Posted on 06/27/2010 11:57:18 PM PDT by Brown Deer
Look at the last eight words of this statement:
we wouldn't want to be held responsible for.
McCain is admitting right there that he could have been held accountable for what he said. Thus, he is admitting that it was inappropriate.
Now let's not head back to the point of "Well McCain said things..." anymore. We all agree, him included, that it was inappropriate.
Now as far as McChrystal, it is clear from the tone of the article that a lot of this kind of talk (trashing the chain of command) was going on in his office. We don't have specific quotes, but you would have to be willfully blind not to see it in context of the article.
So either McChrystal said it himself, tolerated it from his staff, or allowed a reporter to make it up whole cloth.
In any of the above scenarios, it was irresponsible action from the General that allowed this to happen.
I have not heard from anyone who has served in a Senior military position that has not shrugged and said "Yep, he had to go." after reading the article.
From the article:
"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?"
I stand corrected. McChrystal did not say bite me. I read that incorrectly.
Still, we have the same net. The general does play with recognizing Biden and his "top adviser" goes with it.
Nor have I...to include an 06 who recently left McChrystal's staff. He said he had great admiration for the general, but knew he had to go.
Maybe you should remind him of Article 89.
Sorry, you don’t get my bona fides.
With that, your complete lack of understanding is revealed. Good day.
You give up a lot of homers by throwing a lot of pitches over the plate - and flying into harm's way a lot is one way of busting up a lot of planes.Granted it's not the only way to do it . . .
Ignorance is bliss.
I'll take your word for it.
In the above you are clearly speakin of McChrystal correct?
"here is one of many articles on this occurance and loss of life due to spineless officers and generals putting their politcal careers ahead of the troops they command.."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2342812/posts
A McClatchy newspapers’ journalist who witnessed the battle reported that a team of Marine trainers made repeated appeals for air and artillery support after being pinned down by insurgents in the village of Ganjgal in eastern Kunar province.
The U.S. troops had to wait more than an hour for attack helicopters to come to their aid and their appeal for artillery fire was rejected, with commanders citing new rules designed to avoid civilian casualties, the report said.
Morrell said the helicopters were not hampered by any restrictions on air power but had to travel a long distance to reach the Marines at the remote location near the Pakistan border.
___________________
The McCltachy article becomes suspect by introducing obtuse foolishness like this:
"The lack of timely air support...was a consequence of the manpower and equipment shortages bequeathed by the Bush administration’s failure to secure Afghanistan against a resurgence of the Taliban, al Qaida and allied groups before turning to invade Iraq."
"The denial of heavy artillery fire to those trapped in Ganjgal has roots in the Bush administration’s decision to divert resources to Iraq and the resulting stress on the U.S. military."
Those comments would seem to questionably accurate at best, politically motivated (understandable given his background) and tangentially if at all related to the story. They discredit the rest of his reporting.
This seems more accurate:
"There are a limited number of U.S. helicopters in Kunar, a stretch of craggy mountains and serpentine valleys bordering Pakistan where airpower gives a vital edge to overstretched U.S. troops fighting guerrillas who know every nook and trail of the area. Unbeknownst to those trapped in the Ganjgal kill zone, however, the available aircraft were tied up in the Shiryak Valley to the north in a battle in which two pilots were wounded, U.S. commanders said."
I seem to recall efforts at home to declare failure back in 2007 - back when the fighting and dying were at their worst - and to ensure the blame for that failure didn’t rest with the troops but was passed on to the Generals who had sacrificed their soldiers’ lives on the altar of appeasement to their civilian masters. Some might recall “Betrayus” - a disgusting trope that made its way from certain web sites (more concerned with winning elections than battles with guns) to the pages of the New York Times - at a discount.
You need no reminder of that, I am sure. Of days when scant available facts (and abundant fallacies) in initial reports were augmented with the assumptions of those who were most likely to be wrong, whose motives and commitment would require them to ignore or dismiss follow-on reports from on-scene (from those whose every word had mere days before been unimpeachable Gospel truth) and moveon to the next preliminary report, the new outrage of the day.
QUOTES - Initial reports indicate that the troops requested and were given air support and indirect fire, said Sam Truelove, a spokeswoman for the International Security Assistance Force.,p>
“The tactical directive does not preclude any fires for self defense,” said Truelove, a lieutenant commander in the Royal Navy.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said that it did take “some time” for air support to arrive, but the delay was due to distance, not the rules of engagement.
He said the deaths are under investigation, adding, “We will hopefully get to the bottom and figure out if everything operated according to protocol.”
LINKS
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/032602.html
Screw RollingSone and Screw McCltachy
The art of the devil is always deception.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.