A General Named McChrystal Versus the President Named BHO |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Columns - A Cup O' Kapeng Barako | |||
Wednesday, 30 June 2010 19:11 | |||
By Jesse Jose A Cup O’ Kapeng Barako T hree words: He’s got balls. To me there are only three words fit to describe Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the head honcho in the battleground of No ifs or buts, but yes, indeed, he’s got balls. And I think the real reason he got “fired” from his job as the man in And Obama didn’t like that. Because, you see, on one side of this equation is the General, a proven brave warrior, a brilliant war general, a West Point graduate, a Marine and a Special Forces operations officer with all kinds of medals earned in fighting battles. He was the man in In other words, General McChrystal was the one who physically and completely broke the back of the insurgency there. He was the Man, the “Axman” of Gen. David Petraeus, who engineered the turnaround in the war in On the other side of the equation is President Obama, the so called commander-in-chief of the I guess for Obama, vis-à-vis rendering military salutes to POKING These comments appeared in a Rolling Stone profile story, “The Runaway General,” written by Michael Hastings, who reported that McChrystal is said to be “frustrated” with Obama and his top civilian leadership. And that when McChrystal first met Obama, he was “disappointed” with the President’s limited knowledge of the war and his complete “unpreparedness” for conducting a war against insurgents in The General was also quoted saying that he found Obama “painful” when the president reprimanded him last fall for speaking openly about his desire for more In this story, one of McChrystal’s aides called White House National Security Adviser Jim Jones, who is a retired four-star general, a “clown,” whose war strategy thinking is “stuck in 1985.” And that McChrystal was quoted to have said: “Are you asking about Vice President Biden? Who’s that?” Then an aide quipped, “Biden? Did you say, Bite me?” The general was also portrayed as “exasperated” by e-mails that he had received from Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s special envoy to Of Karl Eikenbery, the THE “BETRAY US” GENERAL TO THE RESCUE: President Obama said General McChrystal’s insubordinate conduct “undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system.” YET, right after the firing of McChrystal, Obama RE-AFFIRMED his commitment to the same war strategy and policy that was drafted and proposed, and overseen on the scene by General McChrystal himself. And then he ordered Gen. David Petraeus, the head honcho of Central Command -- whom, if y’all remember, Obama had called General “Betray Us” for proposing that surge in Obama then called the appointment of Petraeus “a change in personnel but not in policy.” So, the REASON General McChrystal was sacked from his command was because President Obama didn’t like the fact that he and his aides were mocked and made fun of by the general and his staff. It’s NOT for incompetence for handling the Afghan War, that’s for sure. How petty naman the reason was. Pikon pala etong si Obama. Pero, tinawag niya si General Petraeus as General “Betray Us” during the troop surge in W hat’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. But in this case, who’s got the bigger balls, the goose, or the gander? And who’s the goose and who’s the gander? And, who’s the better person here? So, I’ve said all this. I am a retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer. Is that being insubordinate, too? Speaking out my views? What’s Obama gonna do? Force me also to retire? I am already retired. Take away my military pension? I am no FilVet who beg for “handouts” from the But most importantly, I’ve also earned my right to speak out. And I think Gen. Stanley McChrystal was fired unjustly, and President Barack Hussein Obama’s decision to sack him was a show of arrogance on his part. It’s true that one of the basic elements of the U.S. Constitution is civilian control over the military. But render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar…. And let the generals win their wars. Let them speak out, too, fearlessly. That’s all. JJ
Newer news items:
Older news items:
|
|||
Last Updated on Wednesday, 30 June 2010 19:16 |
Please consider supporting the "ReVOTElution of Hope" for Sorsogon as the Pilot Province. Please see "ReVOTElution" Banner on this page for details.
Ed
Pareng Jesse,
True enough, General McChrystal spoke fearlessly. Whether he deserve the boot or not was the question Obama also decided fearlessly. That's the American way. Speak up. speak out honestly without equivocation regardless of the consequence.
Best regards,
Romy Marquez
You should have written that both President Obama and the military establishment should decide to get out of Afghanistan, as the United States and her allies are in a No-win situation there.
The Imperial British forces, other invaders and the Russian military could not win in Afghanistan, so how can the U.S. win there? Besides the Afghan tribes have been warring among themselves for a thousand years or more. So?
More power to you and your column,
Maria Clara
Salama nga pala ka comment mo. I agree that Obama made his decision, "fearlessly," too. But it's such a waste that a brilliant, courageous general got sacked just because he spoke up. And deemed to be "insubordinate" because of it. To me, that's un-American.
BTW, I wish to tell you that you're doing splendid work reporting on what's going on in Toronto. I've watched all your You Tube videos. Thank you for sharing them.
Take care now and have a great weekend.
Jesse Jose
(As e-mailed to Mr. Marquez with CC to the Editor)