"Gen. Stanley McChrystal, under fire for the dismissive, wisecracking remarks he made about Obama administration officials in a magazine article, submitted his resignation Tuesday as the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, according to several reports.
Following a cabinet meeting, President Obama said McChrystal had "showed poor judgment'' in his comments about the administration. But Obama said he would make no decisions about the general's future until he has had a chance to talk with him directly on Wednesday. Earlier Tuesday, McChrystal was recalled to Washington and summoned to the White House meeting, where he is expected to pay a price for a gaffe that the administration characterized as "an enormous mistake."
Joe Klein, a Time magazine correspondent citing an unidentified source, said on CNN that McChrystal had already resigned. The New York Times, relying on Pentagon officials, said he had prepared a letter of resignation -- standard practice for a military officer in such a strained situation with civilian leadership. But the real question remained: Would the White House accept the general's resignation?"
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/06/22/ge...-derisive-rema/
0
General faces Obama about wisecracks
Started by NYCGuy, Jun 23 2010 08:18 PM
2 replies to this topic
#2
-
- Members
-
- 578 posts
Veteran
Posted 24 June 2010 - 10:44 AM
Obama did the only thing he could as commander-in-chief: fire the general.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10395402.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10395402.stm
#3
-
- Members
-
- 3,841 posts
Veteran
Posted 24 June 2010 - 03:57 PM
It's hard to speculate on why a smart, political savvy general like Stanley McChrystal would give an interview that any corporal would know presented a clear and present danger of ending his military career. Americans do not cotton to generals who make public statements that criticize their civilian bosses, as Truman's firing of General Douglas MacArthur exemplifies.
One can only speculate that, if the folks who supposedly rule Thailand had the same philosophy, this country might be well on its way to a stable democracy with clear civilian controls over its generals. The sad reality of Thailand is that too many generals and their patrician patrons seem to think they have the option to fire the prime minister. The results can be seen in the endless struggle for solid political stability.
One can only speculate that, if the folks who supposedly rule Thailand had the same philosophy, this country might be well on its way to a stable democracy with clear civilian controls over its generals. The sad reality of Thailand is that too many generals and their patrician patrons seem to think they have the option to fire the prime minister. The results can be seen in the endless struggle for solid political stability.
