It’s not my headline (though I wish I’d thought of it!), but the rest is:
Unruly generals are nothing new. Throughout American history, generals have pushed their own ideas, often to the chagrin of their commanders in chief. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, whom President Obama last month fired, was the latest in a line of generals who found themselves in public disputes with their civilian masters.
From the Fredericksbrug Free Lance-Star
Advertisement
3 comments
July 5, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Colin
Far as I can tell, though, there was no substantial dispute with Obama — McC had won the internal battles over strategy and resources. He and his staff were sore winners.
July 5, 2010 at 3:53 pm
bbstudent
It speaks well for this country and its chosen form of government that all these battles ended with civilian rule coming up on top. What’s odd about this case, as Colin pointed out, was lack of policy disagreement. McClellan would probably gotten away with mocking the President if he delivered on the field, as would MacArthur. Hendrik Hertzberg might be right suggesting that in this day and age the media is acting harsher. I feel this is sloppy staff work on the part of McChrystal- maybe not a fireable offense, but something you shouldn’t bring upon your self by talking to a reporter.
July 7, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Ray Davis
I like Phil Nugent’s answer to “What was McChrystal thinking?”: he thought he was dealing with a normal anti-investigative reporter who would be delighted to keep macho trash-talk off the record.