[Nevermore]

An adviser to the administration said: "People aren't sure whether McChrystal is being naïve or an upstart. To my mind he doesn't seem ready for this Washington hard-ball and is just speaking his mind too plainly."

IOW, "That MChrystal boy is too d--n UPPITY!"
(And who's really not ready for Washington hardball, i.e., ready to make difficult choices?)

[HamiltonJay]

Awe, the thin skinned little wimp is angry... aww...

[Since 2009-07-21]

I don't buy for a second that Obama is equipped to have ANY kind of meaningful discussion with our military. Obama probably went in coached with simple demands and was told to stick to a script. The General looks like he's being barraged with non sequiturs. The 'lympics fiasco makes me think all the more that Obama is just an errand........uhhhhhhhhh man, errand man.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

It’s amazing how the Press can pivot so hypocritically seamlessly. Dissent amongst Generals, higher ups in the Pentagon against Bush = Patriotic. Dissent amongst the Generals, higher ups in the Pentagon against Obama = Treason.

[South40]

Who do you trust to defend this country?

[xzins]

Bruce Ackerman, an expert on constitutional law at Yale University, said in the Washington Post: "As commanding general, McChrystal has no business making such public pronouncements."

On the contrary, Gen McChrystal's responsibility is to be completely candid about his military opinions both to the Commander-in-Chief and the Congress and the American People, for whom he works.

All his career, McChrystal was in Special Ops. Any warrior will tell you that your commander will cut your jewels off if you give a report other than the truth, or at least your very best take on the truth.

If there are multiple directions that can be taken, then you are to explain those options. Also, though, you are to provide your selection and the reasoning behind your choice.

I have no doubt that an Army ground commander has a better feel for the facts on the ground than any other politician or desk bound general could possibly have.

[N. Theknow]

Letterman = 1 hour of 0bama's time with 0bama going to him.

McChrystal = 25 minutes of 0bama's time as an afterthought.

[A.A. Cunningham]

furious

[YankeeReb]

This is just perfect. Last Fri we're told not to worry because TOTUS had met with Gen. McChrystal presumably to discuss strategy going forward. Now we find out , thanks once again to the British press, that all it was was a dressing down for making the "Dear Leader" look like the putz that he is.

I had a feeling, you don't discuss war strategy for 25 minutes sitting on a tarmac. Good Lord!!! That's less time then the Great Stainmaker spent getting his haircut while on a tarmac.

Sadly, the real loser in all this is our troops in Afghanistan. While the POS TOTUS and VP Plugs dither, they're in a potential meat grinder.

This whole administration is like one long national nightmare.

[Condor51]

Here's the speech that embarrassed Barry. There's also a pdf download and video link.

General Stanley McChrystal Address

But there's onr thing to remember, Gen McChrystal is not only the US commander but also that of all NATO forces in Afghanistan. Which I recall reading there's approx 100,000 total to our 60,000. So it's not only American men he has to worry about coming home in a body bag.

So what Barry does or doesn't do affects some soldier's mother/family in Coventry or Hamburg too.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

... Gen McChrystal shocked and angered presidential advisers ...

The advisors were shocked. Until his Teleprompter tells him so Obama doesn't know enough to be shocked!

[Tailback]

What I find interesting, and I don’t know if anyone else has picked up on it, is that the General is meeting the POTUS wearing ACU’s (fatigues) instead of Class A’s.

Could that be an under the radar snub, since McChrystal knew this was gonna be a photo-op with the Soros sock puppet? “Hey look at this empty suit sitting by me, a real snake eating warfighter.”

[Stultis]

So, McChrystal made the mistake of believing what his Commander In Chief actually said, emphatically and repeatedly, about the need to succeed in Afghanistan as a matter of necessity.

McChrystal was supposed to read Obama's mind, and put that ahead of Obama's own stated policy (read, "just words") even though Obama never met with him to explain this (apparently suddenly important) distinction.

What's more, McChrystal was supposed to (telepathically) understand that he was NOT to press the British and other allies about the urgency of the Afghan effort, and their need to contribute to it, even though Obama himself had been pressing the British and other European allies in the same manner just this past spring.

But NONE of this is behavior is capricious, feckless or political on Obama's part. Uh, huh.

[The Anti-One]

"Bruce Ackerman, an expert on constitutional law at Yale University, said in the Washington Post: "As commanding general, McChrystal has no business making such public pronouncements." "

Not much of an expert if you ask me. Our (the citizens of the United States') Generals serve US and take an oath to protect and defend the "Constitution of the United State from enemies both foreign and abroad" which includes rough Presidents.

Hooray for Gen. McChrystal for remembering his oath

(I, Stanley McChrystal, 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.)

and to hell with Bruce Ackerman and his ilk!

Let's hope the General's meeting with Baraq O Bamah hasn't dissuade him from keeping that oath.

Just for the record.... Baraq O Bamah is NOT God.