Stanley McChrystal: Obama And I Have Only Talked Once

Washington Times:

The military general credited for capturing Saddam Hussein and killing the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq says he has only spoken to President Obama once since taking command of Afghanistan.

Read the whole story: Washington Times

Comments

[DavidDial]

I don't know LTG McChrystal's exact chain of command but there are at least three levels between him and his Commander in Chief, President Obama...Ge­neral Petraeus, Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates. I spent a year as a 1LT, Platoon Commander in Vietnam and spoke to my Squadron Commander a handful of times. There was one officer in the chain of command between us, my Troop Commander. I spoke to him almost daily. That is the way the chain of command works. For reasons known only to himself, LTG McChrystal has gone outside the chain of command. He should be hoping that the next time he hears from his Commander in Chief he isn't being relieved of his command.

[themidnightreview]

Chain of command doesn't make good news, but ignoring a general makes a far interesting story for the conservative blogosphere, where a sitting Democratic President is presiding over a war, where Republicans generally dominate..­. commentators only needed a push in the right direction to "prove" that Obama is another sissy liberal, yet I am sure any result would be a negative for the president.

If he fails, he didn't act quick enough. If he succeeds, it was because of conservative policies..­.

----------­----------­----------­--------
http://www.themidnightreview.com

[William McElgin]

Mullen is not in the chain of command. His role is as the principal military advisor to the President. He does not issue orders. The Chain goes Obama->Gat­es->Petrae­us->McChry­stal.

[JXJASON]

A dumb comment from this general. A dumb article too.

[cimbri]

He's eating danishes in beautiful Europe, he doesn't have time to talk to the theatre commander of Afghanistan.

[ibsteve2u]

It would be kind of awkward, to be the CIC and have to talk to Gen. Stanley McChrystal a lot...all while pretending that you didn't know about the Tillman affair.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/new_afghanistan_commander_had_role_in_tillman_frie.php

[Cynth]

The Washington Times? Please, HuffPo, it's like you're not even trying. Of all the sources that have reported on this news item, you choose to link to the Washington Times? How about linking to 60 Minutes: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/24/60minutes/main5335445.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody (see page 4)?

[Lutfi]

Chain of Command, 1- General in Afghanistan, 2- USCENTCOM, 3- Joint Chief of Staff , 4- Secretary of Defence, 4 - Commander in Chief, know the General should have known that, and also the reporter of Washington Time, but when your hart is dark and no blood flow , you say anything to spreat the gospel .

[Cynth]

Cosigned. And The President also gets weekly memos directly from McChrystal.

[William McElgin]

Mullen is not in the chain of command. His role is as the principal military advisor to the President. He does not issue orders. The Chain goes Obama->Gat es->Petrae us->McChry stal.

[LeftLeanWing]

Dear Huffington Post ....

Please do not extract Headlines and Articles from the Right-Leaning Washington Times.

[lonemoderate]

Half the comments here are nothing short of appalling.

General McChrystal is a highly decorated, highly intelligent officer who has done his utmost to help provide a genuine counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan. He has gone as far as issuing unpopular orders that put American soldiers directly in harms way to avoid civilian casualties, that have been largely accepted only due to the tremendous respect and admiration he commands.

To have a bunch of ...... (I'm going to leave it to your imagination to avoid being moderated) ... second guessing his dedication and patriotism from the comfort of their computers is despicable, period.

If a President puts the lives of his soldiers in harms way, I believe the least he can do is to do all he can to ensure they are fighting on a workable strategy. Part of that means talking to your generals.

I am not Obama-bashing here. I would say this for any President, Democrat or Republican. But that Obama overtly atleast shows such little attention towards the military, may explain his abysmal support within their ranks.

It is time for him to come through on the most important campaign promise he made - to help our soldiers win in Afghanistan. Part of that is getting them the resources and help they need and that can only be done by communicating with the man that oversees and develops that strategy.

[bigsioux]

Bravo. A voice of reason.

[JXJASON]

Win what?, lonemoderate.

There is nothing in Afghanistan that I want. There will always be terrorists in the world and the US is not going to succeed in being the policeman for the world.

All these wars have cost us many lives and Trillions of dollars.

Bring our troops home and stop spending money in all these countries. The manpower and money can be used for better border security and to reduce our deficits.

[DavidDial]

You don't seem to understand the way the chain of command works or why it is enforced so stringently. A junior person, if he wishes to speak to a senior person other than his immediate superior asks his immediate superior for permission to do so. A senior person can order a junior person to speak but would send the order down the chain of command and normally conduct any meeting that ensued in the presence of the intermediate commanders involved. It is a far more efficient way to communicate and avoids stepping on toes. Your criticism of the President is off base. If anyone is subject to criticism here it is LTG McChrystal for subverting the chain of command by discussing matters of strategy and tactics in a public forum.

[lonemoderate]

You don't seem to understand that a Theater Commander would only talk to the press outside his theater if directly ordered to do so.

He may have gone off message, but the point is he was clearly put front and center to advocate the message that Afghanistan is a winnable war and the Administration and the military are on track to defeat the Taliban.

He instead candidly stated facts rather than political rhetoric as one would hope every military officer would do. It just so happens that those facts complicate the Administration's political position which is why he is being so publicly dressed down.

So no, he did not circumvent chain of command in expressing his views, he circumvented chain of command in expressing a certain segment of views that the Administration would have rather he expressed privately.

[LeftLeanWing]

This is why Progressive Lose......

Here on a supposedly Progressive Site....

We have a comment from a General complete taken out of context ..... just to imply that President Obama is neglecting to talk to the Commander in AfPak.... or dropping the ball.

A Conservative Site would have never Ever done this ..... yet this type of Headline Reporting to make Obama look bad is routine...­.

Everyday Obama has to fight the Republicans .... almost alone...
Now he has to defend himself against US too !

[dillydawg]

And you have also noticed. Research more and you'll be surprised as to who they really serve..

[jay1975]

So many here crying about the General, but shouldn't the President, as CinC, be seeking out info from the commander on the ground?

[LeftLeanWing]

Actually there is a Chain-Of-Command in place....

McChrystal reports to Petraus who reports to Def Sec. Gates who reports to President Obama


Obama should NOT be talking with him on a regular bases as it might disempower Petraues and/or Gates.

[MaximMaximus]

Obviously you do not know how the military works. Ever heard of the chain of command? The General in question is supposed to talk to his immediate commanding officer who happens to be General Petraus, who, in turn, reports to teh Secretary Gates who is reponsible for all DoD activities to the President.

[XPat Lib]

Like Fox, the WP is positioning this story in order to put Obama in the worst possible light. HP's story should be about that. A headline like "Washington Post Suggests Obama is Neglecting Afghanistan" would be more appropriate.

[KIVPossum]

Maybe there is a chain of command. However, considering the situation, I'd think a Commander in Chief would talk to the district manager occasionally.

[GravitonX]

Disgruntled general who goes to the press to pressure the Commander. Sad.

[jrb35]

No, he didn't. I watched the 60 Minutes interview. Did you? Gen. McChrystal was asked by the reporter how many times he had spoken to Pres. Obama since taking command. He answered truthfully and without spin. He didn't bring it up or use it as a chance to score political points.

[SamEllison]

Yes, we now have a chain of command.

And we are paying the price now for the
surge into Baghdad that neglected our effort in Afghanistan.

[wizegeye]

Very few people posting here probably saw the 60 Minutes interview. If they did, the would know that General McChrystal was very respectful and didn't come across as complaining in the interview. He answered the reporters questions and was very "as a matter of fact" with his answers. There didn't appear to be any animus is his responses. Also, General McChrystal is very well respected by his troops and the people that have worked with him.

[Jaywalkker]

That's what I was wondering. This blurb certainly didn't continue with McCrystal lamenting the lack of direct communication or saying anything specifically negative due to it. I'm taking this as misleading headline and misleading article all together. McCrystal has to be in constant communication with SecDef Gates and others.

That being said, Obama heading to the IOC instead of Afghanistan or taking that time for another VTC or roundtable regarding the Afghanistan report is disconcerting to say the least.

[wizegeye]

All excellent points.

[Cynth]

Yep. And here's the link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/24/60minutes/main5335445.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

[SassySafrine]

What does this creep think? That he has instant access to the President of the United States and Commander and Chief? Go through the chain of Command. Talk to Gates and if he thinks you have something useful, he will go through the chain of Command.

Also, you wrote your report, get over the childishless or quit.

[wizegeye]

I watched the interview. General McChrystal was just answering the reporters question. The reporter asked the general how often he spoke with Pres Obama and the general responded to the question. The general didn't indicate that it was a problem or that it bothered him. The media and political pundits seem to be the ones making a big deal about this.

[Chicagofan1]

The only creep here is you, degenerate SassySafrine.

[hidenout]

You didn't watch the interview. Save your comments till then.

[jay1975]

Sec Gates is in no ones chain of command.