Obama And McChrystal

The Torygraph reports that Team Obama is peeved with the outspoken General McChrystal:

According to sources close to the administration, Gen McChrystal shocked and angered presidential advisers with the bluntness of a speech given in London last week.

The next day he was summoned to an awkward 25-minute face-to-face meeting on board Air Force One on the tarmac in Copenhagen, where the president had arrived to tout Chicago's unsuccessful Olympic bid.

...

In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to "Chaos-istan".

When asked whether he would support it, he said: "The short answer is: No."

He went on to say: "Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support."

The remarks have been seen by some in the Obama administration as a barbed reference to the slow pace of debate within the White House.

Greyhawk at the Mudville Gazette makes an interesting point:

Seriously, I can think of several alternatives to General McChrystal's plan for carrying out the administration's Afghan strategy, but certainly none I'd want my name associated with in any way, shape, or form. In D.C., no one in the administration (or the Pentagon) is willing to have their name associated with any alternative plan, but apparently many are willing to whisper to reporters that there is one and Biden thinks it's great.

Just something to think about.

We are eagerly awaiting the Obama Plan.

MORE:  The Times wrote about the lowered profile of Gen. Petraeus and included this:

How much General Petraeus’s muted voice will affect Mr. Obama’s decision on the war is unclear, but people close to him say that stifling himself in public could give him greater credibility to influence the debate from within. Others say that his biggest influence may simply be as part of a team of military advisers, including General McChrystal and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The men are united in what they see as the need to build up the American effort in Afghanistan, although General Petraeus, who works closely with General McChrystal, said last week that he had not yet endorsed General McChrystal’s request for more troops.

Together the three are likely to be aligned against Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., as well as other administration officials who want to scale back the effort. In that situation, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who has worried about a big American presence in Afghanistan but left the door open to more troops, could be the most influential vote.

Gates, Mullen and Petraeus have an encouraging track record.

ERRATA:  I can not shake a thought which ocurred to me while reading "The Gamble", in which WaPo reporter told us about the surge in Iraq and the men who implemented it.  As I recall it, Gen. Petraeus apparently pulled off a rare, if not unprecedented, double - he was first in his class at Ranger School and then first again, years later, at General's School (a special Army program for the next generals).  Petraeus is also wildly intelligent and well-read, a fitness nut, and an architect of the semi-successful surge.

So when the book described the meeting between Gen. Petraeus and candidate Obama in the summer of 2008 I could not shake the contrast - here was a meeting between a rising star with a tremendous record of success in a challenging field and a fellow who had done a fabulous job climbing the slippery pole of politics and not much else.  I assume Petraeus has sufficient respect for the process and the game (See NOTE, below) that he was able to maintain the appropriate demeanor for such a meeting.

NOTE:  We talk a lot about respect for the game about the time when Jeter is leading the Yankees into the playoffs.

Comments

[bunky]

All you need to know about McChrystal is that he's Delta.

[Fresh Air]

GK--

Interesting that Netanyahu went directly with Putin on the evidence that Russia is supplying assistance in obtaining the bomb to Tehran. In the old days, he would have gone through Bush, or even Clinton.

It just shows you how pitifully weak the U.S. appears with Zero at the helm.

[bishop]

Matt, wondered what you think of this plan, in the LUN

[Jane]

I am laughing so hard tears are in my eyes...

...anyone else listening to Rush?

mega dittos.

[Dave (in the People's Banana Republic of MA)]

Rocco: Aw, shucks.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

I'm lovin' this parody, something for everybody, even Ann.

[Jane]

I dunno about the polls but I see a huge (make that about an inch) shift in the political spectrum over the last week. The moonbats are somewhat silent - undoubtedly crushed by the Olympic defeat which really can't credibly be blamed on Bush; add - this is not the way they wanted to get out of Afghanistan, and since now we know that Obama CAN fail, maybe Health care isn't going to happen.

He's lost the independants, and the less batty supporters are afraid they have been taken for a ride. So I'm optimistic this week.

[Rob Crawford]

He's lost the independants, and the less batty supporters are afraid they have been taken for a ride. So I'm optimistic this week.

Sadly, the batty supporters are going to just be driven to more anger and -- I'm afraid -- more violence.

[Boatbuilder]

Hey, glasater--The ANSWER is blowin' in the wind.

[bio mom]

Caution: The muddle can shift on a dime. Sway in the wind.

[Jane]

Let 'em have it Rob.

[fdcol63]

Has anyone else seen this?

U.S. most admired country globally: survey
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE59447120091005?feedType=RSS&feedName=lifestyleMolt&rpc=22&sp=true

This Reuters article will undoubtedly feed Obama's ego. The world loves us now because of Obama.

[Steve Schultz]

I"ve changed my mind on Afghanistan. I now believe we should leave there immediately and here's why. I was watching the movie "Pearl Harbor" last night and there is a scene near the end of the movie where General Doolittle is talking to the two stars of the movie. His statement was, "Victory will go to the one who believes it the most and who has the most patience". I realized at that moment that Barack Obama has absolutely no concept of victory or patience and that our continued presence in Afghanistan will only result in more American deaths with the same drip drip drip of defeat. It greatly saddens me to say this but we are being led by an empty suit of a politician, not a man of any substance at all.

[bishop]

What's the line that comes to mind with that survey result "You're doing it wrong"
WE didn't really support the Northern Alliance forces either, that didn't help the outcome.

[Militant Banana]

The old adage still holds true: If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.

"... if we adopt the principle of universality : if an action is right (or wrong) for others, it is right (or wrong) for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others -- more stringent ones, in fact -- plainly cannot be taken seriously when they speak of appropriateness of response; or of right and wrong, good and evil."

[daveinboca]

For tea-leaf watchers, the interesting peek-a-boo game is watching Richard Holbrooke, a former FSO whom I worked with in another millennium, because Dick always ends up on the winning side---of a debate, not of wars.

[bishop]

Yeah that gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling,
everything worked out since Holbrooke was assigned to the Afghan/Pak portfolio, he seems to channeling Harriman in this, and not in a good way.

[Original MikeS]

If Obama backs down in Afghanistan, his legacy will be fixed.

That he is considering something other than the strategy he set in March, is a stunning example of poor judgment.

[fdcol63]

I doubt it's poor judgment.

Everything makes sense when you start from the premise that he wants America to lose.

Naive and inexperienced? No. He's just on the other side.

[Original MikeS]

...the premise that he wants America to lose.

That idea really is too painful for me to accept. I prefer to imagine that feigned indecision is really a distraction to keep the media away from the backroom manipulations on the health-care cram down.

[JM Hanes]

I don't think he wants America to lose. I think he just doesn't care unless it affects his agenda and his political capital back home.

[Old Lurker]

Dunno about that, JMH.

For the crowd that believes that the world would be better off without a single superpower (Sec Albright etc), being run out of town with our tails between our legs would announce that we have come down to earth quite nicely.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

According to a segment on Cavuto, Obama doesn't have the money to move forward in Afghanistan. We're too broke to finish fighting this war.

[Old Lurker]

If you don't think the unemployment numbers are bad for the future...LUN from Bloomberg. You heard most of this stuff at JOM two months ago.

[Sue]

If he loses now, he can still blame Bush.

[Rob Crawford]

According to a segment on Cavuto, Obama doesn't have the money to move forward in Afghanistan. We're too broke to finish fighting this war.

BS. We have plenty of money. What we don't have is the will to cut spending on unconstitutional social programs.

[bishop]

No in other news, it seems that lad Al Quahtani's interrogation was filmed, vapors anyone

[Pagar]

If the American leftists have their way, Obama won't have to worry about the military, because there won't be any.

" Protests against military recruiters at schools nationwide tomorrow"

LUN

[gwhh]

semi-successful surge?? How about fully successful surge, or as sucessful as things get in a limited war.