[kbennkc]

Frank the theatre critic , seems to be saying , how can Obambi be praised for the switch , when it McChrystal, who was Obambi's choice , was not relieved for the increased deaths in Afghanistan, or failure to attain significant signs of improvement in the conduct of the war , but only when the comments critical of the administration were published .

[Mr. K]

A thin-skinned loser president fires a man for insulting him (i.e. speaking the truth) and this constitutes “36 hours that shook wshington”???

geez... get this reporter some kneepads- this was NOT a Truman/McCarthur moment....

[Fred Hayek]

And many of such comments were second and third hand. I would even dare say embellished somewhere along the line. I think it may be wise for officers to snub any media people in social situations from now on, and limit dealings with media to activities coordinated by whoever is the media affairs officer. The media weasels are not above twisting words around and even making stuff up for an officer to potentially get hit for an Article 88 violation.

[left that other site]

First of all, this was NOT a MacArthur/Truman Moment.

Correct or not in his assessment, MacArtur was insubordinate to the CIC in demanding we carry the war into China. Truman HAD to fire him, if he were to maintain his position as Commander in Chief.

On the other hand, McCrystal said some offhand remarks about some of Obama’s STAFF to a druggie magazine reporter in a bar in Paris. This is called “GRIPING” and is a time-honored Military Tradition.

Personally, I would have preferred that MacArthur had defeated Red China, but that is water under the Bridge.

The current incident just shows what a thin-skinned crybaby the “Whiner in Chief” truly is. A REAL MAN would have taken it like a MAN and just brushed it off and do whatever is best for his COUNTRY.

[Allegra]

What a bunch of hyperbole.

[qrstuv]

the truth to these people is like garlic to vampires.