tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post3780937684127561239..comments2023-03-16T07:15:20.776-05:00Comments on The Cool Hot Center: The President’s McChrystal OpportunitySteve Lawsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15637858560077832595noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-62115550240832657082010-06-25T08:06:31.213-05:002010-06-25T08:06:31.213-05:00The question I last posed, Steverino, isn't wh...The question I last posed, Steverino, isn't whether the President should tolareate insubordination but - whre's the insubordination? I read the Rolling Stone peice, word for word, some of it twice, and I don't see it. Do you? The article trashes the general, not Obama. <br />As for Norman Schwartzkopf, he did in fact implicitly critize his Prez - Geo H W - when he told a reporter that "we could have made it [Gulf War I] a war of annihilation but the Presdient didn't want one," and it reportedly cost him a fifth star and got him an early retirement. So I stand by my statement about generals' patriotic duty to speak out - they have a higher calling to their country than simply kowtowing to whoever won the latest popularity contest at the national polls. (And as you point out, the size of the popular vote is irrelevant.)<br />As for "a subordinate's critial comments to a media representative not under any obligation of confidentiality," isn;t that what the New York Times and the Washington Post spend most of their news pages publishing? It happens all the time in Washington. Maybe you should move there and impose a gag order, along with becomong BOB's new speechwriter!<br /><br />Big Fan, Big AppleAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-9129078536088957942010-06-25T02:29:01.189-05:002010-06-25T02:29:01.189-05:00Apple, thanks as always. Love getting the NY poin...Apple, thanks as always. Love getting the NY point of view on things.<br /><br />But oh, Apple: Military gots lots more guns than drug dealers.<br /><br />Of course the President is constitutionally the commander in chief, but the constitution does not prohibit insubordination. (Nor, in its present state of interpretation by the Supreme Court, regrettably the only interpretation that currently matters and the only one that has since, I believe, 1803 (Marbury v. Madison), is it likely to prohibit any of the other things on your list, as little as we may like it.) <br /><br />I respectfully disagree that any commander has a "patriotic duty" to air his distaste or disagreement for his commander to anyone other than his superiors, with the possible exception of disclosure of treason by the commander. If you will go back and read your "patriotic duty" sentence, it appears that you are saying that what McChrystal said was so urgent measured by quantum-of-patriotism that it was worth killing his career and command over. It wasn't. It was merely stupid and insubordinate. Would General Notman Schartzkopf have had the "patriotic duty" to say that George W. Bush was a dithering ninmy and Karl Rove an ignorant Svengali if he believed that to be the case?<br /><br />Look, I don't care for this President, but all newly-elected presidents are tyros. Obama has indeed done a conspicuously poor job of training himself in the kind of leadership the country expects and that the military requires. But those forms -- that is, the forms of civilian control of the military -- are important. This guy was elected decisviely (and it wouldn't have made any difference if he hadn't been, see, e.g., GWBush), and he's the Commander in Chief, and if his sub-commanders don't like it, the solution is not to gossip to writers about the guy and his lame colleagues, but either to bring misgivings to the commander's attention, or to resign your commission if you cannot serve while showing the appropriate public respect. Consider your own workplace experience: Would a subordinate's critial comments to a media representative not under any obligation of confidentiality be tolerated for one day? Nope -- the blabber would be gonzo before cocktail hour. McChrystal's failure to recognize that, his failure to perceive that there's a world out there beyond those under his command, is an excellent reason why we HAVE civilian control over the military. <br /><br />We must not let our powerful suspicion that we have a really, really bad president obscure our need to observe, yes, the "forms" of civilian control of the military in this country. And that is true whether the military up and down the ranks likes or dislikes the commander, or whether anyone else does. General McChrystal's remarks added zero to the sum total of what we know about this president -- but it added terabytes to what we know about McChrystal. Unless Obama were going to use the occasion to give the sublime speech I so carefully composed for him, the General had to go and go quickly.<br /><br />My post was intended not to support McChrystal, but to illustrate a way of governing that could redound to our elected president's benefit, and, if believed those fine words I wrote for him, to the country's. <br /><br />Apple, you got me going. Keep writing in and keep being the Apple Fan of The Cool Hot Center.Steve Lawsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15637858560077832595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-59408581573858447612010-06-24T21:52:28.853-05:002010-06-24T21:52:28.853-05:00OK, now I've read the RS article and McChrysta...OK, now I've read the RS article and McChrystal comes across as an ass (if that's the same as a jerk) but NOT as insubordinate; in fact, most of what's been attributed to him in the rest of the press doesn't come from him at all. SO where's the insubordination? Waht;s your take? Big AppleAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-60445547994362128182010-06-24T16:02:13.246-05:002010-06-24T16:02:13.246-05:00Ah, so the military "must serve the civilian ...Ah, so the military "must serve the civilian leadership, and it must scrupulously observe the forms for doing so" -- and why is that? Because "it has guns"? Methinks not. Drug dealers have guns. The reason is that the Constitution says so - the same Constitution, by the way, that the individual mandate of Obamacare violates and that says that the President has no authority to hire or fire the CEO of General Motors, or to take over GM, or to tand the bankruptcy laws on their head while doing so, or to tell BP how much it must pay to whom, or to shut down drilling inthe Gulf of Mexico, or ... well, you get the idea. <br /><br />Like the President, every general takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution, against enemies both foreign and domestic. McChrystal had a patriotic duty to speak out when he thinks the President is wrong, even though it meant sacrificing his career and I, for one, salute him for it. <br /><br />I also disagree that this engenders sympathy for Obama; it just shows once again how little respect the military has for Presidents who like to fly around in Air Force One in their little "Commander in Chief" jackets while having no experience, little understanding, and only minimal respect for the military, like Clinton before Obama.<br /><br />I mean, how condescending and patronizing was it when Obama first stepped on board Air Force One and said to the pilot "That's exactly what I want the pilot of Air Force One to look like"? What would have been the reaction if John Roberts had said at BOB's swearing-in, "That's just what I want a President to look like"?<br /><br />Obama looks smaller every day in office. He really should hire you as a speech writer if he doesn't want to wind up being Jimmy Carter II.<br /><br />Your Big Fan in the Big AppleAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-3724866808581013412010-06-23T14:43:58.751-05:002010-06-23T14:43:58.751-05:00Anonymous Apple: McChrystal is undoubtedly a patr...Anonymous Apple: McChrystal is undoubtedly a patriot, but undoubtedly also an ass. As little as one may respect Obama, he is still President Obama, and it will not do to have even highly competent military authorities voicing public disrespect. As long as the President isn't going to take my advice on what to say, then McChrystal probably has to go. Whoops, looks like he's already gone.<br /><br />Also, consider that having disloyal commanders -- disloyal government lifers of any kind -- engenders sympathy for Obama in his attempt to get anything done. It is true that it seems like most of the country, including leaders in his own party, grumble about him behind his back. <br /><br />But the military is a different bird. It has guns. It must serve the civilian leadership, and it must scrupulously observe the forms of doing so.<br /><br />As always, AA, thanks for checking in and for your kind words.Steve Lawsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15637858560077832595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-73928558059629083982010-06-23T14:34:48.574-05:002010-06-23T14:34:48.574-05:00Steve G: Be honest with you, not sure that Afghan...Steve G: Be honest with you, not sure that Afghanistan isn't an intractable situation. Doesn't have Iraq's infrastructure (!) and stability (!) that will enable any modern power to impose any kind of a solution. Soviet Union found that out. Maybe we should. Not that adding a Marine or two to the mix won't improve about any situation. Semper.Steve Lawsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15637858560077832595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-39951910339112644152010-06-23T07:51:13.932-05:002010-06-23T07:51:13.932-05:00Steverino: As always, some stuff to agree with an...Steverino: As always, some stuff to agree with and some not. Agree: mcChrystal acted insubordinately, and (2) Obama should kepp him on. (Great speech, by the way, but Obama will never give it.). Disagree: Obama is not that bright and he does not command respect, even among civilians and Democrats. Look at what both Harry Reid and Joe Biden said about him ("clean," "doesn't speak with Negro dialect except when he wants to") and where are they today? Consider the possibility that McChrystal is not an "ass" but a patriot who is willing to sacrifice himself and his career for his country, to get the word out from a credible source through a left-leaning mouthpiece rather than, say, National Review.<br />But Keep on blogging, my man, and I'll keep reading. Your big fan in the Big Apple.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2079366795444743478.post-74857809895883982022010-06-23T07:33:40.238-05:002010-06-23T07:33:40.238-05:00Good analysis. But wrong bottom line. The only rig...Good analysis. But wrong bottom line. The only right answer is put a Marine general in charge, have Army units in Afghanistan report to USMC, and bring Matthew Hoh, Capt, USMC ret., back into the action. Then maybe we can get our Afghan strategy un-freaked.Steve Galebachnoreply@blogger.com