On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:29:06 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:20:16 -0400, John H Rant wrote:

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:04:03 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:30:18 -0400, John H Rant wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/yb525xo

Generals should not offer opinions. They're job is simply to do as
they're told by someone with all the combat experience of a slug.

Reading challenged, again? That's not what that article said. A quote
from Gates, "provide our best advice to the president candidly but
privately." For a General to *publicly* campaign for his ideas limits
his commanders options, and undermines his commanders authority.
McChrystal should keep in mind, he serves at the President's pleasure.
If he doesn't agree with Obama's policies, he should quit.

Gosh, when Gen. Shinseki did basically the same thing, he was hailed as
a hero by you liberals.

Bull****! Gen. Shinseki was testifying before U.S. Senate Armed Services
Committee, and was answering a direct question when he made those troop
level statements. His career also suffered because of that statement.

My goodness. Such standards.

McChrystal did, in fact, agree with 'Bama's policies. 'Bama said this
was a war of necessity for the United States. Based on that 'policy'
McChrystal supported his President by emphasizing the requirement for
more troops.

But, you liberals are not fond of the idea. Giving up seems to be more
your style.

Perhaps you should just call names.

Are you denying he became a liberal hero because he verbally disagreed
with the President's policies? Shouldn't he have quit?

Again, perhaps you should just call names.