Surely he should have known that if Obama did not fire him he would look like 
a wuss. Surely too he should have known that no president can allow a general 
to look like the boss rather than the commander in chief. The language in the 
article is so strong, mocking, and insulting not just to Obama but to many top 
officials and even to the mission ISAF that there is no way Obama could do 
anything but relieve him of his duties. I doubt that McChrystal had showing he 
was boss in mind. Anyway Obama and McChrystal do not really disagree about 
policy. What on earth motivation would he have to show Obama that he was boss. 
Obama went along with his policy and his request for troops as much as he could.


Cheers, ken hanly 


Blog:  http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html
Blog:  http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html



----- Original Message ----
From: Jim Devine <[email protected]>
To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, June 23, 2010 5:20:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Why did McChrystal want to be fired.

it could have been a matter of daring Obama to fire him -- and then if
O doesn't do it, McChrystal has shown "who's boss."

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:31 PM, ken hanly <[email protected]> wrote:
>  After thinking about why McChrystal would allow Michael Hastings to tag 
> along with his group and record all those disrespectful remarks I concluded 
> as did Michael Perelman that it was deliberate. The mainstream media does not 
> seem to be dealing with this. Anyway this article follows the same track as 
> Michael's earlier post.
>
> http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6145845-why-did-mcchrystal-want-to-be-fired

[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to