Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

I can't blame RS... McChrystal and his guys said those things in front of him. They may think them, and say them to each other, but it was a bad move to say it in front of a Rolling Stone reporter. Sure, everyone trash talks their boss, but he did it in front of a reporter.

Maybe McChrystal wanted that info out there....maybe he wants people to know how ill-informed and incompetent the O administration really is. Maybe he wanted out of his job... who knows. I wish the focus were on what he actually said, though. That should make people worried. Not that he actually said them, but the substance.

But, at least as far as I know about the story, to blame Rolling Stone for what McChrystal said is like blaming the rabbi for what Helen Thomas said.

I heard that the reporter won a free dinner with Jane Fonda. So he's got that goin' for him.

Obama/McCrystal was a bad marriage from the start, so it appears we are learning, and like I said earlier, it is reminiscent of a Diana/Charles soap opera, only it is actually something of world importance.

I assume we haven't heard the last of this story.

I kind of lost interest in what was going on over there, the press seems to have been fairly quiet on the subject. Where is Cindy Sheehan when you need her?

"Rolling Stone magazine managed to bring down the commander of our forces in Afghanistan, disrupt the war effort, and embolden our enemies by disrupting the allied chain of command."

This just reinforces reporters' beliefs that they control the narrative, the conversation, especially in ObamaWorld. Even if the general says nothing (which he didn't), or that his people say things that are questionable (which they did), or if you use fallacies and strawmen (which the reporter did). Who cares? It works!

The MSM needs to be cleaned up, from top down, from the ground up - including journalism schools (where most of these guys learn that they can say anything with impunity). They may be a Constitutionally protected entity, but they need to be held accountable for their "words, just words" spewed with a spin or agenda.

I personally believe McCrystal did what he did for a purpose - a Special Ops leader who has gotten to where he is MUST know these reporter types and what will be the outcome from this type of article. Moreover, McCrystal knows that the current CinC is a thin-skinned, prideful wimp who would think and act on what the perceptions are, not reality - certainly not on what's best for the troops. McCrystal, IMHO, is doing this for a purpose, probably to ensure that there is VICTORY in Afghanistan; if sacrificing his career is what is best for his troops, he'll take the hit.

My opinion, of course; only time will tell.

Here's what I don't understand: McChrystal was showing disunity. Or something. Bad mouthing the administration or allowing his aides to do so. How on earth is that any different than the CIC trotting around the world bad mouthing our country, its history, and its people? Shouldn't BO be fired for bashing the whole country? All McChrystal did was say (or allow to be said) some home truths that this admin would do well to listen to and correct. He didn't bash our country or make us weaker.

Here's what I don't understand: McChrystal was showing disunity. Or something. Bad mouthing the administration or allowing his aides to do so. How on earth is that any different than the CIC trotting around the world bad mouthing our country, its history, and its people? Shouldn't BO be fired for bashing the whole country? All McChrystal did was say (or allow to be said) some home truths that this admin would do well to listen to and correct. He didn't bash our country or make us weaker.

Rolling Stone did not bring down McCrystal. McCrystal brought down McCrystal.

McChrystal knew what he was doing in saying anything at all to a dirtbag from RS, for goodness sakes. Furthermore, if his staff didn't know what would happen when they "joked around" with a reporter then they are terminally stupid.

Of course RS brought the general down. Heck, if RS wouldn't have gotten McChrystal out of theater, then he might have entertained a scribbler from The Enquirer. Or, to scrape the bottom of the journalistic barrel, even the NYT.

Sorry, Bill, but I have to really disagree with you on this one. I would suggest you listen to Lindsay Graham's comments, and then really listen to Admiral Mike Mullen's comments. McChrystal clearly has violated Article 88 of the UCMJ, and even worse, has allowed an attitude of disrespect and contempt toward the national command authority to thrive within his command. He had to go. It wasn't Rolling Stone's fault; it wasn't the reporter's fault; and it wasn't Barack H. Obama's fault. You really should not let your dislike for Obama cloud your thinking on this. I think this is the first thing Obama has done that was the right thing to do. In Article 89 of the UCMJ we find that delightful phrase, "... truth is no defense ...". When it comes to displaying contempt toward superior officers and the civilian command authority, it is not a defense. This is inherent to maintaining good order and discipline. Or would we all rather have a nice dose of Seven Days in May?

There is a bright spot to McChrystal's leaving. Michael Yon, who was banned from embedding with troops during General McChrystal's command, has been invited back.