Political humor: If Pelosi,Reid, et. al. sound intelligent to you...don't enter

[JimL]

[Spirited-6]

He more than likely said that and more. 

[big turkey]

McKrystal should have quit right then and there.

But he is a hero type and a can do fellow.

He thought he could win even with one hand tied behind his back.

So this is what we have here, and that's the way the Prez wants it.

Can we live through this time of poor leadership, yes we can.

Yes we Can, I think I heard that some where before.

Stick to the Constitution and it addresses this type of bad leader and he(OBAMA) will be spat out.

By US or the U.S..


Big Al

[fstsix]

Looks like O is nervous sitting in the Enemy camp there ? 

[Bobbo]

It is obvious that the photoshopper who added words to the picture posted here has absolutely no military experience, along with no understanding of the events that took place before Gen. McChrystal was relieved of duty.  Insubordination is as serious as it gets in the military, especially in the upper ranks.  Many solders (of all ranks) believe their Commanding Officers are wrong or misguided in some decisions, but they took a sworn oath to follow orders without question or complaint.  It is unfortunate that the Rolling Stone magazine was able to coax some unflattering comments out of Gen. McChrystal, but I’m sure he realized what he was in for as soon as they were published.

Our constitution, in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, establishes the President as Commander in Chief of all military forces.  Many may disagree with this decision, but the President was within constitutional authority to take this action.

[RainMaker]

That picture looks like it was taken on Air Force One.  Note the windows.

[fstsix]

Hey unknown.....how many Generals does this make now?....

[Chrisj CMA]

I think the photoshopper was spot on!  I spent 23 years in the military and went into harms way even when I didnt fully agree with my governments decision.  Following orders YES!  Thinking stuff like what was in the THOUGHT BUBBLE shopped in the pic.....ABSOLUTELY! 

True obedience is doing what you are supposed to even when you dont agree.....McCrystal did that, hes a hero, he was not insubbordinate.....he made a mistake.......he trusted a repoerter to NOT publish off the record comments, comments that should not have been made? Sure...(most of which were made by the Generals staff)  None the less he was wrong, but he is a military hero and a warrior and deserves the legacy as such. 

[Serk]

Everyone's got that relative that sends 'em 23 different chain mails a day. I usually glance at 'em and toss 'em aside, but this thread reminded me of one I recently got. I usually don't do this, I HATE it when someone's entire post is nothing but cutting and pasting something else, and usually just tune those out, and not saying I agree or disagree with this take on the situation, but it IS an interesting read either way, IMHO... (And yes, I know the author is a bit to the right)

          The General and the Community Organizer

by Paul R. Hollrah
June 24, 2010

Channel-surfing from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN through MSNBC and Fox News, the inside-the-beltway pundits had a field day trying to get inside the heads of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, General Stanley McChrystal, and McChrystal's top aides.  The one thing common to all of the analyses, by the most famous and highly-paid talking heads in the Western World, was that they are all wrong… dead wrong.  What is certain is that they all owe General McChrystal and his senior aides an apology for assuming that they are lame-brained numbskulls.

The facts of the McChrystal case are not in dispute.  General McChrystal and his senior officers allowed a reporter for Rolling Stone Magazine, Michael Hastings, to have almost unprecedented access during an extended stay in Paris.  The extended stay was due, in part, to an excess of atmospheric ash from Iceland's Eyjafjallajokull volcano, keeping the McChrystal party grounded for days.

In an interview with CNN, Hastings reported that he had a tape recorder in his hand most of the time and that McChrystal was "very aware" that his comments would find their way into print.  He said, "McChrystal and his people set no ground rules for their conversations, although they did ask that some parts of their conversations were off the record."  Hastings subsequently published a lengthy profile of General McChrystal on June 22, titled, The Runaway General.

As Hastings wrote in his profile, McChrystal thought that Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the roomful of military brass during their first meeting.  Of their second meeting, an advisor to McChrystal quoted the general as saying that it was "a 10-minute photo op."  He went on to say, "Obama clearly didn't know anything about (McChrystal), who he was.  Here's the guy who's going to run his f_ _ _ing war, but he didn't seem very engaged.  The Boss was pretty disappointed."

As General McChrystal flew from Afghanistan to Washington to face Obama in the Oval Office, the almost unanimous opinion of the talking heads was that the comments made by McChrystal and his staff were off the cuff and inadvertent.  But to believe that is to totally ignore who these men are.

General McChrystal and his top officers are not simple-minded, knuckle-dragging brutes.  To the contrary, they are intelligent, thoughtful, highly educated, patriots… graduates of West Point and other fine universities… who are dedicated to duty, honor, and country.  To think that such men would be so careless as to speak unflatteringly of Obama, Biden, and other top administration figures, in the presence of a reporter for a notoriously left wing publication, defies logic… at the very least.  To think that men who are trained to be careful and deliberate in everything they do, could do something so careless and so unguarded is simply beyond comprehension.

I would argue that McChrystal and his aides knew exactly what they were doing.

From the day that he became the handpicked "spear carrier" for Obama's unique brand of warfare… playing at being Commander in Chief while playing to his far left constituency… McChrystal's life had been one of constant frustration.  After telling Obama exactly how many troops he needed to carry out his mission, Obama dithered for months before deciding to give him just half the troops he requested.  McChrystal could not have been happy about that.

The Obama team insisted on new Rules of Engagement designed to reduce collateral damage (civilian casualties).  Obama's ROE required that U.S. troops must be able to see the enemy with weapon in hand before they were allowed to return fire.  One videotape circulated on the Internet showed a platoon of Marines pinned down by enemy sniper fire.  But since the enemy was firing from some distance behind the open window of a building, the Marines could not actually see the weapon being fired.  Although they were taking deadly fire, they were prohibited by the ROE from putting small arms fire or an RPG through the window opening.

Under Obama's politically correct ROE, our soldiers and Marines were required to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.  McChrystal could not have been happy about that.

A strict new interrogation policy, dictated by Attorney General Eric Holder, required that prisoners must be delivered to an Interrogation Center within twenty-four hours of being captured or be released.  A great deal of actionable intelligence was lost as a result and battle-hardened enemy fighters were returned to the field to kill Americans.  McChrystal must have found that to be incomprehensible.

But the greatest insult to our troops in the field, and to the officers who lead them, may be a new battlefield medal designed by the Obama team.  It is called the Courageous Restraint Medal and is awarded to soldiers and Marines who demonstrate uncommon restrain in combat by not firing their weapons even when they feel threatened by the enemy.  Would we be surprised to learn that the preponderance of these medals were awarded posthumously?  McChrystal must have found that to be an insanity.

I suggest that, having his best military judgments subjected to the White House political sieve for nearly a year and a half, McChrystal decided that he'd had enough.  And when he announced to his senior staff that he was prepared to retire they decided to push back… to make the most of a bad situation.  It was clear that, if McChrystal were to simply take off his uniform and walk away, his retirement would be page-twenty news for a day or two before the mainstream media and the American people forgot all about him.

They had to make the most of his retirement because it provided a one-time opportunity to show the American people, as well as our enemies and our allies, that the man who claims the title of Commander in Chief of the U.S. military does not command the respect of our men and women in uniform.  To make the most of that opportunity they had to choose their messenger very carefully.
 
They knew that, by openly showing their disrespect for Obama in front of just any newsman, they may not attract the attention they desired.  Like any astute observer of the MSM, they knew that most reporters would turn on their own mothers if it meant a good story.  But they could not take a chance that a mainstream media reporter might suffer a rare pang of conscience when confronted with the prospect of ruining the careers of some of the most senior officers in the War on Terror.  They had to fix the odds as much as possible in their favor so they chose to use Michael Hastings and Rolling Stone Magazine.

During the long hours that General McChrystal was in the air between Kabul and Washington, Obama knew that he had just two choices… both bad.  He could declare McChrystal to be an irreplaceable asset in the war effort, give him a public reprimand, and send him back to Kabul.  Or he could fire McChrystal, sending a clear message that, at least in his own mind, he was the Commander in Chief.

In the former case, he was certain to appear weak and ineffectual… a man not totally in charge.  In the latter case, he might at least win a few rave reviews from the Kool-Ade drinkers in the mainstream media.  He chose the latter of the two options.

But what is now lost in all of the hand-wringing and speculation is the fact that McChrystal and his people have succeeded in doing exactly what they set out to do.  They wanted to plant the seed in the minds of the American people that Obama is not up to the task of being Commander in Chief and that he does not command the respect of the men and women of the uniformed services… from the newest Private E-1 up to the top four-star generals and admirals.

That seed is now firmly planted and it cannot be unplanted.

From this day forward, no one will have to tell the American people that Stanley McChrystal is a true warrior, a man's man, and that Barack Obama is nothing more than a… community organizer.  Well done, General! 

[Bobbo]

I think the photoshopper was spot on!  I spent 23 years in the military and went into harms way even when I didnt fully agree with my governments decision.  Following orders YES!  Thinking stuff like what was in the THOUGHT BUBBLE shopped in the pic.....ABSOLUTELY! 

True obedience is doing what you are supposed to even when you dont agree.....McCrystal did that, hes a hero, he was not insubbordinate.....he made a mistake.......he trusted a repoerter to NOT publish off the record comments, comments that should not have been made? Sure...(most of which were made by the Generals staff)  None the less he was wrong, but he is a military hero and a warrior and deserves the legacy as such. 

If you were to read the UCMJ, Article 91, insubordination includes disrespectful speech towards superiors.  I’m glad there was no court-martial.
 

[Chrisj CMA]

I think the photoshopper was spot on!  I spent 23 years in the military and went into harms way even when I didnt fully agree with my governments decision.  Following orders YES!  Thinking stuff like what was in the THOUGHT BUBBLE shopped in the pic.....ABSOLUTELY! 

True obedience is doing what you are supposed to even when you dont agree.....McCrystal did that, hes a hero, he was not insubbordinate.....he made a mistake.......he trusted a repoerter to NOT publish off the record comments, comments that should not have been made? Sure...(most of which were made by the Generals staff)  None the less he was wrong, but he is a military hero and a warrior and deserves the legacy as such. 

If you were to read the UCMJ, Article 91, insubordination includes disrespectful speech towards superiors.  I’m glad there was no court-martial.
 

I agree, but we are off the original point...........theres no fowl in thinking what the wanna be cartoonist was suggeting, in fact I would bet he was thinking worse by looking at his face in that pic and others while in the oval office

[JimL]

I think the photoshopper was spot on!  I spent 23 years in the military and went into harms way even when I didnt fully agree with my governments decision.  Following orders YES!  Thinking stuff like what was in the THOUGHT BUBBLE shopped in the pic.....ABSOLUTELY!  

True obedience is doing what you are supposed to even when you dont agree.....McCrystal did that, hes a hero, he was not insubbordinate.....he made a mistake.......he trusted a repoerter to NOT publish off the record comments, comments that should not have been made? Sure...(most of which were made by the Generals staff)  None the less he was wrong, but he is a military hero and a warrior and deserves the legacy as such.  

If you were to read the UCMJ, Article 91, insubordination includes disrespectful speech towards superiors.  I’m glad there was no court-martial.
 

Bobbo I respectfully feel that the conclusions that you arrived at within the context of this cartoon are somewhat of a "non sequituir".  I agree with most everything you said, with the possible exception being that the Photoshopper "has absolutely no military experience, along with no understanding of the events that took place".  I see no basis for this conclusion, the Photoshopper obviously was having some fun opining on what might have been going in McChrystal's mind during their meeting.

Clearly the President was within his constitutional authority to dismiss General McChrystal, and it is my personal opinion that he was justified in doing so.  I have yet to hear anyone on this forum or any prominent conservative or liberal in the media disagree on either of these points.

Furthermore, if the conduct established in UCMJ, Article 91 were broken I also agree that a court martial would be in order.  However, an OFF THE RECORD comment by one of the General's staff (or by the General himself) in the presence of a reporter, in my opinion hardly violates that standard.  Although I think we all will agree that it constitutes extremely bad judgment, and would be a basis for dismissal.


Just my humble opinion............

[Scanner]

He was the General who perpetrated the Pat Tillman "killed by the enemy" fraud and should have been dismissed at that time.

And from everything I hear, the grunts on the ground are very pleased he's outta there now.

His dismissal was overdue.

[Bobbo]

I think the photoshopper was spot on!  I spent 23 years in the military and went into harms way even when I didnt fully agree with my governments decision.  Following orders YES!  Thinking stuff like what was in the THOUGHT BUBBLE shopped in the pic.....ABSOLUTELY!  

True obedience is doing what you are supposed to even when you dont agree.....McCrystal did that, hes a hero, he was not insubbordinate.....he made a mistake.......he trusted a repoerter to NOT publish off the record comments, comments that should not have been made? Sure...(most of which were made by the Generals staff)  None the less he was wrong, but he is a military hero and a warrior and deserves the legacy as such.  

If you were to read the UCMJ, Article 91, insubordination includes disrespectful speech towards superiors.  I’m glad there was no court-martial.
 

Bobbo I respectfully feel that the conclusions that you arrived at within the context of this cartoon are somewhat of a "non sequituir".  I agree with most everything you said, with the possible exception being that the Photoshopper "has absolutely no military experience, along with no understanding of the events that took place".  I see no basis for this conclusion, the Photoshopper obviously was having some fun opining on what might have been going in McChrystal's mind during their meeting.

Clearly the President was within his constitutional authority to dismiss General McChrystal, and it is my personal opinion that he was justified in doing so.  I have yet to hear anyone on this forum or any prominent conservative or liberal in the media disagree on either of these points.

Furthermore, if the conduct established in UCMJ, Article 91 were broken I also agree that a court martial would be in order.  However, an OFF THE RECORD comment by one of the General's staff (or by the General himself) in the presence of a reporter, in my opinion hardly violates that standard.  Although I think we all will agree that it constitutes extremely bad judgment, and would be a basis for dismissal.


Just my humble opinion............

Well, if you look at it that way, the words added to the picture could also be considered a non sequitur.  I may not agree with President Obama’s dismissal of General McChrystal, but the captioning suggests that Obama thinks he can run the war better, and is replacing him because of that, which wasn’t the case.  It also belittles the fact of Obama’s lack of military experience, which, is common in our presidential history.  I’m sure any other president would have done the same.

[JimL]

Well, if you look at it that way, the words added to the picture could also be considered a non sequitur.  I may not agree with President Obama’s dismissal of General McChrystal, but the captioning suggests that Obama thinks he can run the war better, and is replacing him because of that, which wasn’t the case.  It also belittles the fact of Obama’s lack of military experience, which, is common in our presidential history.  I’m sure any other president would have done the same.

"I may not agree with President Obama’s dismissal of General McChrystal, but the captioning suggests that Obama thinks he can run the war better, and is replacing him because of that, which wasn’t the case."

(1) I think we can safely say that the intent of the Photoshopper was definitely to suggest that the President felt that he had a better strategy for winning the Afghan engagement.

(2) I also think that we can safely say that the Photoshopper definitely suggested that McChrystal might not think too highly of the President's expertise in this matter.

(3) The humor in this cartoon dealt with what might have been the thoughts of the two parties during a meeting on AF1 in October 2009, 8 months before the world knew of the Rolling Stone article...and certainly before the President dismissed McChrystal.  Assuming there is no temporary warp in the space-time continuum, I fail to see why any intelligent person would think that the humor within the context of this cartoon could deal with an event 8 months in the future...the firing of McChrystal.

Oddly enough (in a tortured sort of way), this makes your first statement true...it would be a "non sequitur" of the highest order; and hopefully there's not too many folks that would arrive to that conclusion.

[Bobbo]

I fail to see why any intelligent person would think that the humor within the context of this cartoon could deal with an event 8 months in the future...the firing of McChrystal.

I would think that an intelligent person would recognize the ambiguity in posting an old captioned photo featuring two prominent people involved in a well publicized recent event.  That same intelligent person might think political posts deal with current events and not with a non-event from the past.

[big turkey]

You may or may not know that this was the First Time he was called home or in the Wood

Shed.

He was called home for making disparaging remarks about the War Effort.

The issue was Troop Strength and the lack thereof.

He said 40,000 in his brief to the President and leaked it to someone.

This is why he should have quit right then and there if he was gonna be treated this way

just because our Commander and Chief( I HATE to say it AS MUCH as some OF YOU DO, but it's true)

could not make a decision in a timely manner to comply with the advice of the front line commander,

 that was asked to make a reccomendation as to this number.

So he chews the guy out for asking for that many I guess.

Quit right then and save his honor  for being called out of Battle for what a Email would have

accomplished.

Big Al

[JimL]

I fail to see why any intelligent person would think that the humor within the context of this cartoon could deal with an event 8 months in the future...the firing of McChrystal.

I would think that an intelligent person would recognize the ambiguity in posting an old captioned photo featuring two prominent people involved in a well publicized recent event.  That same intelligent person might think political posts deal with current events and not with a non-event from the past.

Quite the contrary, an intelligent person would not find it at all ambiguous.  The only thing that an intelligent person would deduct is that the author/Photoshopper:

(1) Probably suspects that General McChrystal does not have much respect for the President's expertise in matters of strategy when it comes to executing a military campaign.
(2) Probably suspects that the President feels that he has valuable political insight that would be valuable in winning the military campaign in Afghanistan, and that political insight possibly equals or trumps the value of the General's military experience.
(3) I think an intelligent person could probably also deduce that the author/Photoshopper probably is not a supporter of the President's policies.

I doubt that there are too many other reasonable inferences that can made from that cartoon.  That having been said, I am sure there are individuals out there that are capable of extrapolating just about any ridiculous inference imaginable...such as

a. The author/Photoshopper has no military experience
b. The author/Photoshopper has no understanding of the events that took place before Gen. McChrystal was relieved of duty. 
c. The author/Photoshopper thinks that the President was not justified in dismissing General McChrystal


I'm certain that we could even find someone who would claim that the author/Photoshopper is suggesting that this meeting was simply cover for a homosexual "affaire de coeur".   I would be reluctant to validate any of these claims by calling them "ambiguous" within the context of this cartoon....and I doubt that they would be the product of a superior intellect.

[fstsix]

Maybe a Dean from some College could make this Administration happy lets start keeping count of these Generals, only 18 months so far  

Harry Reid won't listen to General Petraeus	powered by Aeva

[Skinhead]

but they took a sworn oath to follow orders without question or complaint.  

Our constitution, in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, establishes the President as Commander in Chief of all military forces.  Many may disagree with this decision, but the President was within constitutional authority to take this action.

Your (not mine by choice) president also swore an oath to support the constitution of the US and execute the duties of the POTUS.  I think he is more in violation of his oath.  Can we fire him, along with all the politicians that similarly violated thier oath?

[RoadKill]

but they took a sworn oath to follow orders without question or complaint. 

Our constitution, in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, establishes the President as Commander in Chief of all military forces.  Many may disagree with this decision, but the President was within constitutional authority to take this action.

OUR constitution ...means little if anything to the current POTUS. IMHO of course