President Obama is living proof. He is a petty, petulant man who has failed every test since becoming president. So the child-caesar fired the general. Good enough, but he had to drag him halfway around the world (where he was leading tens of thousands of America's finest) to publicly kick him when he was down. Must've been a real ego builder.
Here is the true test of these two men
Stanley McChrystal, stripped of his command and military rank, will still be a battle-tested man of cast iron character and a rock-solid American hero. Barack Obama, once he vacates the presidency, will be nothing but a self-absorbed man whose only accomplishments were fooling some of the people one time and winning an anticipatory Nobel Prize.
For the conspiratorial-minded, here are three thoughts...
General McChrystal did not really vote for Obama; they were just playing the Rolling Stone reporter.
The Rolling Stone reporter did this all on purpose to poison the military-press relationship. Since 9/11, even liberal reporters have gained a grudging respect for our troops, often writing glowing reports about them while still criticizing the wars they fight. That's over now. No embed will ever be the same again, and that's how the liberals want it.
Obama demoted General Petraeus (the Afghanistan commander falls under CENTCOM) to take him out of the 2012 Presidential Campaign equation.
18 comments:
The President used the excuse of breaking ranks. Never happened as McChrystal never said anything directly negative about Obama. It's Biden who wants the President to take another approach on Afgan. That being counter terrorism, which has proven not to work and takes less time, so to get the troops out with in the time table this administration wants. McChrystal wants to win with counter insurgency, Obama/Biden wants to please their liberal left base.
Its all got to do with politics. In war, politics needs to take a back seat.
Of course, Obama doesn't know this unless his 'campaign' staff tells him what he should do.
If this country puts a military man in the White House as president would we have endless wars without borders like RZ calls them? God I hope our country NEVER does that! I don't care how honorable a general in the army is, I don't want him for a president.
Good psd for the smallest of men.
This man Oilbama makes me sick to my stomach, and I see this as an attempt to diminish General Patraeus putting him in a no win situation to also wear him down and damage him for a presidential run.
THEY THINK.
He turns that around he's a two termer.
Fourth conspiracy theory.
McChrystal wanted out, has lost all faith in the administration and wanted to send a message. If he had resigned first, he would not have had an interview. I refuse to believe that a man of his record could have such a serious lapse in judgement along with his staff.
I've thought the same thing about Petraeus and 2012
@Sue, Presidents Washington, Eisenhower, Grant, Jackson, Harrison, Taylor, Hayes, Garfield, Pierce, and Harrison were all generals who served in combat
Presidents Jefferson, Madison, Polk, Teddy Roosevelt, and Harry truman were all colonels, with Roosevelt and Truman serving in combat.
Presidents Johnson and Nixon were Naval Commanders (res) and fought in WWII
Presidents Monroe & Gerald Ford were Majors/LT. CMDrs and saw combat. Ford in WWII, Monroe in Revolution
JFK, Carter, and Reagan were all o3's (captains or lieutenants)
Of course, Clinton and Obama never served. You know, Clinton with all his honor and honesty.
People who have seen war and death know the price our military pays and would be less likely to engage in meaningless wars. Being in the armed forces does not make you a war monger. It makes you self sacrificing.
Your fear and disdain of the armed services does you an enormous discredit in my book.
>People who have seen war and death know the price our military pays and would be less likely to engage in meaningless wars.
Exactly.
In addition, it wasn't the military that made Vietnam, for example, take nine years longer than it should have then pulled the troops out to let the communists ("liberals") invade the south and massacre a couple million people. It was the politicians. Members of the military want to get in there, get it done, and go home. Career politicians are essentially the only ones who play the moronic games that lead to endless and/or meaningless war. Democrat politicians have been especially active in that field, of course.
I agree with KOOKS' 4th theory and his take on Sues (lets say less than educated) comment.
What nonsense you write.
I also agree with KOOK'S 4th possibility.
As for Sue's comment... a great job of educating her.
good points made and kudos to Kook and Bastiartarian for telling it like it is,something the liberals have an aversion to.
It is embarrassing to our nation and for the general. I wish he would have resigned his commission before the petty, petulant president forced him to.
Kook, spot on my friend!
Good stuff, Kurt. All I know is we're just occupying space in Afghanistan until the Failure in Chief pulls us out next year.
Now you know why our nation is in such a hell of a mess.
Let us just hope and pray that when this dope leaves office, all Americans will soon forget he even existed.
Failure in chief..love that one..spot on Silver! Adversity does not build character, it reveals it..ah yes!
Rock Solid "Hero" McChrystal covered up Pat Tillman's death for political expediency...
Awesome, keep venerating liars!
Anything to keep the attention off of this failure of a president, Gene.
Keep up the good work Grung_e!
Post a Comment