/Cheney wouldn't have done the same thing.

UCMJ Article 88 (quoted from http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/56176):

“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.”

Elements.

(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

And here is the explanation.

Explanation.

The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Note that McChrystal’s statements were not a private conversation nor made during the course of a political discussion. They were made to a written publication, an aggravating element. So the bottomline is that what McChrystal did is not called insubordination. It is contempt, and it is a court martial offense.

IMHO, he's lucky to get away with just being relieved of command... President Obama should Show the Enlisted Ranks that he will Not Tolerate a Double Standard. Courts Marshall his Ass.

The poll has it backwards! Firing him is what makes Obama appear weak - a baby with a bruised ego who fired someone because his feelings were hurt.

As for the UCMJ that is unconstitutional and it shouldn't be allowed to exist. It forces American citizens to be STRIPPED of their first amendment rights, their UNALIENABLE rights. Yeah, that means they are not supposed to be "alienated" just because they joined the military or anything else!

To teabaggers, any fact they find inconvenient is "unconstitutional". The huffing and puffing is getting old, and will cost Republicans dearly in the next election.

incognito,

it is obvious you never served!

i am a veteran. the right you talk about is one of the things we WILLINGLY AGREE to give up when we enlist.

the UCMJ takes the place of those constitutional guarantees, ok.

pull your earlobes 'til you hear a LOUD pop

Now Now lets not insult the Ego in Chief he might hunt you down and have you fired. This administration and it's clown follows are the biggest circus I have ever seen. God help this country it needs help with B O and his dumocratic yes people running it.

Ya cain't charge McChrystal with contempt, either, 'cuz BO is the most contemptable little runt ever paraded as president by the powers that wannabe !!!

JTM,

Exactly!

McChrystal is not a dumb man, he knew he would have to go; he wanted to be thrown out because he lied about the resources needed to fight the war, asking for about a tenth of the fighting force that his own book on insurgencies said was required. He did not have the stomach to be in charge of a lost war, one that was being lost because he asked for the resources he thought were politically feasible, not the resources he actually needed.

I totally agree!

Ditto. Well sort of - I was never a submarine officer or any kind of officer or in the military - but I agree!

Have either of you actually read the article. The General did NOT violate the UCMJ. Most of the article was un-sourced quotes to the general's aids. The General was never directly attributed with anything that would be inflammatory or incriminating.

It is sad that our country is being manipulated by the media and everyone is making decisions solely on an emotional response of what they "believe" to be correct without backing anything up with hard facts.

This is just another instant of very poor leadership by President Obama. He seems to be a very personnable guy and very good with speaches. Unfortunately he is not a good leader. Obama should re-read the Constitution and try and focus on doing is job.

Semper Fidelis

David B

As a former US Navy, petty officer(1963-67), I knew the chain of command also, and as much as hated richard nixon, I kept my mouth shut and did my job.

....but what does that tell you when war wary Generals oppose the top down strategy?

It says many things....but first and foremost I think it says that these Generals are tired and exhausted from fighting a war that cannot be won.

Totally Agree! I wish the neo-con Obama haters could get this through their thick skulls. This issue has nothing to do with the partisan politics at home.

Obama knows that in order to win this war we need a general who understands that he works for the democratically ellected Government of the United Sates of America.

The "top down" strategy was McChrystal's he purposed it to the Administrtion and said it would work.

Robert Perkins,

If you are going to lie,try looking for the correct facts to support your lie..Nixon wasn't the President from 1963-1967...

Obama of all people shouldn't be running the military..The closest he was ever to being in the military was playing with his GI-Joe toys...Talk about incompetence..

Who sent Rolling Stones to Afghanistan? McC. superiors, of course! Why??

DAVID-B if you are going to try and use that argument them the Aide's work for who? The General and who is responsible for them and there actions.

GregL - FDR wasn't in the Military ever and he was Commander in Chief during WWII. Nixon was at least CIC during Vietnam so Robert just had time wrong but still his point was correct.

Everyone quit commenting on your political views and comment on the real issue. The General got off easy he could be Court Marshaled.

David B is absolutely right. I read the article and the only direct quotes to the General were that he thought the Ambassador to Afganistan betrayed him and in what was clearly a joke he said did you say "Bite Me" when asked about "Biden". The first one may be actionable the second one is clearly just a joke. Now with respect to the "unnamed" subordinates, if they truly said it I agree with the military folks the UCMJ would apply (6 yrs active 2 yrs reserve). That said how smart is he really for letting the Rolling Stone Magazine follow him around? Either way it is a shame.

David B,

"Un-sourced quotes"?? Your use of the term Semper Fi might indicate you were once in the Marines and may know a thing or two about the UCMJ, but you obviously know very little about journalism. The article WAS the source. These quotes were made in the company of a reporter who was "on the record" when the comments were uttered. While it is possible the writer twisted what was said, took it out of context, or simply made them up, the General or any of his staff could dispute the facts as reported. The fact that they have not attempted to rebut the article indicates that it is likely accurate.

I don't know enough about the UCMJ to say whether it was breeched, but it seems to me that just allowing your aides to behave as such in public is suitable grounds for the President's reaction. We can debate that point as a matter of opinion. However, blaming the media for manipulating the public's emotional response is in fact a manipulation of the public based on an emotional distrust of the media, something that is impossible to debate. If you believe the article was misleading, prove it with "hard facts," as you say.

Dave C

Damn bubble heads. The UCMJ was always stupid for the most part as it it archaic and should be revised.

I should have added to my comment that not disclosing someone's name while reporting the news is common practice. Allowing someone to remain anonymous permits them to divulge facts without fear of retribution. The flap over this article was about the General's control of his aides and his own conduct, not the aides per se. Wrecking the careers of all involved was likely the motivation against publishing names.

lmao @ Robert L.

Obama of all people shouldn't be running the military..The closest he was ever to being in the military was playing with his GI-Joe toys...Talk about incompetence..

Incompetence is a party boy, bought into the Texas Air National Guard and given a pilot slot, with a 25% test score over hundreds of more qualified applicants, then leaving to work on a political campaign, and not returning (going AWOL). This brilliant military strategist made the Mission Accomplished statement...what? 7 years ago?

Give me an intelligent, coherent, self-made civilian over some moron who had his way smoothed all his life by his daddy and his political connections. At least Obama LISTENS to his advisors, who often have different views on how things should be accomplished, instead of surrounding himself with a homogeneous view that ultimately failed.

Find another job! I know people that went into the military because there is not jobs to be had they are all going the frickin ILLEGALS THE EGO IN CHIEF WANTS TO KEEP. That being sad the Ego in Chief is way to thin skinned he seems to like revenge on anyone who does not agree with him Mr. teleprompter forgot to have that put in his speeches about hope and change.

That's exactly what he should have done.

The General probably did handle it wrong, but it is wrong to let him go. General Patton appologized and still commanded into a great victory.

I don't know. They need to let the generals do what needs to be done and the civilians stay out of the mix. Think about Mc Arthur, Westmorland,... see what I mean, where did it leave us?

How do you know he didn't talk to Presdent Obama about his concerns? The powers that be aren't going to put that out there. Being in the military means you aren't allowed to voice your opinions? He didn't reveal classified information or even say anything that can't be found elsewhere. For the President of Afgan. to say don't take him away, he's working, and still do it anyway, smacks of a supiority complex and possibly a lack of interest in what is best for the Afgan people. Oh that's right, we're not there for "the people" we're there for the terrorists.

McChrystal was not elected to run the country, therefore he shouldn't feel personally responsible for it. He is a servant, a public servant, a public employee. He is not Hitler, Mussolini, or Napolean no matter how much he desires to be. He clearly took too many military classes and not enough government, philosophy or humanities. His education must have really sucked, like most military families. This is exactly why our founding fathers forced the military to be beneath the civilian government (in all cases)

oh, gee, "nonconformist", let's rely on Karzi's opinion. Silliest thing I've heard yet. Probably should have been fired just on principle if Karzi wanted him. The guy is corrupt as hell. And yes, actually, that is exactly what being in the military means, you don't get to publicly degenerate your superiors, read a book and learn before running your mouth off.

People for him talk like McCrystal was some sort of second coming. Obama has vastly increased the presence in the region at his request, but things are sliding backwards and the troops in the field are NOT sold on his plan and are VERY frustrated at his rules of engagement. Just because he is a general doesn't mean he's right on strategy, they aren't infallible because of position. He should be honored for serving, but that doesn't give him carte blanc to do and say what he wishs.

"So being in the military means you aren't allowed to voice your opinions?"

Yes being in the military means you aren't allowed to voice your opinion in a public forum such as a Rolling Stone article. If I remember correctly you are not even allowed to put political stickers on your vehicle if you are in the service, but I could be wrong about that.

The part of this that aggrevates me is that McChyrstal wasn't the only one who was quoted in the article bad mouthing the President, but he's the only one who is being publicly set down for it.

Disagree with SAL - He violated his oath and being a four star - he sure knew what he was doing.

The Military Oath

The Commissioning Oath

"I, ____— , having been appointed an officer in the (Service) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of ____— do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

The Enlistment Oath

"I, _____, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

rrobeson,

It's people like The General that keeps your sorry azz safe..You can bad mouth him all you want,but I would trust him with my life way before Obama...Obama is a coward and never served....As much as Biden is a buffoon at least I can respect his service...

He Violated the UCMJ

UCMJ Article 88 (quoted from http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/56176):

“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.”

Elements.

(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

And here is the explanation.

Explanation.

The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Note that McChrystal’s statements were not a private conversation nor made during the course of a political discussion. They were made to a written publication, an aggravating element. So the bottomline is that what McChrystal did is not called insubordination. It is contempt, and it is a court martial offense.

IMHO, he's lucky to get away with just being relieved of command... President Obama should Show the Enlisted Ranks that he will Not Tolerate a Double Standard. Courts Marshall his Ass.

Greg - I don't think anybody is "bad mouthing" the General - he has a stellular career, but he threw it away by leaving the president no choice but to fire him for violation of UCMJ Art 88. The president could had a Courts Martial and that could of stripped him of his rank. Air Force two star was busted to Colonel for having an affair.

I do know I would rather have Obama then "Insane" McCain or God help us "Wailin" Palin

GregL-671049

"The General that keeps your sorry azz safe..You can bad mouth him all you want,but I would trust him with my life way before Obama..."

Sounds to me like you prefer a military dictatorship over civilian rule...

rrobeson - gosh, you sound like a total liberal elit, but in fact, you don't even have any facts to back up your generalization! PATHETIC! Do you even know any facts about mcChrystal?? He graduated from West Point, one of the BEST college in this nation. Not only do you need to intelligent, you also need to be phsically agile and have the capability to lead. I am sure you are non of the above based on your ignorant comments. No wonder you like Obama, another liberal elit who hasn't really done anything for this country except increasing polarization, health care reform, attacking Arizona for protecting its citizens, enforcing the law that should be enforced by the federal government, and calling the "Cambridge police acted 'stupidly'" after admiting that he didn't know the whole story yet. Generalizing military's education as inferior? Have you ever risked your life to serve this country? What a arrogant jerk! I haven't yet, but I know it takes tremedous courage to put your life on the line everyday to serve the people, like the police, firefighter, and our military men and women. Before you point finger and call other people names, look at yourself in the mirror! p.s. I'm receiving my Ph.D. in a couple of months, so you can stop trying to attack me.

No, I just believe in Honoring the Commitment and Oath I and Every other Soldier, Sailor, Airman and Marine has taken. Along with my Commitment to Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States, I Swore to Obey the Orders of the President of the United States and all Officers appointed over me. I also accepted the Laws that Congress established under the UCMJ.

While I will Mourn the loss of a Great General. He KNEW the consequences of HIS ACTION. No one forced this man to do what he did. In fact, this Lack of Respect had become Infectious and had spread to his Subordinates. Otherwise his men would have never made the comments they did. When Insubordination is fostered and allowed to continue, it becomes a Cancer. Good Order and Discipline go out the window. THIS Cannot be tolerated.

Everyone is saying that McCrystal mouthed off, and in the military, that is something you never do ("publicly degenerate your superiors"). Now, you would think that a man who has been in the military his entire life would be aware of the fact that talking out about this subject was against the rules and would inevitably result in some type of reprimand. So that makes me wonder, why would a man who has dedicated his entire life to the military break one of its cardinal rules unless he felt something was drastically wrong?

I have no qualms with what McCrystal did. Speaking out of the chain of command may be wrong, but coming ill-prepared to a meeting about a 9-year war is worse. If McCrystal would have come out and said the same things about Bush, he would have been portrayed as a hero by the media. It is possibly more important now than at any other time in this in this country to make sure that we do not accept media opinion as fact (from either side of the political spectrum). Analyze the situation, ask questions, and draw your own conclusions, while remaining open to change. Do not accept (without question) other's opinions without asking questions first. For example, this poll's options were all phrased in a way that condemned McCrystal and said nothing about Obama. Be aware, there are more reasonable opinion options than the three listed in this poll.

And just a side note, people on this message board have referred to McCrystal and the people supporting him as Nazis. However, I believe Hitler would routinely dismiss those who were outspoken against his administration. And for the people going nuts right now, I realize that Obama is not Hitler... just a perspective check.

Our President should let our Generals take care of the War, he should worry about our boarders, first...

totally agree with GregL-671049. i remember that all the "great education receivers" came out to protest the war, and actually get in to the classes to dodge the draft, so.... may be instead of giving all of you grants to go to a college we should pour this money in to the "military education". and you may get your great education by serving in the military first. Military is our defence, otherwise we would be constantly fought over by more powerful nations. Let's not forget, because our military is not on the borders, Mexico is quietly invading us! Military IS our Savior. and i am ashamed to read posts like rrobeson, you or your parents probably were throwing dog p...p at our returning soldiers from Vietnam... shame on you...

I'm not even going to dignified your studpid comments on Harvard or Columbia, Obama is the one that should have stayed in school. He had no real-world experience, pure talk. I worked for the last 18 years to put myself through college, MS degree, then Ph.D. and I have held positions as manager and received multiple awards. I don't care people graduated from Harvard or Columbia, I personally know people who went to Harvard and other top schools, granted, they might not be stupid, but they have sub-par work ethics.

FYI - I came to this country lEGALLY, waited 8 years for my green card. Worked my way through school, with a help of student loan that I have to PAY BACK. I DID NOT use any tax payer's money. IN fact, I have been paying tax since 18 years ago when I started working. Get your facts straight before you start calling names.

I WAS a democrat until I saw people going for the guy who is seemingly educated and ingelligent, but with NO susbstance. He has proven himself to be a grant master of manipulater and opportunist. He would tell you what you want to hear, then changes course when the political wind changes.

Here are just some examples of things that he had reversed his promised. Just remember, the worst tyrants in history were not stupid, they were actually very smart in order to get to where they are. eg. Hitler.

- Campaign finacing -promised of public finacing, but going back on his words.

- gave a briliant speech about "can't disown Jerimiah Wright like he can disown his own white grandmonther", then a week later, the political wind change, and he threw him under the bus. I guess this is how you treat your "spiritdual mentor" for 20 year, the person who officiated your wedding, and baptized your two daughters.

- Obama and the Louis Gate Jr. are good friends. And to come out and criticized the police doing their job is OFFENSIVE and APPALING before knowing all the facts (he said it himself).

let me refresh your bad memory http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/07/obama_tells_lynn_sweet_police.html

The police responded to a call from a concerned neighbor, and Gate was acting belligerant, that was the only reason they arrested him. Give me a break, stop using every incident as a racial issue. Perhaps the Cambridge police should have jsut sit around and not do anything. Oh, forgot, I'm sure they would be then criticized for not doing their job because Gate is black. Give me a break.

I am not white and I did not participate in this country's shameful past, I guess that's why I'm not one of you apologist out there supporting this faker in the white house.

pistatthesystem

One more thing, try to get your name-calling under control. People usually don't have respect for those who can't debate as a civilized person without getting emotional and name-calling. At least I don't.

To JC-

Hey doctor, you spelled legally wrong! Who are you trying to impress? Your arrogance is appalling! You stereotype people who graduated from Harvard or Columbia as sub-par! What gives you the right to judge people you don't even know. As for our shameful pass! I have nothing to be ashamed of and neither does anyone in my family. If anything, my ancestors were slaves 5000 years before this country came into being, that was 5000 years ago and has nothing to do with me or the people of today. If you are so ashamed of this country's past, you could leave!

I'm always so amazed by the crazed anit-Obama crowd. I just wonder how you'd like the incompetent McCain/Palin in office. Remember - "there is no economic crisis," then the next week "I'm suspending my campaign because of the dire state of the economy." You are all such right wing nut cases.

Oh yeah? How so? Hmm?

The General thought President Obama was "a big wimp". The General was wrong, the General was fired. Good.

I am sure you are probably right, but it's tough to see someone else punished for serving a Country when Obama has not done much of what he PROMISED he would do - it's too bad we can't fire him immediately.

Exactly what has Obama NOT done? What makes you think it WON'T get done?

After 8 years of hell - that takes time to clean up my dear.

Too bad. So sad. Deal with it.

Kim: Once again...Obama actually went AGAINST one of his campaign promises...he ramped up the number of troops in Afghanistan. He gets criticized for doing that...and then gets criticized for being a wimp? Some of you people are just not making any sense. He listened to McChrystal who demanded more troops ( to the tune of about 170,000)...Obama sent in more troops, but fewer than loose cannon McChrystal demanded! We cannot continue to stay in Afghanistan for 10 more years! This general needs to shut his damn mouth and spend time doing his job...which he obviously could not do! Good riddance!

This is ridiculious, how can you make reference to Obama's Administration not doing their job. Like BJs65-634377 he is cleaning up bad decision made by the previous Bush Administration. It took 8 years to damn near destroy U.S Admin. its going to take longer to clean up. And far as what Obama "Promised", he can't act alone, if House of Representives and the Senate cant make decision sole based on what will be good for the country and not based on their personal issue they have with the president how is Obama to get anything done that he promised. There is a whole lot of ignorace going on, I dont see how anyone can back the Bush Administration when 4 years ago our nation couldn't wait to see Bush leave office.

You are correct. He had no choice.

UCMJ Article 88 (quoted from http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/56176):

“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.”

Elements.

(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

And here is the explanation.

Explanation.

The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Note that McChrystal’s statements were not a private conversation nor made during the course of a political discussion. They were made to a written publication, an aggravating element. So the bottomline is that what McChrystal did is not called insubordination. It is contempt, and it is a court martial offense.

IMHO, he's lucky to get away with just being relieved of command... President Obama should Show the Enlisted Ranks that he will Not Tolerate a Double Standard. Courts Marshall his Ass.

Great post MMC

US Army 24Oct66-23Oct1966..I served and I think the President is a bumbling fool and isn't worthy of the office... I have heard a lot of Obama butt boys saying the General should be relieved for what he said..I don't see many people saying what he said wasn't true...

MMC Streamsnipe,

He (Obama)may insist the military follow his orders,but they will never love him..He is a disgrace..

No Matter what anyone may think of him, he is still my Commander-in-Chief. If you Were a member of the Military, You would never make such statements without the shield of these anonomous Postings.

When members of the Obama Administration wanted to get rid of general McChrystal, it was Obama that stood by him and supported him. He gave McChrystal everything he asked for, including most of the troops he requested. when McChrystal told Obama what he wanted to achieve in Afghanistan and how he thought he could get the job done, Obama said he would support that policy and made it his own. If military types are criticizing President Obama, it is because they do not undertand the military code of justice and military law. What McChrystal did was a serious offense according to military law. These people should call their judge advocates office and ask that the law be explained to them. Do it pronto before you get yourself in hot water someday and will find out in the United States Military you do not get to plead ignorance of the law! The law states that all military personnel shall not publicly criticize, ridicule, mock or say anything disrespectful about the Commander-in-Chief, who is also the President of the United States, nor the Vice President, The Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, all other cabinet members, and the President's staff such as National Security Adviser (currently retired 4 star Marine General Jim Jones, a man with a more sterling career record than McChrystal yet was called by McChrystals staff a "clown)," and reportedly this was said to a journalist for Rolling Stone Magazine. Also this military law forbids the public criticism of all Members of Congress, the Governors of all fifty states, the Governors of all American territories and American commonwealth, and of course you must obey your superior officers. It has to do with the chain of command. You can argue with the President or any one else privately, but publicly all military personnel must keep their mouths shut. To break this rule is to embolden the enemy and weaken our position. I hope General Petraeus, who also has a more sterling record than McChrystal and who was McChrystal's boss, I hope Petraeus is able to explain to the troops why Obama had no choice but to remove McChrystal. Obama made a brilliant move when he got Petraeus to agree to take over McChrystal's command. I am frankly appalled at the number of people who claim they are currently serving in the armed forces and have absolutely no understanding of the code of military conduct

here here. I am also frankly appalled by all the vitriol, ignorance, totally biased and hypocritical comments against the President by people who were undoubtedly all for suppressing the freedom of speech for civilians when ANYONE dared challenge Bush 2 for starting a war based on false pretenses. I'm tired of hearing people through around words like "dictator", "socialist" and the like without ANY understanding of what those words mean historically or practically. I'm tired of the double standard many Conservatives engage in and the loud way they try to shut down any intelligent discussion.

There's just too much stupidity to try to counter it at every turn so I'm going to just give up for now. Whew. Some of the population of this country is truly frightening.

Dr. B: What do you expect from an American public who spends more time watching reality TV shows and listening to that fat arse Rush Limbaugh? In my way of thinking...Americans in general...are just plain dumb! They let someone else do their thinking for them! I give up...you can't reason with idiots.

An arrogant General who deliberately called the President out was put down hard, as he should be.

If the General can't win the war with the resources he asked for, he should have said so, in private, and advocated withdrawl. Instead the General chose to play rope-a-dope; ask for what he can get now, promise what he must now, and then ask for more resources and more time later. Obama probably made the General stick to his original agreement; which pissed the General off. So he doubled down. If President Obama had allowed the General's insults, the General would have demanded ever more resources and time, even if the country could not provide them. President Obama did the right thing. Now the president should re-evaluate our presence in Afghanistan and get honest people to tell him what it will really take to win. I'll bet if the situation is assessed honestly, we will be withdrawing in July as planned. The cost of continuing the war are too high, the benefits non-existent.

Wow! Excellent the way you explained the situation! Thank-you for your great post!

Good Post 7Mathew1520!

Cuts to the heart of the situation.

I'm just a regular person, no military experience. But I know enough not to get faced in front of a reporter. I cant help to think that McCrystal in his stupored state must have thought he would come across as cool or something. I just cant imagine someone with that long and distinguished a career willingly allowing himself and his subordinates to be portrayed as perfect idiots.

Obama did the right thing relieving this general from his post. Obama didn't create this war, he's trying to find a strategy that will allow the US to exit gracefully and give the Afghanistan people a way to live freely, in control of their own destinies, without the interference and thug tactics of the Taliban.

I believe that Obama listened privately to this General, both his good and bad comments. This administration was doing what it could to assist McCrystal, even Hillary Clinton was supporting him. To air any BS that bad-mouths others in the military...even worse to say you were undermining the civilian side of the equation to retain power (read the article folks!) is an offense that should be court-marshalled.

Lets all just pray that this situation can be turned around for the benefit of our Military troups and the Afghani people. Blessings to each of our Military men who serve to protect.

Who is?

You do not need to have military service in your background to be Prez.

Just because you don't like him doesn't make him qualified.

Deal with it.

golfwesty - so you of course agree that the deserter who was in the White House for the previous administration had no right to serve either?

You mean your guy, ex cheerleader, ex alcoholic, who skipped serving the country and take us to the illegal unjustified war fit to be a Commander in Chief? Where have you been in the past 8 years? Gosh... Idiot...

Zero military experience - Reagan, Clinton, GWB - should I go on?

So Bush had so much military experience. He is the exact reason we are still at war. Get real, please!!!

Don't forget our Sarah "I'm an Idiot" Palin - she has absolutely ZERO experience in the military! I can't believe the idiots that wanted to vote her in! Talk about ruining the country and becoming the absolute laughing stock of the entire world!

Reagan served. Bush was Air National Guard. William Jefferson did not--he was a draft dodger.

Bush was AWOL.....he never bothered to show up half the time....I would not call that SERVICE.

Yeah, remember that campaign suggestion about Obama running a multimillion dollar campaign that gives him more fiscal experience than Palin? I don't even like Palin, but to use that as EXPERIENCE? No wonder why we still have a gushing oil leak at the bottom of the gulf. No need to wonder how poorly Palin would have acted as VICE PRESIDENT, Obama and Biden are doing such a fine job.

I'd wager you supported Bush who also didn't exactly have any REAL military experience (hiding out from the Vietnam way through Daddy's connections and not even always showing up for duty don't exactly count). Our country created a system where a CIVILIAN government heads up the military with the President as Commander in Chief. Regardless of your feelings for the President, the military survives by following a very strict chain of command and McChrystal clearly broke it. I'm willing to bet a LOT of money that McChrystal himself would've canned anyone below him for a LOT less.

whatever.

Yes Reagan did serve - in Hollywood making training films. As to Bush's nation guard training - he never showed up - don't you think members of that unit would of came forward and said yes - I served with the president - or here are snapshots of me the the prez downing a few brews at the o-club. NOBODY did.

For who - Sarah Palin, the half-term governor of a state that gets $2 in federal money for every $1 in taxes? Mitt Romney, who couldn't even muster a decent showing in 2008? Oh, what about Newt Gingrich? I mean, it's not like he resigned in disgrace or anything...

Face it, the GOP has nothing but has-beens and never-wills on their bench.

No, my dear Greg, he will be re-elected.

That he will. I voted for him in 2008 and I will vote for him again in 2012. Proudly.l

While I agree that Petraeus is definitely a better choice, I just want to point out that it is 2010. Lincoln did not have the media coverage to deal with that we have now, nor did he have the political pressures of current day. Lincoln did not have to face term limits, which were enacted by the 22nd Amend. after Roosevelt was elected for his fourth consecutive term.

Petraeus is definitely an upgrade!

Lingua Factiosi - I disagree - Lincoln had more troubles then people know. That several northern states were thinking about succession also - they were against using troops to bring the first confedrate states back into the union - but that changed when south carolina fired on Ft Sumter. News publishers were thrown in jail for trying to print the truth about the war the first years of it - that's were the term "copperhead" came about.

In the past 20 years we have seen the office of the President go from respect to disrespect. You may not agree with the President - I know I don't - but the amount of disrespect that has been shown to our current President and our former President is appalling. It is no wonder we can't get anything done in this country.

And who engineered the disrespect for the Presedency? Republicans. They did it by dragging Clinton's personal life thru the mud, and then appointing Bush president for 8 years that destroyed this nation.

Let's face it...call it what it REALLY is....this country was NOT ready for a President of a different color...sure..the majority elected him...the very LOUD and very DUMB minority are going to make sure that they discredit him at every turn.

The "President" could be a smurf!!! Who cares what color he is??? And if the General was "of color"??? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

if only some of the idiots on this site would purchase a clue - they would help this country out considerably if they would simply stop being Haters!!! This President is one of the best our country has ever seen - hands down! He was given a bowl of horse dung and expected to clean it up over night! no one could clean this mess up over night but President Obama has worked diligently, nite and day 26 hours a day to pull us up out of the gutter the previous admin. dumped us is... His decision makes absolute sense in that insubordination on any level, in particular military, cannot and will not be tolerated... I praise him daily...

OMG Please dont ever reply to any of my post. As I am not a hater nor and idiot. AND I am not a follower as some seem to be. PLEASE. And by the way you are the one who needs to be GIVEN a clue if possible...you see I won't even charge you for it.

a hater you are indeed to refer to our Brilliant President as a "moron"???? !!!!! you don't have to be a follower to assert respect which when absent becomes idiotic... and thoroughly sad... again, you refer to one of this Country's Greatest President's as a moron that makes you the ultimate HATER. PLEASE...

Please...our best president ever......GET A CLUE!!!! The president needs to serve the people of our country, not other needs that benefit him. You make me laugh so I will not respond to anymore of your idiotic views or replies. I have the right to my opinion still. The worst president of the united states has yet to take that away from me....but I'm sure he will try if it benefits him...and by the way, you sound more like the hater, not me

iamwoman- u think WE should purchase a clue??? hahahahaha- u praise him daily and thinks he works 26 hours a day-and u say WE r the idiots?? FYI-there r only 24 hrs in a day. lmao

lmao iamwomanif color he is a moron over and over he lied to the people over and over fixing thing what have you been drinking if some one does not like the jerk it does not make them a hater or racest it make them smart lol

iamwomanofcolor...I'd have to agree with 1911212. You really need a clue! What good has he done so far? Opened up the pockets of the American workers in order to fill the illegals' pockets even more...tried to push through a health reform that HE wanted without listening to what WE wanted...tried to pass the oil spill as not as significant as it really is...disregarded any assistance from other countries offering their help for FREE...soon will be raising our taxes to pay for the HUGE deficit HE put us in...need I go on??? Working diligently...yeah, for himself! If you praise him daily, I feel sorry for you.

Let's stop the name calling here. The biggest problem we have in this country is polarization and lack of respect. I respect your right to your opinion, no matter what I think of it. I would urge you to respect mine as well. I am an Army wife and the President is the commander in chief of Gen McChrystal. If a soldier of lower rank openly criticized the general, especially in print, he would be disiplined and possibly relieved of duty. Whether you love or hate the president, he followed military procedure. If you support the troups, and I suspect you do (as I do), you cannot undermine the authority of the commander in chief. Let's pull back on the disrespect. It's unAmerican.

@ 1911212...yes you have a right to your opinion....we all have them....but the only moron I can see here is you...bet you never served in our military....I'm not sure about you being a hater but you post says you are a idiot.

Tea baggers...ugh.

Weak tea at that!

Actually, no very intelligent and 3 great grandfathers, 2 grandfathers, 1 father, 6 uncles, 1 brother and spouse....ALL military.....so your theory is incorrect...like I said...understand code, but allowed my opinion still. Obama has yet been able to take away public opinion (trying but not yet done)...so you are allowed yours also.

What is it that makes you say Obama is a moron really? Can you point to anything specifically? Do you think once a person is elected President, no matter what party, he can just walk in and everything just falls perfectly into place for him? Everything is a battle. It's like Las Vegas inasmuch as it is a city that never sleeps and everyone is hedging bets to get their interests' needs met or awarded porkbarrel projects. Haggling, arguing, negotiating, secrets necessary for national security all jumbled up into one job and more. Obamas no moron. He is busy as hell and I think a lot of people don't like him for another reason.

thank you dears for supporting our awesome President as do I... for the teabaggers, again they all need to purchase a clue or somehow, someway, get over the fact that they lost and we WON... and for those who would deny that it has anything to do with his RACE, again, get over it - there is now an extremely qualified BLACK MAN in the White House... all or most of his decisions have been blocked by the Party of No-way...and yet still he has done more for this American Nation in such a short amount of time than any other President to date - and yet they, the true morons, with their illegitimate beefs, just don't get it... I suppose they truly loved and admired all the great (not) things the former administration left in place for Pres. Obama... such a shame ... do they truly not remember what we were going through (i.e. on the precipice of financial destruction, et. al.) just 3 years ago...?? geez louise, but again, I truly thank all of us who support him in his efforts for on and behalf of each and every one of us...26 hours a day - yeah I said it and will repeat it: 26 HOURS A DAY.... they all need to stop listening to the likes beckhannitypalin and treat themselves to some truth...instead of drinking their daily doses of tepid tea... I pray for them all anyway....

So he is a "jack of all trades" and a "master of none"? that sounds like what you are saying? In fact you are correct, he can not handle coming in to a situation as is and doing the job, because history states that there are presidents that have accomplished those tasks. What reason would that be that you think people don't like him? Simple fact is, he is to inexperienced for "Commander in Chief" and maybe someday he will be ready...who knows and FYI if your trying to play the race card with me....don't MORONS come in every color. and for the other post...I don't drink tea... because I am not a teabagger...LOL

President Obama did not get to be President of the Harvard Law Review because they thought he was a moron. Secretary of Defense Gates who was appointed by Bush and asked by Obama to stay on because he respected him so much was quoted as saying President Obama is "one of the smartest poeple he has ever worked for." In fact, many important and brilliant minds have made similar remarks about Obama being highly intelligent. Calling the President a moron when there is so much evidence out there to the contrary tells me more about your level of intelligence!

iamwomanof color, your comments are based solely on your ideals, simply because the president is one of color does not automatically make him one of the greatest presidents, your blind following of a man based solely on color is at it's most basic racist. he has done nothing that would merit the label of one of our greatest presidents. he has made this country one of the most polarised since lincoln was in office without accomplishing anything that could be considered great. seems as though you need a reality check. myself with what is quickly becoming a large majority of this country disagree with just about everything this president has done, his only great achievement is his disastrous health care legislation that will bring this country to it's knee's financially. it's clear that your one of the give me all the handouts crowd and let someone else pay for it. what are you going to say when the well dries up and theres no one left to pay for your handouts, the president wants to redistribute the wealth by taking from the rich and giving to the poor, i say work for the wealth yourself, pay your fair share of the taxes on what you earn, take care of those that absolutely cannot do so for themselves and leave those that can to their own initiative and hard work, if they don't do the work, and if they don't acquire the wealth it is their responsibility not mine or the governments to give it to them. stop the liberal fraud being perpetuated on the american people, and for being the greatest president let me say this, come november he will become a lame duck and in 2012 he will be replaced and health care reform as he has made it will be repealed for something that actually makes sense. just because you believe he is so great does not mean the rest of the country agree's with you, and I for one have never felt as though he were my president, the only one in almost 50 years of my life that i can say that about. so go ahead now and call me a racist and a right wing nut and anything else you want just because i disagree with you wholeheartedly. let the attacks begin, thats the only answer the liberal community can come up with since they have no arguement based in fact to dispute what i've just stated. and to get back on subject as to whether or not he should have fired mcchrystal, i think he again was wrong. nowhere in the oath taken by all in the military does it say you cannot voice an opinion or state that with which you know to be fact, not only is it not illegal to do so but he cannot be court martialed for it either. you would take away the same freedoms from the military that they fight and die for to defend for you.

NO it does not actually...my level of intelligence is more than likely higher than yours, but I am done. just because YOU support him, does not mean he is the "best" president ever or capable of being president. In this job he is making MORONIC choices and decisions, and well...anybody can vote, buy a vote or etc. thanks all for your time and responses.

what makes you say Obama wants to own the world ?

media is crazy: and your comments as well are based solely on your ideals...because everything you've spewed is disagreed with by me and half the country... let's get that point straight first: there is no "large majority of the country..." that disagrees with everything he has done - to the contrary, WE, that is THE MAJORITY THAT VOTED HIM IN, stand by him and all of his efforts for and on behalf of each and every one of us!! The healthcare that passed may not have been exactly what we wanted - but when you spend every second with folks from the Party of No Way, it is rather difficult to get anything at all passed...higher pay for women was something awesome... and i have never received a "handout" from anyone anywhere - work my tail off to make ends due but always make sure there is some change left over to contribute in support of my President's efforts...next, the Republican party has always made it such that "...the rich get richer and the poor get poorer..." so sad and so sorry that you don't care about anyone but yourself - I personally feed hungry people, clothe those that have nothing to wear, and provide a safe harbor warm mean and clean bed for those who have not... sorry that I was born to help others and you perhaps were not...Thank goodness my President wants to see us all live a better lifestyle than that which the former administration was able to render... You truly forget the condition the country as a whole was in when the last President was at the helm? really? really? And you honestly feel we'd be in a better place if McCain/Palin were running things today? wow the hypocrisy knocks me out - and oh, healthcare will not be repealed, instead it will be enhanced and your children's children's children will rejoice from the benefits...and lastly, my mother being amongst the most beautiful of white folks and my father being a beautiful brilliant African man, I am able to love all folks unconditionally and I wait to hear what spills from their lips and I wait to see how they treat EVERYONE before labeling them "racist"... if the shoe or the outfit fits...oh well... The castigating vitriolic hatred spewed forth from the right the very second this awesome amazing Black Man took office has been so very obvious to sooooo many of us of all colors that it would be deemed rather obvious to those of us with any level of intellect whatsoever, that racism has and is permeating this society and taking us back emotionally and psychologically to the days when we were being hung by our masters/owners for perhaps eating lunch...lastly, whether President Obama fired the General or not, he would be ridiculed by your ilk - just because!!!! but, i pray for you all anyway...

iamwomanofcolor - great postings! Thumbs up to you!

To those who call her names because you disagree. Whine and moan why don't you? You can't even argue your point without resorting to (attempted) insults and name calling.

Yeah. Real. Mature.

Dear 1911212 I hate to call names normally, but I have to prove a point to myself atl least. First, you are a moron. I know this because you insist that you are not: to argue with a fool only proves that two fools are arguing. Second, anyone who is intellectually superior does not brag about it: it's like being rich. Those who truly have money don't have to tell people, everyone will just know. Q.E.D. If you cannot acknowledge a man's accomplishment's, then that is just because of jealousy, stupidity or racism. Maybe all three. Obama is a great man who is trying hard to save our country. Why wouldn't he? It's his job. He is a humble man from all reports and to me that makes him even greater. He is excellent at giving speeches. I am sure that history will prove him to be a great president. History will take everyone's opinions out of it and tell it like it is. You can't deny it. His actions today were swift appropriate and needed. But the sad thing is that McChrystal planned the whole thing. Being in the military for 30 years, he is well acquainted with the code of conduct. He knew all to well what would happen when he gave his interview to Rolling Stone. Didn't you think about that? McChrystal can't live up to his end of the bargain and his troops are complaining about him anonymously to reporters, so he bailed out of his incomplete mission. Next time you strike with a viper tongue, make sure you know of what you speak.

thank you Disgusted in NY!!! I am a native New Yorker dealing with folks on the West Coast - and believe me the vitriol is rampant out here! one of the largest factions of the KKK actually reside in an area known as Orange County - the O.C. - they truly despise our President there and come up with the most innane/insane reasons why (i.e.: he is gonna outlaw fishing!! amazing..lol) ... we do truly know WHY... again I thank you personally for your supportive post and i feel truly fortunate to have learned the timeless lesson that "...sticks and stones..." well you get it - I live to address their hatred - I watched my African father scorned, maligned and beaten by them - physically - and will fight to the end of my days to change the face/color of this bigoted nation and will support with much pride, our Awesome President Barack Obama ... blessings to you friend...

oh I just read your post Lingua Factiosi and can I just say a very hearty: Hoorah! I love you and I love your post... for a minute there, I didn't know what site I was on with all the venom being spewed... but from the poll result numbers above, looks like 55% to 39% still standing...that means what??? we win - again! have a blessed evening friend...

Hmm. Name calling. Can't think of anything else to say? Who's the real moron here?

The only danger this country is in, is from people like you! YOU ARE AN OBAMA HATER whether you want to admit it or not. You just want to bash President Obama not matter what he does. The fact that Bush lied to the country, repeatedly, or that he entered an illegal war or that fact that he ruined our reputation around the world. And just so you know, his father was just as bad, not only did he illegally invade Panama, the American people were duped into believing that only minor civilians casualties occurred there when in fact, thousands of innocent men, women and children died in an invasion by US troops that should never had happened. Like father like son!

What does race or color have to do with this subject? This country has had numerous clueless leaders, and guess what? Not ONE of them WAS of COLOR!!! Bush defended this country after we lost over 3000 innocent lives!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Have we been attacked since?
As for ruining a reputation? Obama with all of his vast military experience, removes our largest weapon against terrorism, because his name was besmirched in a crappy magazine. He has disgraced the country, and opened the door for the rest of the world to laugh at us.

In the military the phrase 'Freedom-Of-Speech" is protected but not practiced.

Julie, you need some education on UCMJ! The military gives up the freedom of speech. Maybe while you study take a little civics class, throw in some government too. You seem a little rusty in these matters. Socialism Ha!

Wow, your lack of understanding about the extent of "freedom of speech" is incredible. Please tell me what about our country is now a socialist system, or how a socialist system would even take away freedom of speech. Europe is abound with socialis democratic governments that allow freedom of speech. Try to live in the real world and not the FOX world that Richard Ayles is creating for you. Even Murdock, Ayles boss, lieks Obama.

We are not talking about a socialist system here, Julie. Nor are we talking about a democracy. We are talking about the United States military. There is no freedom of speech. Everyone has a boss (even those with stars on their shoulders), and if you have a problem with the boss, your answer is NOT to whine to the press. Talk to your boss. If you don't like the answer you get, resign and get out of the way; you are now an impediment.

I would bet my paycheck that you have never actually served. Just like "Mixman34", who artfully dodged the question when he was asked earlier. Must feel nice, sitting in that armchair, making all those command decisions....

Julie, you don't have a clue. This kind of behavior is totally forbidden in the military.

What are you? crazy!!!! This is the military, he knows better. If one of his subordinates had said any of these things about him, they would have been court martialed. Sorry state of affairs on your part.....You probably wish the second Bush was still in office.

Socialism? Yes! It was started by Roosevelt in the 1930's with SS and continued in 1965 by LBJ with Medicare. Why don't you ask those on SS and getting their medical bills paid by Medicare if they want to give them up. As for the General, he knew very well what he said could cost him his job, but he said it anyway. President Obama had no choice but to fire him. BTW when I was in the Army, I swore the same oath as the general. One of the first things I learned was the UCMJ.

Freedom of speech is not as we know it in the military. The first thing you get told when you go to bootcamp is "we're here to uphold democracy, not to practice it". In the military you respect authority and follow orders, otherwise the whole system wouldn't work if every subordinate was allowed to publicly disrespect and question what higher ranking officers say or do. If it was the General taking this from someone below him, he would have been court martialed for insubordination. It's no different, the president is the Commander in Chief and they're bound by his authority and position weather they like him being there or not. You can't sign up to serve the military and suddenly decide you won't want to. Your ass will follow orders until your time is up.

Whatever happened to "freedom of speech"? The UCMJ. The United States military does not operate under the same rules that civilians do. When serving in the military you are required to not display insubordinate behavior to the Commander and Chief, EVER! Socialism? Do you mean like public schools, Social Security, the military, fire departments, police and such? You know where the government steps in to organize and socialize the risks and costs? Sometime "socialism" isn't the demon you've been taught to fear. Next time you have a fire emergency try calling Exxon.

Julie you are one of those supposedly patriotic americans yet you havent a clue on how the military works. Freedom of speech is not a luxury used in the military. If it were...your precious freedoms wouldnt exist because our military would be inept.

Socialism is an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production.

commonsense-and your point is...?

UCMJ Article 88 (quoted from http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/56176):

“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.”

Elements.

(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

And here is the explanation.

Explanation.

The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Note that McChrystal’s statements were not a private conversation nor made during the course of a political discussion. They were made to a written publication, an aggravating element. So the bottomline is that what McChrystal did is not called insubordination. It is contempt, and it is a court martial offense.

IMHO, he's lucky to get away with just being relieved of command... President Obama should Show the Enlisted Ranks that he will Not Tolerate a Double Standard. Courts Marshall his Ass.

Julie - there is no "freedom of speech" in the military.

Would you stop with the "socialist" catch word please? You don't know what it means and shouldn't use the word.

You also don't know anything about the military. It is all about discipline and this General sent up a big red flag that he can't be trusted.

Funny, I hear no right-wingers crying "freedom of speech" when somebody speaks publicly against the management of the company they work for, and then gets canned.

What McChrystal did was far worse; he knew the rules and violated them, and hurt our chances in a war, were lives are at stake.

Julie 811534 when I read your post I thought to myself, "someone has to educate this person about the world because she doesn't have a clue." But then I saw the other posts to you when I hit reply and thank God for people with brains!!!! They schooled your ass. If you want socialism go to France.

No it's not looking like if you complain you'll be out. This isn't even the first time McChrystal has gone to the media with his complaints--he didn't even really get his hand slapped the first time. It seems to me you don't understand how the military works. You can't allow blatant insubordination, not even at the top, especially not at the top. It corrupts the entire ability to hold together cohesive troops attempting to carry out a common mission. McChrystal would've gotten rid of any one of his soldiers for far less, you can be sure. That's how these things work. You need to learn how to separate your feelings about Obama and his administration from how things work in the military. You can't justify McChrystal's behavior and McChrystal had to have known this full well before he spoke up so publicly. There could be no confidence in his leading the war strategy when he's so clearly fighting with his Commander in Chief (even if it's McChrystal's OWN strategy)