- Jun 19, 2010
- Reaction score
- Heart of Dixie
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
It was a good statement I felt. I only feel for Patreaus. He's gonna have a fricking heart attack lol.
Name one quote where he went after the president. His only quote was against an ambassador and it hardly rose to contempt.
You really need to read more carefully.
A number of his comments about Obama can be construed as contemptuous. But that's for a military tribunal to decide.
But not by him. The sticky thing about a court martial. You kind of have to to after the guy who actually made the comments. :roll:
Washington Times said:Although the most biting and insubordinate criticisms in the article come from unnamed McChrystal aides, the general himself speaks disrespectfully about the vice president, joking he would answer a question about him: "Joe Biden … who's that?"
Well, that was a play on "good riddance to bad rubbish." Ever heard that one? You're right, he's not rubbish. A better thing to say would have been, "So long you insubordinate prick."That said, believing he should be relieved and agreeing with his feelings on the matter can be seperate issues. Additionally I think its a pathetic attempt for anyone to claim this man is "rubbish" after what he's done for this country and after his military history, when at worst you can fault him for caring too much with regards to the safety of his troops that he broke protocol. Hardly a trait of "rubbish".
Yeah, I realize that, and he did:
You can read the article here. Just because it takes me a couple minutes to find the exact quote doesn't mean it doesn't exist (but hey, what else can you expect from the Fox News school of ambush debate?).
Again, it's for a tribunal to decide if Gen. McChrystal's remarks rose to the level necessary for an article 88 violation, but to say that he made no remarks that could be construed as contemptuous is entirely disingenuous, and defending this insubordinate general, who at the very least permitted a culture of insubordination in his administration, is the worst kind of partisan hackery.
He should've resigned, or been relieved. While there was nothing directly said about Obama there was enough said concerning the strategy and administration of the Commander in Chief that he created a situation where there was really no other reasonable answer to expect. You just don't speak in such a manner, even if not specifically about the CiC, and it was idiotic for the interview to have been allowed to happen in the first place.
That said, believing he should be relieved and agreeing with his feelings on the matter can be seperate issues. Additionally I think its a pathetic attempt for anyone to claim this man is "rubbish" after what he's done for this country and after his military history, when at worst you can fault him for caring too much with regards to the safety of his troops that he broke protocol. Hardly a trait of "rubbish".
I can't wait for the General Betrayus ad's to obviously start being posted by MoveOn.org now that Obama has him taking over, I mean, since he's such a pathetic liar and betrayer of the American People and all...
or maybe that was only the case when Bush was in office.
Well, that was a play on "good riddance to bad rubbish." Ever heard that one? You're right, he's not rubbish. A better thing to say would have been, "So long you insubordinate prick."
Defend him all you like, but avoiding criticism of the commander-in-chief is a sacred duty for our military officers. He failed. If he's capable of this kind of indiscretion he isn't the kind of man we need leading such a crucial military theatre.
Please. Thats not even close for a court martial. A sanction possibly but Article 88 was clearly for deliberate and excessive insubordinate behavior
:roll: Yeah, so I guess a four star general badmouthing the commander-in-chief to a Rolling Stone reporter is within the limits of "acceptable insubordinate" behavior? And if you're talking about a sanction over an Article 88 violation, where are your facts? Show me the black letter law and maybe you'll persuade me.
Can you link to his exact quotes of his "badmouthing the CiC" and specifically quote what you are talking about? Thanks.
You made the hillariously ironic comment above about the "worst kind of partisan hackery". Well, let me say its wonderful to meet you Mr. Pot, because I'd say someone claiming that an individual is a "prick" based on nothing but a joking response to a question regarding the Vice President that is not slanderous nor attacking and second hand heresay interprited by unnamed aides simply because of their own political ideology while completely and wholey ignoring the decades of military service ranks right up there.