Author Topic: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan  (Read 4314 times)

Ichiban

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1847
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2010, 11:27:13 AM »
McChrystal had to go - he pissed in his own well.  Unless he was on a kamikaze mission to draw attention to what a bunch of losers are running the civilian side of things, his actions were inexcusably stupid.  You can not expect to maintain a working relationship with people after you public diss them so his effectiveness was essentially over at that point.  The other option for BHO was to replace the civilian "clowns" and let it look like McChrystal was the lead dog.  Aint gonna happen.

The only upside is that it will be a long time before anyone in the military says a damn thing to the media again.

This is just one of those situations where all you can do is shake your head and say "Dude, WTF were you thinking?"

Pathfinder

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
  • DRTV Ranger -- NRA Life Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2010, 05:23:06 AM »
McChrystal had to go - he pissed in his own well.  Unless he was on a kamikaze mission to draw attention to what a bunch of losers are running the civilian side of things, his actions were inexcusably stupid.  You can not expect to maintain a working relationship with people after you public diss them so his effectiveness was essentially over at that point.  The other option for BHO was to replace the civilian "clowns" and let it look like McChrystal was the lead dog.  Aint gonna happen.

The only upside is that it will be a long time before anyone in the military says a damn thing to the media again.

This is just one of those situations where all you can do is shake your head and say "Dude, WTF were you thinking?"

Personally, I think that is exactly what he did, knowingly. He is too smart, too experienced, not to know what would happen to him for his comments, and I think he knew full well who he was talking to (RS wanker), he chose his battleground opportunity.

He opened the gummint's kimono a bit to let us in on what's going on, knowing full well he will get a desk job and retire soon to a large retirement fund and speaking fees.
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do this to others and I require the same from them"

J.B. Books

crusader rabbit

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2731
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2010, 07:18:59 AM »
Maybe my paranoia* is getting the better of me, but I think Odamna had another, more ulterior motive. 

There has been a great deal of talk in the blagosphere about General P being a good choice as the Republican candidate for Pres in 2012.  Odamna just took him out of the equation.  The General won't be able to run until 2016.  I am afraid our Nation won't make it until them.

*Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are NOT out to get you.

Offered as food for thought by a worried Crusader. :( ??? :P
“I’ve lived the literal meaning of the ‘land of the free’ and ‘home of the brave.’ It’s not corny for me. I feel it in my heart. I feel it in my chest. Even at a ball game, when someone talks during the anthem or doesn’t take off his hat, it pisses me off. I’m not one to be quiet about it, either.”  Chris Kyle

Timothy

  • Guest
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #13 on: June 25, 2010, 09:07:11 AM »
Compared to Swartzkopf, both of these guys are administrators.

West Point boys...

jnevis

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1479
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #14 on: June 25, 2010, 09:43:13 AM »
Compared to Swartzkopf, both of these guys are administrators.

West Point boys...

I don't think I'd say that about McChrystal.  JSOC is no place for sissies or "managers."  It's a whole command of snake-eaters in the first degree.  He's been a part of the SOF community from the very beginning.  "Administrators" need not apply.

Patraeus was long part of 18th Airborne Corps/101st Air Assualt/82nd Airborne and isn't a "paper Ranger" either.  He has had a lot of staff jobs and good assignments though.

The only major difference is their early careers didn't start in Vietnam. 

Swatrzkopf was a West Pointer too BTW
When seconds mean the difference between life and death, the police will be minutes away.

You are either SOLVING the problem, or you ARE the problem.

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #15 on: Today at 11:52:20 AM »

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #15 on: June 25, 2010, 09:49:19 AM »
Maybe my paranoia* is getting the better of me, but I think Odamna had another, more ulterior motive. 

There has been a great deal of talk in the blagosphere about General P being a good choice as the Republican candidate for Pres in 2012.  Odamna just took him out of the equation.  The General won't be able to run until 2016.  I am afraid our Nation won't make it until them.

*Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are NOT out to get you.

Offered as food for thought by a worried Crusader. :( ??? :P
Sounds like the kind of Machiavellian stuff I'd post. I lke it. ;D Still, I don't think Patreus would run. Everybody loves the General, until they look at him. Then he's just another Pol and one with a fundraising disadvantage. Remember Powell as the magic bulet in '96, or Clark in '04? Powell was smart enough to say no, Clark went no where. Unless patreus wants the job (and what sane man would in these times?) and has some serious sugar daddies lined up, his odds of winning a GOP primary are slim. Hell he might be a Democrat, or Pro-choice or anti-gun or any of a hundred different things that could be a deal breaker. He's on a fast track for the Joint Chiefs or Sec Def as it is. A smart man would leave it right there.
FQ13

Timothy

  • Guest
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #16 on: June 25, 2010, 10:15:37 AM »
Swatrzkopf was a West Pointer too BTW

True but, of the three, I'd lay odds that he's actually killed some of the enemy!

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2010, 10:17:23 AM »
True but, of the three, I'd lay odds that he's actually killed some of the enemy!
I thought Powell saw some action in Vietnam?
FQ13

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2010, 10:24:26 AM »
True but, of the three, I'd lay odds that he's actually killed some of the enemy!

Don't mean to pee in your porridge, but I would put that down to their relative ages and timing.
Kind of hard to get a combat assignment when there isn't a war going on.   ::)

Yes FQ, Powell started his career as a Grunt leading a platoon in Vn.
Same as Ollie North.


Quote from: jnevis on Today at 09:43:13
Swatrzkopf was a West Pointer too BTW

Most Army Officers (career type ) are West Pointers, or from Norwich, VMI, or the Citadel.
Which school predominates is often determined by Branch.

Timothy

  • Guest
Re: McChrystal out; Petraeus picked for Afghanistan
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2010, 10:32:36 AM »
True enough Tom...

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk