McChrystal to Be Fired?

[Monkey Riding Dragon]

This (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/mcch-j23.shtml) is probably the best article on the subject that I've yet read anyway. Clearly, this development represents only the latest setback for the United States in its latest effort to gain total control over Afghanistan and plunder its resources (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/afgh-j15.shtml). Since the announcement of their new imperialist strategy in December, which relied mainly on General McChrystal's advice, things have only continued to go downhill for the occupation forces. Their takeover of Marjah was largely unsuccessful (particularly in the ideological sphere) and, as a result, they were forced to delay their planned invasion of Kandahar from this month until September. Now you have this development, where the principle architect of the current Afghanistan strategy may well be fired. It's becoming increasingly obvious that Washington isn't particularly winning its war in the area. The failure of the essentially McChrystal strategy has now revealed fissures between the Obama team itself and the military industrial complex it supports. Represented therein is a contest of civilian rule or increasing military rule.

Our stance shouldn't be to support the firing of McChrystal, but to demand his arrest and trial for war crimes.

[Starport]

This (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/mcch-j23.shtml) is probably the best article on the subject that I've yet read anyway. Clearly, this development represents only the latest setback for the United States in its latest effort to gain total control over Afghanistan and plunder its resources (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/afgh-j15.shtml). Since the announcement of their new imperialist strategy in December, which relied mainly on General McChrystal's advice, things have only continued to go downhill for the occupation forces. Their takeover of Marjah was largely unsuccessful (particularly in the ideological sphere) and, as a result, they were forced to delay their planned invasion of Kandahar from this month until September. Now you have this development, where the principle architect of the current Afghanistan strategy may well be fired. It's becoming increasingly obvious that Washington isn't particularly winning its war in the area. The failure of the essentially McChrystal strategy has now revealed fissures between the Obama team itself and the military industrial complex it supports. Represented therein is a contest of civilian rule or increasing military rule.

Our stance shouldn't be to support the firing of McChrystal, but to demand his arrest and trial for war crimes.

Great, more cracks in imperialist camp

[GPDP]

Yup, he just got fired (or "handed his letter of resignation" as they politely say), and David Petraeus, the butcher of Iraq, is to take his place.

Obama has just issued a statement on this development, reaffirming his commitment to imperialism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, while at the same time stating he will not tolerate division. The fact he has to do all of this says volumes about the current state of the American imperial machine and the people who lead it.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Yup, he just got fired (or "handed his letter of resignation" as they politely say), and David Petraeus, the butcher of Iraq, is to take his place.

This might be the dumbest of all possible outcomes.

[khad]

Now one wonders why McChrystal was a fucking dumbshit and agreed to the interview. He even helped inspire mutiny among his own men, who had been chafing for months under orders not to fire on civilians.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/120251


Greetings from Kandahar. I've spent the last few days on an airfield in southern Afghanistan, embedded with U.S. forces. It's very hot — like 106 degrees hot. Fighting is a daily occurrence (I saw one firefight, from a good distance, this morning) and rocket attacks on base are the norm. (In fact, I lost a draft of this blog post as a bunch of rockets landed, the power went out, and I ended up on the floor alongside other folks.)

For most soldiers here, the high stakes political wrangling that goes on in Washington doesn't usually register on their radar. The focus is the mission, what they have to do day- to-day. Talk of Jim Jones and Bob Gates and Ambassador Eikenberry feels pretty irrelevant when you're lugging a Hellfire missile across a runway in 106-degree heat. (Many Hell Fire missiles, btw, have slogans painted on them. I saw one yesterday that had "Fuck Your Couch" written on it.) But the story on Gen. McChrystal we published in Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236) appears to have sparked a bit more interest than usual on the ground: Our troops may or may not have a new commanding general soon, depending on how the meeting with President Obama and General McChrystal goes.

Read our full story on Stanley McChrystal, "The Runaway General," here now. (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236)

(http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236) A number of troops and private contractors have told me what they think of the story. It’s small, informal, biased sample, for sure. But it's generally broken down into two categories of feeling: glee or relief.

McChrystal's new directives — from restricting U.S. forces ability to attack the enemy to banning Burger King — have a created a widespread backlash among the soldiers here. (We talk about in the piece, and CJ Chivers at The New York Times did a story on it today.) When a private contractor found out that I was the guy who wrote the McChrystal story, he immediately said, "Good." Then he directed me to check out a wooden wall covered in graffiti, where the soldiers had apparently vented their frustrations about the new directives, rather graphically. Another soldier told me that the point of view shared by many soldiers was finally being heard — that the rules being handed down from on high aren’t working, and that America is not winning the war.Banning Burger King is a complaint? How much fucking tail does this toothless army have?

[Dimentio]

What are the reactions from the Anti-Obama super-reactionary camp?

[GPDP]

What are the reactions from the Anti-Obama super-reactionary camp?

He's dumb for letting him go, he's obviously pissed off and he shouldn't be, etc.

[~Spectre]

Petraeus was the only choice Obama could make to somewhat shield himself politically from Afghanistan's expected deterioration this summer.

[Martin Blank]

McChrystal was not "fired". He merely resigned his command. He is still General McChrystal, U.S. Army, but he is without a current assignment now. In other words, Obama gave him a "Get Out of Jail Free" card and let him walk away from the mess he made in Afghanistan with his failed counterinsurgency strategy.

[choff]

What are the reactions from the Anti-Obama super-reactionary camp?

I'm seeing a surprising amount of them trying to call Obama out on acting "out of turn" in firing a general, and that he should "leave war to the generals." Conveniently overlooking that whole "commander-in-chief" thing. :lol: