The Case of the Whining General, Stanley McChrystal

The most awesome responsibility a President has is Commander-in-Chief. His decisions are life or death, he could waste enough money to bring the country to it's knees, and he could leave all of us one helluva lot less secure than being in Cheney's undisclosed location.

It takes intelligence, patience, and the ability to make the big calls. Going into our ninth meat-grinding year, we've had ample evident of what can happen when Commanders-in-Chief are chickenhawks and/or incompetent.

We're slowly leaving Iraq, though so slow and bumptiously it'll be long after Obama is gone that we're free of that crapulent kingdom. And when the last PFC turns out the battle lamp, we'll have wasted enough money to make health reform look like a trip to the dime store and produced enough bodies to fill Arlington 100 times over.

Without very permanent support Iraq will, unfortunately, be little changed from the days of Saddam. And "the right war" in Afghanistan? It'll end ten times worse then Iraq for everyone - poppy farmers and Presidents alike.

One of the biggest elephants in the Afghan war room is General Stanley McChrystal, head honcho on the ground. McChrystal's no dummy. He's shown himself to be a capable leader (minus his involvement in the despicable Pat Tillman affair), but he may suffer from what many people who can walk on water do - extreme irritation when his advice is questioned.

Both Bush and Obama pledged to, "listen to the generals on the ground" while constantly shopping for ones that told a more pleasing story. However, it's the President's prerogative to do what he thinks is right - whether it's stupid or strokes the Generals' ego or not. It is the Generals' duty to say "yes sir", do a crisp about face, and make it happen.

But what isn't a prerogative is McChrystal's taking the argument public and the Oboistas returning the favor. If we expect to keep our military on a leash instead of at our throats - like, ummm, Saddam - the public politicking must stop and civilians must be firmly in charge. Generals are supposed to give advice, not set policy. To keep a democracy a democracy, our military can't be one.

Bush 43 - and now Bush 44-To-Be - allowed the back talk to go on to the detriment of the country. It's time for Obama to tell the good general to shut his yap and for McChrystal to act like the soldier he is supposed to be and restict his bellyaching to the interior of the Oval Office. Perhaps Obama should be more Trumanesque and tell McChrystal he's planning a MacArthur Day party for him at the Pentagon - BYOB, Bring Your Own Battle.

After 8 years of silence, there should be a whole lot of brainstorming over how we quantify "winning" and then some more about how to get there - or even if we can't get there.

Like most Generals, I assume McChrystal is well-versed in history. That background should tell him a lot about how to define "winning" in Afghanistan.

He should be aware that the scrubland currently occupied by the modern Islamic Republic of Afghanistan has never been successfully governed. Ironically, it's strongest leaders may have been the Taliban. You can whip people into a scared shitless state if you're mean enough and it would take a mean sumbitch like the world has never seen to tame Afghanistan. With a fashionable, goat skin cap wearing sycophant in charge, we don't stand a chance. My bet is we don't stand a chance without him either.

So General McChrystal, it's time to start relying more on history and less on the Pentagon's capable PR bureau. A little more talk about informing policy and a little less on arguing with your superior officers in public.

We'll all be better off if you did.

Cross posted at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!