Tom, what is you view on Gates role in all this? He is smart and signed up with Obama for more than just reforming procurement. Personally, I would be less interested in what the three and four star views are than how Gates sees things. Generals always think they are under resourced and that their theater of operations is the most important place in the world. Gates (and Jones) should have a broader view?

Ah, yes. The Roach.

"Need a flare?"

"No. He's close. He's real close."

What's that old line from Galbraith... when the facts change.. never mind.

Stand tall President Obama. The American people are with you. The war mongers, arms dealers and racisits are no match for you.

Memo to war monger Stanley:

It's stupid to think a smart man like our president thinks like you or your kind. His mind is not twisted and filled with thoughts of killing and destruction, nor is it filled with dark glory gained from the dead and mutiliataed bodies of innocent women and children. You worked hard to damage and harm the President and thank God you failed. Learn this war monger, CRIME DOES NOT PAY!

I'm no cheer leader for Gen. McChrystal, primarily because he has history with the Cpl. Tillman affair, and there is always a nagging doubt in my mind with honesty. However, SecDef Gates picked him as the best we had for the job, and the President affirmed his position telling him to assess the situation making his needs known.

It would seem our President allowed his alligator mouth to overload his canary rump. The SecDef changes his mind daily. And McChrystal needs to shut his mouth in public at this point, and understand "sometimes the military solutions are known but are impossible to implement."

What a damn mess.

is a good use of 25 minutes of the President's time. National Security well that may take a little longer and with a broader input.

taken together the comments above are the most moronic I've seen on this blog.

Tom,
It's been clear for months that Gen McCrystal thought he had the president's backing -- hard to imagine taking the job if he thought he was going to get cut at the knees. But so what? He will follow the President's plan...whatever that may be and whenever he plans on dispensing it. There will be gripping from the services and Congress and I suppose it will make good theater. You will do stories about it as officers violate confidences or talk out of turn to give you interesting gossip. McCrystal's assessment seems to indicate we are fighting stupidly in AFG -- well he can fight smarter all he wants...just w/ less troops than what he wants. He's a big boy and he'll be alright.

Team Obama has been setting the stage over the last couple of Washington Post headlines to move away from a COIN centric strategy - extolling our progress against Al Qaeda on Wed and today highlighting the virtues of a CT-focused and training strategy.

In the end - I agree w/ McCrystal - it's good to have a debate. Obama was silly to delineate good wars from bad wars on the campaign trail and now is thinking through what he really wants to have happen in AF-PAK. Welcome to the real world state senator - you're now President.

War is simply a means to achieve some strategic policy end-- if its not working or allowing a state to attain it's desire outcome - then a leader must pursue alternative courses of action. Good on Obama for actually thinking it through after his early naiveity. While he's deliberating it would seem logical to challenge some assumptions:

Would AQSL really leave Waziristan for AFG if the Taliban seizes control over certain parts of the country? Or is North Africa/ Yemen a more likely alternative location? Does AQSL retain some measure of protection from the full weight of US airpower by staying in a Pakistan - despite our deadly drone attacks?

What is the impact on Pakistan if the AFG government fails. Does this limit our ability to run effective CT in Pak?

Ricks and the Neocons just don't seem to respect/understand our constitutional system.

"I will make a prediction. If McChrystal does not learn to subordinate himself to something other than his vision of what is right and true, he is going to get fired."

"MacArthur was a lot smarter man than McChrystal and yet he suffered the ignominy of relief for cause even though he had not "gone public" against national policy. There should be a lesson in that."

"He was not invited to the White House to represent "the other side" in the present deliberations on Afghanistan because there is no "other side." Admiral Mullen,for good or ill, is the president/commander in chief's military adviser. McChrystal is merely a subordinate, one of many."

"McChrystal was summoned from England to a 25 minute meeting with the president aboard Air Force 1. He showed up in field uniform? He owns a set of Greens (Class A uniform). He wore it in London to the IISS meeting. The man does not seem to know his place."

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2009/10/a-generals-public-pressure-ackerman.html#more

"In a speech in London on Thursday, Gen. Stanley McChrystal publicly intervened in the debate over Afghanistan. Vice President Biden has suggested that we focus on fighting al-Qaeda and refrain from using our troops to prop up the government of President Hamid Karzai. But when this strategic option was raised at his presentation, McChrystal said it was a formula for "Chaos-istan." When asked whether he would support it, he said, "The short answer is: No.""

This man is dangerous and a threat to our constitution. Kick his insubordinate A@@ out of the Army now. I've seen PFC's go to the brig for way less than this!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100203939.html

Just was informed today that my daughter’s husband is definitely bound for yet another deployment with his SEAL Team to Afghanistan in January. They are tuned up and ready to go and like all Navy SEAL’s will walk though walls if ordered to do so. But it would be nice to know that the national command authority actually had some idea what the hell they were doing. Actually, SEAL’s don’t seem to care where they are sent as long as they can do their thing. However, it would still be nice to think that all the training, separation from family and risk’s run were actually for something constructive.

I'm getting that same sick feeling I had in my stomach prior to the Iraq war.

President Obama needs to fire General McChrystal. Nothing good will come to this country following General McChrystal into a protracted war in Afghanistan - a man who lied to this country about the death of Pat Tillman. Are we suppose to trust this man now? And his latest public challenges of Obama and the civilian leadership is insubordination of the gravest nature.

And where are the journalists? Is the general public even aware of the past misdeeds of General McChrystal? It is a shame that journalists like Tom Ricks are failing this country for the second time in this decade. I suppose Tom Ricks will be able to cash in when he writes "Fiasco II".

Tom Ricks should think that, because it's true.
And incidentally, discussion boards keep their value when the job of maintaining civility isn't left entirely up to the host. I commend posters upthread for their contributions in this regard.

As Stan and Dave plot their mutiny against President Obama, our soldiers get killed and mutilated. What did these young people get killed for? Who and what are they fighting for? Eight more mothers and fathers are crying their hearts out today. The mothers who gave birth have lost their babies for nothing. This is deep and real suffering. If the mutineers have their way, many more mothers and fathers will lose their beloved children in vain. Those who support this insanity are responsible for the deaths of these young Americans. Go look in the mirror and see the face of a killer.

"The Christian Science Monitor reported last month that 80 percent of Afghanistan now sees heavy insurgent activity, as opposed to 54 percent two years ago, with the violence growing particularly in northern Afghanistan."

Hope you all read Jones' comments in today's NY Times re McChrystal's "opinion."

I think Bob Boardman is "spot on" Mild criticism is a long way from spitting on someone. You are worried about someone being unkind to Mr Ricks! We're talking about lots of young people dying or . . . . not dying.

Mr. Ricks,

I regret that the discourse at your site is deteriorating so fast and so far.

Some of these people truly appear to be off their meds, and clearly have no direct role or experience in the events -- political or military -- on which they are expounding.

My own impression is that President Obama has not been well served by his senior-most team -- the same team that had him label Afghanistan a war of necessity as recently as, what, a few weeks ago? As we know, Presidential speeches go through a vast clearance process that includes some of the very same people who are now saying that we can do Afghanistan on the cheap.

I have never felt that Afghanistan is a war of necessity, and I am troubled that McChrystal has on his team people who somehow continue to find senior listeners when, in my opinion, they are completely discredited.

That said, McChrystal was brought in specifically because the administration's civilian leadership felt that his predecessor was not sufficiently aggressive and flexible. This was no normal rotation, but rather the sacking of a four-star -- the first time in how many decades.

McChrystal is thus hardly a warmonger for delivering a report that says what he believes he needs to win the war that the President's civilian team has declared one of necessity.

Further, McChrystal clearly has no problems with indecisiveness or an unwillingness to risk his career, as one of the previous blasts, above, claims is true of all current military officers.

I hope that future posts will be more civil and rational, and urge you, if necessary, to decline publication of posts like some of those above.

Thanks

p.s. As I recall, errant pfc's go to the stockade; it's marines and seamen who go to the brig.

If we're going to get upset about the uniform issue, can we also ban civilians visiting these theatres from wearing standard issue desert combat boots with a suit? A true style atrocity, as well as a patronising gesture of 'solidarity'. I thought the vision of Bremer stepping off his helicopter in Brooks Brothers suit and desert camo combat boots might have sealed the fate of this particular protocol crime, but I recently saw a photo of Biden in Baghdad doing EXACTLY the same thing.

Why doesn't anybody talk about the substance of what this guy proposes to do? We are talking about a country in which we have no effective civilian partner, and one in which no effective civilian government has ever existed...ever. Our adversary has the support of 5 percent of the population, yet their control over vast swathes of the country has taken us to the brink of defeat. How in god's name are they going to pacify this country with 40,000 more troops? And on top of that, we have other leaders telling us the added troops will offend the Afghans. This seems like a fantasy--an imaginary surge redux under vastly different conditions. Where is the fundamental political change (like the one that allowed us to pay off the sunnis in iraq) that gives this surge a leg to stand on? Which areas are particularly suited to a saturation of forces, like the market in Sadr City, or the outlying areas of Baghdad? The country is simply too massive, isolated, rugged, and untraversible to be likened to iraq. That Frontline expose was about the most sobering thing I've watched. I'm not saying that a withdrawal wouldn't be an absolute catastrophe for us and the region, but I don't think we have the willpower to do what it takes to win this thing. If we did, we'd send 100k troops. And since we don't we should probably get out. If someone can explain to me how 40k nightwatchmen is going to defeat the Taliban, I'd love to hear it. Seems like to me the Taliban's staying power is *slightly* lengthier than ours. After all, in a society that's been at war for 30 years a draft is an unnecessary tool.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/world/06gates.html?hp