Posts Tagged ‘mcchrystal’

…the concept that the replacement of McChrystal with Petraeus brought one line of argument, basically that it shouldn’t be used to try to win, because of course there is no chance that this can be turned around in a year. There seemed a real worry that Petraeus had made a deal giving more time to fight.

The possibility that this could be used to bail out the president couldn’t trump the agreed fret that we shouldn’t try to win.

One interesting note, Barnicle as he is wont to do started giving the names of some of the KIA’s and they faded out quickly. Why? Because now those names reflect on Obama.

from their site. Down the memory hole it goes, via Weasel Zippers. Stacy puts it best:

The American Left: Shamelessly Following Orders Ever Since Stalin Told Us to Endorse Hitler’s Invasion of Poland.

Well not everyone. AMERICAblog expresses surprise:

You’ll remember Petraeus as one of the Iraq war’s biggest defenders. Which is interesting, since the Senate Democrats just a few years ago produced a lengthy analysis of how flawed Petraeus’ Iraq testimony really was.

They get full marks for consistency, but it’s funny I’m sure the first thing on everybody’s mind was his testimony. It prompted the following comment from me:

Perhaps our democratic friends have discovered that “flawed congressional testimony” doesn’t trump actual success in winning a war.

I’ve already said I don’t care who commands as long as we win (and don’t have to do without Lara Logan). Little Miss Attila is still worried:

I actually think it was a clever move, though I wonder whether it’s possible to salvage the situation at this point.

And I offer her these words of encouragement:

Have faith Joy, after all that’s what the World Cup announcers were saying at the 90th minute of today’s match.

However Michal Yon in an e-mail to Glenn is more bullish:

I was there through the entire surge, and more, and saw the remarkable transformation under command of General Petraeus and due to the incredible efforts of our armed forces and civilian counterparts. No book that I have read, including the one that I wrote, has fully conveyed the magnitude of those days. You simply had to be there.

Here we are again. This time on the cusp of losing the war in Afghanistan. The situation is worse than ever before. Again, the United States has asked General David Petraeus to step into a situation that seems hopeless to many people. It is not hopeless, just extremely bad.

We have not yet begun to fight.

Update: Now a Memeorandum thread coming to a computer near you.

…the thread that has dominated memeorandum, because I am indifferent.

Yeah I don’t like the Rolling Stone interview, yeah lately the administration has not inspired me with their priorities, but bottom line is I want to win the war.

We have an army of millions, we have plenty of Generals, I doubt that McChrystal is the only one who is tactically capable of winning the war. If he is then we are in trouble bigtime.

As for generals and presidents butting heads, we have had that as long as we’ve had generals and presidents, cripes we had that before we even declared independence.

To steal the name from the old wargaming magazine I used to read, it comes down to Strategy and Tactics if McChrystal is the best choice and he is not undermining the war then keep him, if not then replace him.

The goal is to win, eyes on the prize people, eyes on the prize.

Update: McChrystal out, Petraeus in. Big Whoop, as long as we win.

One good thing about the move is Petraeus is that his rep will likely allow him to pursue the strategy of his choice, but we will see.

and actually puts out the McChrystal stuff in full and in context:

As with the leak of McChrystal’s report, observers would do well to exhibit a bit more skepticism and ask a few more questions, chief among them being “Who benefits from these leaks and ugly insinuations?” Clearly it’s not McChrystal: the media are calling for his head on a platter. He’s being treated every bit as badly as David Petraeus was during the Surge, but for the opposite reason: where Petraeus was called a coward and traitor for not speaking truthiness to the American people, McChrystal is being told he has no business speaking truth in public. The real irony here is that neither man did what he was accused of but the Left attacked these men anyway for failing to support their preferred narrative.

Any source who chooses to spread paranoid, unsubstantiated, third hand rumors about what McChrystal or Obama are rumored to have said when transcripts of the General’s speech and Q&A session are easily available should be dismissed out of hand.

The ratings seem to suggest that this is taking place. That would also explain the FCC’s move. Jeff Jarvis is worried:

And there is the greatest myth embedded within the FTC’s rules: that the government can and should sanitize the internet for our protection. The internet is the world and the world is messy and I don’t want anyone – not the government, not a newspaper editor – to clean it up for me, for I fear what will go out in the garbage: namely, my rights.

What I now truly dread is that the FTC is holding hearings about journalism on Dec. 1 and 2. As Star-Ledger editor Jim Willse (full disclosure: he hired me a few times) said in my Guardian podcast last month (full disclosure: I work for the Guardian): the words, “we’re from the government, we’re here to help,” should be met with trepidation.

Hey nothing to worry about, just because these guys admire Chavez it doesn’t mean we will see stuff like this.