Friday, June 25, 2010

McChrystal- A Different Take

Forgive the ever-cynical Green Eagle for this take on the McChrystal firing, but as usual, I fear that not just the mainstream media, but everyone has missed the real story here. This is my account of what I think really happened.

I've been reading some books lately about World War I, which I never knew too much about. The early years of the war were filled with an unending series of failures, on all sides, by generals. The Germans in their initial attack on France, both the French and the English in their response, the Russians in their sweep through Poland, the Austrians every chance they got, the Turks in their pathetic winter assault on Russia, across the Carpathians, and their attempt to attack Egypt through the Sinai peninsula- every step was marked by generals making promises which they spectacularly failed to keep, and which, in the aggregate, resulted in the stalemate and slaughter that followed. And this failure was accompanied by attempts by all of the generals involved to cast the blame on anyone but themselves.

Well, I think that is what McChrystal was facing in Afghanistan. We all know that the Taliban is not being diminished, that our "war" in Afghanistan is going down the same road that it went down for seven years of Bush Administration mismanagement- i.e. that McChrystal's grand strategy has failed.

I believe that McChrystal made a decision that he would rather be removed for a minor "indiscretion" in talking to the wrong reporter, than to be kicked out and humiliated for being a total failure as a general, and so he deliberately found a way to bait Obama to the point that he was relieved of duty. Now, he gets to play Douglas McArthur, and be a hero to the right, rather than slinking away in shame, and he gets to leave his mess to be cleaned up by someone else.

You don't get to be a four-star general without demonstrating considerable talent at manipulation, and I think this was a fine example.


mastercynic said...

Better to be thought stupid than incompetent? Tough choice, but I can see it. It struck me as career suicide- and maybe it was. Doesn't seem as honorable as the way a Roman (or Japanese) general paid for failure, but our military has always been more political than anyone wants to admit. Anyway, he's certainly set himself up for a long career in Republican politics - stupid AND incompetent fit right in.

Green Eagle said...

Well, better anyway to have made one mistake than to be seen as being utterly incompetent at his whole life's work.

At least MacArthur had the sense to fade chance we will have that kind of luck with this rat.

Anonymous said...

Funny, there are people on the right saying the same thing.

I'm an occam's razor guy. I think it was simple stupidity.

mastercynic said...

MacArthur was many things, aome of which could be kindly described as despicable, but I don't know many who would call him an incompetent military tactician.

Green Eagle said...

No, you're right, Mastercynic. I referred to MacArthur because so many right wingers are comparing McChrystal to him today. I guess I didn't make that clear. My point was not about MacArthur at all, but rather about the insane delusions of grandeur that have been circulating in the right wing world ever since they decided that taking out the pathetic tinhorn dictator Saddam was right up there with beating the Nazis.