You can read the whole article here - but here are the pull quotes that makes you understand why General McChrystal is in full “on his back, exposing his belly to the alpha dog.” I thought that this might be a bit of an exaggerated story - but let’s assume it is what McChrystal’s signals are sending - it is 85%+ accurate.
Behold,
Last fall, during the question-and-answer session following a speech he gave in London, McChrystal dismissed the counterterrorism strategy being advocated by Vice President Joe Biden as "shortsighted," saying it would lead to a state of "Chaos-istan." The remarks earned him a smackdown from the president himself, who summoned the general to a terse private meeting aboard Air Force One. The message to McChrystal seemed clear: Shut the fuck up, and keep a lower profileFirst, look at Lincoln vs. McClellan. Then Truman vs. MacArthur. Then look at Bush vs. Fallon. Then Obama vs. McKiernan.
Now, flipping through printout cards of his speech in Paris, McChrystal wonders aloud what Biden question he might get today, and how he should respond. "I never know what's going to pop out until I'm up there, that's the problem," he says. Then, unable to help themselves, he and his staff imagine the general dismissing the vice president with a good one-liner.
"Are you asking about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal says with a laugh. "Who's that?"
"Biden?" suggests a top adviser. "Did you say: Bite Me?"
...
Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the roomful of military brass. Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn't go much better. "It was a 10-minute photo op," says an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run his fucking war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty disappointed."
...
Part of the problem is structural: The Defense Department budget exceeds $600 billion a year, while the State Department receives only $50 billion. But part of the problem is personal: In private, Team McChrystal likes to talk shit about many of Obama's top people on the diplomatic side. One aide calls Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and veteran of the Cold War, a "clown" who remains "stuck in 1985." Politicians like McCain and Kerry, says another aide, "turn up, have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him at the airport press conference, then get back for the Sunday talk shows. Frankly, it's not very helpful." Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal's inner circle. "Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said, 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.'
McChrystal reserves special skepticism for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating the Taliban. "The Boss says he's like a wounded animal," says a member of the general's team. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous. He's a brilliant guy, but he just comes in, pulls on a lever, whatever he can grasp onto. But this is COIN, and you can't just have someone yanking on shit."
McChrystal reserves special skepticism for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating the Taliban. "The Boss says he's like a wounded animal," says a member of the general's team. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous. He's a brilliant guy, but he just comes in, pulls on a lever, whatever he can grasp onto. But this is COIN, and you can't just have someone yanking on shit."
...
McChrystal and his team were blindsided by the cable. "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," says McChrystal, who adds that he felt "betrayed" by the leak. "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.' "
President Obama only has two choices here - neither of which is good for the nation he leads.
COA 1: Fire the S.O.B. Recommended:
- This is the action fully in line with precedence and is what must be done. A four-star general who does not have the good sense to have a staff that understands what a reporter is - and what his place is in a Representative Republic is - must be brought down, and brought down hard. I have no beef with McChrystal and I know that this will significantly hurt our STRATCOM in the short term; but this needs to be done quickly and publicly.
---- Pros: In line with other Presidents’ actions. Firmly establishes the COC and the proper civilian-military relationship; Move on. Story will move off the front page earlier.
---- Cons: Another Commander will need to do the Hill kabuki dance, but the domestic political opposition will not get in the way or make much political hay out of it; new Commander too soon, in the middle of fighting season.
COA 2: Keep him closer. Not recommended.
If there is no appetite for COA 1, then this is the only other COA ; there is nothing in between.
---- Pros: Avoids the domestic problem of another General having to testify on the Hill. Keeps continuity of Command during fighting season and avoids another turnover of the in-theater Operational Commander.
---- Cons: Both the CINC and McChrystal will have lost face in a public manner and will be looked at as weaker; McChrystal will have more enemies in the Administration’s National Security Structure; McChrystal has shown support for your only significant Democrat rival, SECSTATE Clinton. Worst part again is the CINC will also lose face to much of the world - especially with our enemies. In most of their cultures, a General Officer saying such things would be shot or have an unfortunate helicopter accident. They will not view keeping McChrystal on as a signal that President Obama is a firm leader.
Both are bad options - but being CINC is often picking the least worst of two bad options. The CINC will be attacked for what ever choice he makes. My advice - look to what is best for the nation in the long run. Keeping the military in its box is critical (see Founder‘s opinion on a standing Army for a reference).
So, in summary from a guy who has supported Gen. McChrystal in the past - if even half the stuff in the RS article is accurate, there is only one option: Fire McChrystal.
66 comments:
Put Mattis in
"If he truly didn't see the backlash from the [Rolling Stone] article coming, then it is no wonder our troops are struggling in Afghanistan."
And, if Gen. McChrystal planned the backlash? One must then wonder if he assessed it as the most graceful manner of exit from impossible facts and circumstances he had been dealt. No U.S. General should ever again send our troops into mortal combat with the P.C. ROEs and rigid collateral damage constraints placed on our guys in Afghanistan. Something tells me the ROEs were strongly suggested to McChrystal from on high.
If the C-in-C could place his most desirable fantasy leader in McChrystal's place, dollars to donuts it would be a female, J.A.G. General. Nothing beats the latter for P.C. No Marine General would ever consent to the tripe ROEs McChrystal promulgated under his own name.
[The discussion of Gen McChrystal's dismissal has been largely a political one; the author of this comment has therefore not refrained from equally obvious and pertinent political remarks. The indulgence of other readers is requested.]
Reports are McChrystal resigned. Probably to spare himself the indignity of being fired by the guy who has hamstrung the war for 17 months. I know I'd quit before letting him fire me. But he's opened the can of worms on the overall incompetence of Team Obama.
Er, Lincoln vs McClellan. Not McClennan.
But spot-on. Little choice, neither good.
To pick up on a wisecrack left over at Lex's place to open the door to discussion as to what follows, this is a fine kettle of fish. I, for one, don't see a lot of future for the General.
The President has to pick a successor. It will be difficult to find a competent one who is eager to sign on to the current mess in Kabul, whom the President will be eager to appoint.
I think we are going to have to get used to losing the First Afghan-American War. The consequences of that unhappy prospect, if my hunch is correct, will not be likely addressed pending regime change, which may occur in two or six years.
At this point we may not need a long term strategy, but rather a long term plan to be ready to make one after the backlash from ignominious defeat creates an opportunity for contemplating the possibility of planning for strategic success.
The future looks grim. Short term.
Long term? Too close for me to call.
But my bet is on the Captains and Lieutenants. "In 10 or 20 years." H/t John Ford/Captain Nathan Biddles).
And Lincoln replaced him with Burnside, and we know how that worked out, don't we?
When I saw this story on Fox News yesterday, I couldn't believe it. I was sure that it was out of context, misquoted, somehow made up. Nope...he really did it. He just ended an extraordinary careeer by shooting himself in his very own head. Giving a candid interview to Rolling Stone (Rolling Stone?!)? Voting for Barack Obama (Barack Obama?!)? And then letting it be known for whom he voted, in contravention of all military practice for senior officers, and for good measure insulting every other politician he could think of. Flaming out like this calls into question all of the other judgments that he's made in Afghanistan. What a stupid crying shame.
You left out one Pro in COA #1: CinC gets low-cost opportunity to look tough at a time when even supporters are asking themselves "Does this guy ever get angry?"
It's a shame since many of their assessments, especially the one about Holbrooke, are spot on.
The lesson learned for senior staffers: Journalists are not your friends.
I don't suppose we could do this with class - like letting the man retire gracefully? Put him in charge of special projects? (Somebody has to spearhead DADT). Gotta agree with Sal: Obama's choices aren't good, but if Truman could fire MacArthur... McChrystal is a soldier. A soldier needs to know when to keep his mouth shut.
But Burnside had great facial hair. Perhaps the 19th century equivalent of a slick power point brief?
Yon's looking a little prescient now?
Out there, on the tip, observing a shark tank of leadership with absolutely nobody interested in the welfare of the troops. hmmm. "These FOBS of ours have too many creature comforts and so we must shut them down." "The ROE must be changed to reflect our greater concern for Taliban and lesser concern for our soldiers." hmm.
I think every 782 wearing guy in AF is cheering this downfall.
And if Yon badmouths some milblogs, well, I've done that too. Didn't make me wrong. TCOVERRIDE, that was special!
When you lose faith in the leader out at the pointy end?.....There's a website for that. Disallusion or something. Some great powerpoint slides.
Right or wrong, the fact the CINC is so disdained in senior staff's speaks volumes. Many reasons why it is so, but This is not the same as Mac wanting to take the fight over the Yalu, and McClellan had ambitions and DID run.. Gen Mc is most likely acting out of disdain and allowed the matter to permeate his staff. He should retire, and then be done with it.. but I cant wait for the book.
Obama's painted into a corner and knows it.............I think that the General got tired of being put off and put off and put off while the CINC worked on his golf game.
He hasn't drunk enough of the COIN cool-aid. He still wants to win.
I think Curtis LeMay would have been great for the post. Bomb em back to the Stone Age is what is needed. A few B-1 strikes would clear the air over there. The pussy PC ROE's have gotta go. A Marine General would be fine. Burn all the poppy fields, Level towns that resist. A little more rubble, a lot less trouble.
At least the President isn't flying to Wake Island to meet him. At this point I see no alternative to firing the GEN; it doesn't matter if the GEN is right or not (I personally think he is more right than not).
I agree that Yon is once again turned out to be more right than wrong, much as I don't like his style on such things. This isn't the first time he's flamed out, but later been shown to be at least half correct.
The scary part is it sounds as though this actually got The WON angry. He has a track record of being incredibly aloof...but now it's personal.
And just what does this signal about the man in the Oval Office? Danger, Will Robinson. The next question is will he become so "personally" involved it gets even worse, being distracted (even more) from the duties of the Office he has been duly elected to?
Fat fingers. Me Dixie.
The question has been raised in comments over at ID... what if he planned this blow-up, to give himself cover to go work for Hillary's campaign?
It's just a conspiracy theory, yeah. But if you look over at Belmont, Wretchard just posted a piece that could be interpreted as Rahm setting himself up to do the same thing.
I seriously hope that there was no planning, no deliberation to do something like that. Abject stupidity, in some ways, is preferable to conteplate than treason, for it would be treason indeed to deprive the soldiers of one's command of one's absolute best efforts in order to further one's political career.
At this level some political sense and sesibility is expected of a general... Sad to lose probably skilled commander, but at this level again war is more than just military action. Compare to Eisenhower who managed to run Monty's and Patton's egos while keeping politicians happy.
This has nothing to do with Yon. Zilch.
Some other observations.
If Fox Fallon had to go-for things that made a lot more sense, then McChrystal has to go. But mark my words-in one week the blame will be back on Obama no matter what happens.
What's really depressing is that the people who really deserve a lot of blame for how badly things are going in Afghanistan-the Afghan people themselves. When you start with a bad seed corn-very little good grows.
Skippy,
I think we are roughly on the same book +/-.
The blame shouldn't go to the Commander in Chief who appointed General McChrystal to command in AFG? Isn't that supposed to be where the buck stops?
I wonder how Monty, Patton, or even Ike would have faired in the present-day 24 hour news cycle.
<span>There were two choices here. Win or lose. In either case, POTUS is going to get the credit! I believe it's in the billet description.
We can't blame anybody else. We chose the policy.</span>
Although the General should prolly go based on protocol, the empty suit community organizer will play this out unmercilessly, if for no other reason than to show some periodic resolve. But the General remains generally right.
While General McChrystal may be a great commander, every officer is taught from the beginning of their career that it is not their place to publically denounce the civilian leadership. If one cannot, in good conscience, follow the orders of the chain of command then it is his duty to resign. In my mind the President has no other choice but to sack General McChrystal, especially in light of the previous public expression of the General's disagreement with the President's policy.
This brings to mind the Laws of the Navy, which I learned back when I was a Midshipman 4th class.
The 3rd Law:
"Take heed what you say of your seniors,
Be your words spoken softly or plain,
Lest a bird of the air tell the matter,
And so shall ye hear it again."
Isn't this a case of the fact that the good General messed up, and that's the critiscm being reported, that it takes away from the real substance of the story?
Granted - the general messed up and should be replaced.
But did this general believe in the ONE, and only now feels he was mis-led, or what a complete incompetent (person) the CIC is?
Those of us who opposed the ONE in 2008 could see this train wreck coming. If the general was surprised by the train wreck, as is soooo many others, then I question the political acumen of the general.
It looks like the General may be retained but what good will that do? He may be our best bet with retaining the support of the Afghan and Pakistani leadership but he is damaged goods on the Hill. I believe the President will let this current COIN operation run its course and begin the drawdown in July 2011 as advertised. And he will let GEN McChrystal be the fall guy if COIN does not produce results in a timely manner. Perhaps its best to get out now and write a book describing how you pushed for a surge of 80,000 and maximum effort.
I anticipate he will fall on his sword and "fade away."
Having had a chance to actually read the article again I find it interesting that the politicians and the media have chosen to focus on stuff like the "Vice President 'Bite Me'" comment and McChrystal's reaction to Holbrooke's e-mail (a common reaction in both military and diplomatic circles during my Bosnia days). What I found more interesting is Hasting's description of "diplomatic incoherence" resulting from State, the NSA, the Special Envoy, etc. competing for influence and how this left McChrystal and his staff as the primary drivers of policy in Afghanistan. Guess discussing that is too complicated for cable news.
Patton probably would have had to attend anger management sessions.
Then he's a nutless chickencrap jerk who didn't have the cojones to up & resign. That's the most graceful manner of exit. He's either behind the President's agenda, or he's against it, but too cowardly to say so.
He's got (what?) at least 20 years in, minimum rank of O-7 or O-8 at retirement, and I don't see how he can get a dishonorable discharge out of this. Just what would he sacrifice by standing up, in public, and saying "This is how I disagree with the President, why I do so, and why I shall resign my commission?"
Curtis: short version: BS.
But, hey, feel free to console yourself that Yon really hasn't become a paranoid, self-important prima donna...
Agreed. Alas, far too many partisans will flog this to death while pursuing the concept of "Yon as Nostradamus."
I seriously doubt they would allow a tabloid "reporter" 24/7 access to their staff, or that the staff would demonstrate such idiotic diarrhea of the mouth...
Um, no. See SNAnonymous right below you. You either shut up & soldier, or you resign. McChrystal was at best foolish to allow that reporter such unrestrained access, not to mention apparently not warning his staff to be aware of what they say and how they say it. That was just Plain Dumb.
<span>The lesson learned for senior staffers: Journalists are not your friends.</span>
Yet, they could be, if properly managed...or at least not made into your enemies...
We really do suck at "Strategic Communications". One wonders what Red's reaction is to this dustup.
Recommendation: Fire McChrystal. Concur.
Bomb 'em back to the Stone Age? Um, have you seen their level of "civilization?" They are already closer to the Stone Age than to the 20th century. Don't disagree with your opinion that a half-@$$ed ROE is ineffective. NAPALM all the poppy fields and force the country to enter modern society.
An element of this story that doesn't seem to be getting much play is the assertion that McChrystal said he voted for Obama. Besides the obvious indictment of his judgment if he actually did vote that irresponsibly we have the whole matter of an active duty officer publicly stating who he voted for in a recent election. Members of the military retain the right (okay, duty) to vote. However, it is incredibly inappropriate for him to disclose his vote. IIRC, Eisenhower (among others) even said he never voted until he retired. Our loyalty should always be to the country and its Constitution not the person temporarily holding an elected position.
Given how public this is, I don't think you have a choice but a public firing. I am no fan of Obama, and I think much of the criticism is warranted, but there is a right way and wrong way to get that message out. Gen McC definitely went the wrong way. When you have stars on your uniform, and everyone and their brother toadying to you, the ONLY way you complain is to resign THEN take it public. You don't do it while you are an active duty GOFO. That opens the door to all sorts of political shenanigans by, for and against those in uniform, and I don't think anyone wants to start down that road. Good lord, Mullen and Roughhead have been doing enough open toadying lately, just imagine if we let it get WORSE?
<span>I can't help but feel that McCrystal is too good to do something silly like this. The man is a professional soldier trained in special operations and SF. His job is to create smoke and mirrors. I don't know if I believe that this is related to Hillary (Big D's comment). I find that a little far fetched for me. However, I don't think he just blundered into this. Maybe he wanted to leave and have his troops love him. Maybe he wanted to leave and make a point about the way the war is being fought. I am not sure. I can't specify motivation, but I can point out that this whole thing isn't as simple as everyone is making it out to be.</span>
<span> </span>
<span>Besides all of that, yeah, you have to fire him.</span>
<span>"It looks like the General may be retained" I hope not.</span>
We cannot afford to cross that Rubicon now or ever.
One of 2 things has happened, either McChrystal screwed up and utterly botched a media operation (which is a goodly part of COIN) in which case he is not as brilliant at winning hearts and minds as he is purported to be...OR he knew EXACTLY what he was doing in which case he violated article 88 of the UCMJ. In which case he really needs to be fired.
In any event, the man is not the mission.
The long term implications are troubling as well. To the south of us are many other Republics that did not swat down a McArthur or a LeMay or a McClean or a Fallon....they tended to go to a very dark place. We don't need to cross that rubicon.
Crossing the Rubicon? That's overstating the situation a bit, don't you think?
Who is McClean?
Escellent, excellent point.
That's a great link, URR. Thanks.
You'd think "so-called diplomats" would know better than to yell at the president of a country. I imagine it was a pain to have to undo the damage from those guys before you could talk about important things...
"<span> Crossing the Rubicon? That's overstating the situation a bit, don't you think? </span> "
The current situation yes, of course. However, these things start with an eroding of respect for the civilian leadership.Such things are very hard to reverse, which is why we have article 88.
McClean? Hmmm...while it's possible that it could be an Irish cleaning product, in this context is actually a typo. I was referring to George B. McClellan. Yes, I'm aware that the situation is not really the same, but he was a popular General who was dismissed.
Now that they have that settled, Mzz. Hillary should tell McC to put a civvy suit on and send him back to AFG as her personal envoy. And recall Ambassadors E and H. It's a win-win. (But it won't happen. It would make too much sense.)
Casey T. -
Care to retract your opinion? A man of McChrystal's acumen knew what he was doing (communicating an urgent distress directly to the U.S. public) at the cost of his career (he certainly has tendered the resignation he intended all along). How can you call him a coward?
Obama had no other choice to save face. When the truth comes out (book and/or 60-Minutes interview) McChrystal will fill in the blanks for people hard of reading between the lines. I am sure Obama threatened McChrystal with reduction in rank (loss of General's pension) if he writes a book or does an interview. Such a threat would only stop a coward.
Umm, Isnt the Demotion of Gen Patreaus to Afghan COMGEN similiar to Ike becoming 12th Army Group? Or in other terms Like Mike becoming CNO (god forbid) again?
He will surely be Subordinate to himself now...
That's one way to be sure that the boss will approve your recommendations.
Ya know the guy nailed the canadien general as a total loser and now the American general and most of his staff have shown their colours. The strategy is shit. The POLMIL relationship is shit, the Embassy is shit.
What part of that shit did you miss?
I was Yon in a few wars you never heard of. I don't have to taste shit to know it. It smells! The troops can smell it too. When the CINC has a withdrawal deadline on the table EVERY SINGLE SOLDIER KNOWS THAT HE COULD BE DYING FOR NO PURPOSE AT ALL.
go ahead and explain how that works for morale?
Word!
Therapist1,
A man of McChrystal's acumen knew what he was doing (communicating an urgent distress directly to the U.S. public) at the cost of his career.
Obama had no other choice to save face. When the truth comes out (book and/or 60-Minutes interview) McChrystal will fill in the blanks for people hard of reading between the lines. I am sure Obama threatened McChrystal with reduction in rank (loss of General's pension) if he writes a book or does an interview. Such a threat would only stop a coward. No one who knows McChrystal believes he has suddenly become a coward.
"<span> When the CINC has a withdrawal deadline on the table EVERY SINGLE SOLDIER KNOWS THAT HE COULD BE DYING FOR NO PURPOSE AT ALL."</span>
There's the rub. And no talk of "victory", only of "withdrawal". I know I would never, ever, want to lose a Marine for the cause of biding time.
(scratches head) Sorry, Vigilis, I can't see allowing a reporter to record the typical (but embarrasing if publicized) venting that goes on in any headquarters as "acumen."
I'll put it this way as a question: why not just resign? Wouldn't that have gotten just as much attention as this fiasco did? And then later (as you say) he can present his argument.
This way, he looks incompetent (i.e. he unthinkingly gave that reporter free rein, and signed off on an embarassing article), or cowardly (i.e. he did it on purpose, to generate an "out"). Which brings me back to the above question. Why not just resign? I'm sure worst case he'll still get a better retirement package than more Americans do.
I've heard enough from those over there to know there's issues, and am leaving that aside for the moment. My point is that Yon hasn't been vindicated, as he claimed McChrystal was an idiot, while everyone else is saying he's doing this because he's not an idiot (i.e. he caused this fuss to generate a way out for himself, and maybe everyone else).
You "were Yon?" What, the only time you were in a fight was when you killed a guy in a bar, then quit the service a few years later? Ok, aplogies for the snark, but Yon's spent far more time as a reporter than he did as a servicemember under fire. I don't doubt you've served honorably & well. I just object to people deifying the man.
I admired Yon's work before he became a prima donna. Hell, I used to go around telling people to Google him and check out his work. But he's gotten to the point where he's become the story, instead of reporting it. It's not as if he's perfect. This from Carl Prine (former Marine, serving National Guardsman, reporter for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, and former Iraq embed):"As someone who has seen a great deal of combat in my life and who earns his daily bread as a reporter," Prine opined on the Internet, "I can assure you that a lot of what Michael Yon writes is misleading, inaccurate and vapid."
I was going to conclude with "so let's stop worring about side issues," when I realized my first reply -as well as this one- was doing just that. Still, i'll post this, with the admission that contributed to the distraction from the main point. 'Nuff said. :)
That point probably went over their heads.
I like the idea, DB, but I don't think Hillary would ever allow anyone at State with bigger brass ones than hers.
DB, That's Holbrooke's "modus operandi" and he used it frequently during his dealings with the Serbs (not that they didn't deserve it). The only thing the guy ever did that I thought was neat was making sure his aircraft was out of Yugoslav airspace before we launched the TLAMs.
<span>Casey T. ,</span>
<span></span>
<span>I must disagree vehemently that Gen. McChrystal is an any way a coward; hi is certainly not.</span>
<span></span>
<span>Why not just resign? Only he can answer that, but not only has he resigned, he has now done so with his rank and pension INTACT (perhaps that offers both of us a clue).</span>
<span></span>
<span>When a fuller accounting is published, one with less ambush and more military insight, the answer may be very simple and politically upsetting for supporters of Obama's "WIMP" regime. </span>
nn1r5i4uk
My web site; best electric toothbrush
Post a Comment