23rd June 2010, 10:46 PM
Did you read the article? There's a lot of spin, but it's also very revealing. You can read it here: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236
It's more than just a few remarks, it's also a tense relationship between McChrystal and the US Ambassador Eikenberry and Special Envoy Holbrooke, and that a lot of the troops themselves are frustrated with him. As for the remarks themselves, he and his aides basically painted Obama to be out-of-touch and out of his league. The article also mentions that McChrystal also allegedly tried to cover up the accidental death of an American soldier at the hands of his fellow troops.
I'm really not surprised that he was fired. He wrote his letter of resignation before even meeting with Obama, so perhaps he wasn't surprised either (though it was probably just a formality, or he knew it was coming, etc). It's unprofessional to be so loose-lipped around the media, and comments such as the ones he and his aides made undermine the war effort.
On the other hand, I don't know that I'd agree with going so far as to firing him from the comments alone. It seems to me the bigger issue is that McChrystal is trying to take too much control over the war effort. I do commend him on his focus to minimize civilian casualties at all costs, though. It's a wise effort and a path we should continue down.
Any word on who's taking his place yet?
It's more than just a few remarks, it's also a tense relationship between McChrystal and the US Ambassador Eikenberry and Special Envoy Holbrooke, and that a lot of the troops themselves are frustrated with him. As for the remarks themselves, he and his aides basically painted Obama to be out-of-touch and out of his league. The article also mentions that McChrystal also allegedly tried to cover up the accidental death of an American soldier at the hands of his fellow troops.
I'm really not surprised that he was fired. He wrote his letter of resignation before even meeting with Obama, so perhaps he wasn't surprised either (though it was probably just a formality, or he knew it was coming, etc). It's unprofessional to be so loose-lipped around the media, and comments such as the ones he and his aides made undermine the war effort.
On the other hand, I don't know that I'd agree with going so far as to firing him from the comments alone. It seems to me the bigger issue is that McChrystal is trying to take too much control over the war effort. I do commend him on his focus to minimize civilian casualties at all costs, though. It's a wise effort and a path we should continue down.
Any word on who's taking his place yet?