Trump Says Stanley McChrystal Has A “Big, Dumb Mouth”
BY Herschel Smith
6 years, 2 months ago
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump tweeted to gripe about comments retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal made Sunday to ABC News.
Asked whether he would work for the president, McChrystal, the former top commander of U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan, explained why he would not, calling Trump “shady” and “immoral.”
“It’s important for me to work for people who I think are basically honest, who tell the truth as best they know it,” McChrystal said, suggesting that the president has been, at times, “openly disingenuous on things.”
Trump didn’t take the criticism well, based on this reaction on Twitter.
This is an idiotic response from a reactionary man who obviously isn’t a thinker and knows nothing about history. So let me give a much better response.
Stanley McChrystal is a murderer.
But the irony is that McChrystal, who issued the most restrictive rules of engagement ever promulgated on American troops, waxes know-it-all on what it takes to keep our people safe. He can micromanage the campaign, release a bunch of inept, bureaucratic, PowerPoint jockeys into highly protected mega-bases to command the troops under fire in the field, turn so-called general purpose troops into constabulary patrolmen, and become a laughingstock when his juvenile staff turned party-animal with Rolling Stone. But he didn’t manage the campaign in such a manner as to keep our children in uniform safe in Afghanistan. If he didn’t do that, why should I care what he has to say about anything else regarding my safety?
This is what happens when media stars think they know something about policy. So here is a suggestion for Mr. McChrystal. You go read the lamentations at this article from the families and widows of SFC Kenneth Westbrook, Gunnery Sgt Aaron M Kenefick, Corpsman James Ray “Doc” Layton, and others in the Ganjgal engagement. You know the one I’m talking about, even if others have forgotten. You and I will never forget. The one where they left our men to perish without fire support because of your rules of engagement. You sleep with this reality, if you can, you ponder on those men and their lives morning and night, and you lament with the widows and families. And then you tell me why I should give a shit what you have to say about anything, much less what it takes to keep my children or loved ones safe?
McChrystal and his ROE left good men at Ganjgal to perish, while the ring-knockers at Joyce sipped their coffee, or played video games, or whatever they did.
That’s the response Trump should have given. Since I’m having to do Trump’s work for him and bring up the real issues while he plays little child, where do I send the bill? My rate for emergency and exigent support is $450/Hr.
On January 2, 2019 at 1:22 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Herschel
Happy New Year to you….
Your summation of General McChrystal’s dishonesty, flaws, and venality is apt, but might just as well apply to General David Petraeus, another general/flag officer whose commissioning oath apparently meant nothing to him and who was only too-willing to sell out for prestige and easy money.
Not long ago, both officers came out in public for gun control and against the private ownership of firearms. By doing so, both men betrayed their respective oaths to uphold, protect and defend the U.S. Constitution and the republic for which it once stood.
Far from being the great military leaders they have been sold as by a fawning media, both men have revealed themselves as what the late Colonel David Hackworth called “perfumed princes,” bureaucrats clothed in general officer’s uniforms. Careerists willing to sell out their men, their oaths and the nation they swore an oath to protect. Truly contemptible.
Petraeus also sold out his wife and family by conducting a more-or-less open and notorious affair with a female colleague.
Petraeus, last seen working for KKR’s Global Institute, lobbying on behalf of the Sunni Arab oil states on the “virtues” of doing business with Qatar and Saudi Arabia – “went native” as the British used to say in old Afghanistan, and may have converted to Islam. As the very least, he has proven he is a true mercenary for sale to the highest bidders – even if they happen to be the oldest enemies of our civilization.
On January 2, 2019 at 9:04 am, JoeFour said:
So how do we end up with the generals we end up with? Here’s one West Point grad’s observations (aptly summarized in the title to his article):
https://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-blog-about-military-matters/60879683-the-u-s-military-s-marathon-30-year-single-elimination-suck-up-tournament-or-how-america-selects-its-generals
On January 2, 2019 at 3:52 pm, Bram said:
He forgot “”statist”.
Can anyone make the leap to General Officer these days who doesn’t have the correct political opinions? Even Mattis believes in global warming, women in combat units, and globalist alliances that never quite work out in American interests.
On January 2, 2019 at 6:33 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Bram
“Statists,” indeed…. both Petraeus and MyChrystal qualify on that count as well. Part and parcel of being kept-men of the deep-state, a.k.a. “perfumed princes”…
On January 2, 2019 at 7:26 pm, June J said:
CINC has to get smarter about responding to these retired officers who are openly insulting and questioning his policies.
Recall McCrystal to active duty and prosecute him under the UCMJ.
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
On January 2, 2019 at 10:26 pm, Herschel Smith said:
@GeorgiaBoy,
I’ve covered Petraeus extensively. I just don’t have it in that category for whatever reason. It’s in the McChrystal category.
On January 3, 2019 at 1:41 pm, Gryphon said:
Just another Filthy War-Pig bereft of Morals or Scruples, “Playing” War for Personal Gain and Glory. Why Anyone with a Fraction of a Brain would Enlist in this “Military” escapes Me, except for to be a Mercenary….
“Generals gathered in their masses,
Just like Witches at Black Masses.
Evil Minds that Plot Destruction,
Sorcerers of Death’s Construction”
That Drug-Addled Englishman sure had a Way of Describing things…
On January 3, 2019 at 11:12 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Herschel
Re: “I’ve covered Petraeus extensively. I just don’t have it in that category for whatever reason. It’s in the McChrystal category.”
Hey, organize things however you like – it’s your blog!
Moreover, since I hold both men in about the same low regard, going after McChrystal is just as good as going after Petraeus. Both are deserving of the contempt of good men.
One final thing: I finally had the time to re-read your original post on McChrystal (dated1 Jan 19), and they were positively epic. It is a shame Trump is the one who will have to call him on the carpet instead of you. You really ripped into McChrystal and justifiably so. Goodness knows someone ought to! As the Marines say, you really know how to “blow some smoke”!
On January 4, 2019 at 5:13 am, DAN III said:
ALCON,
Flag officers = globalist political hacks. Mattis being the latest warmongering, flag officer globalist to get the heave-ho.
I have seldom had any use for commissioned officers above company grade.
On January 5, 2019 at 1:44 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Dan III
Re: “Flag officers = globalist political hacks. Mattis being the latest warmongering, flag officer globalist to get the heave-ho. I have seldom had any use for commissioned officers above company grade.”
To paraphrase the great WEB Griffin, “Warriors interfere with the smooth functioning of the peacetime military”
Strictly speaking it isn’t peacetime since our forces are deployed and engaged in various places, but that hasn’t stopped the perfumed princes from doing what they do best.
There are a few genuine warriors and patriots out there in the ranks of the field grades and above, but it is very tough to get promoted – especially across the vast gulf between full Colonel/Naval Captain and the flag/general officer ranks without being – as you aptly-termed it – a “globalist political hack,” since all promotions to that level must be approved by Congress.
The present selection-and-promotion system actively selects against the very kind of men who we ought to have in the most-senior leadership positions of our armed forces. Only under the pressure of an ongoing “hot” war do well-qualified personnel sometimes make it past these roadblocks – and usually then only because the hacks have lost some battles and needlessly gotten some good men killed.