E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Six months after their 1950 meeting on Wake Island, Truman fired MacArthur. Now, eight months after their meeting on Air Force One, McChrystal is being summoned to Washington, his professional fate unclear. In this video from MSNBC TV's The Daily Rundown, NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell says:
"I think it crosses the line of insubordination and it crosses the line of the Military Code of Justice. He has challenged the Commander-in-Chief and legally, morally, ethically, professionally, he ought to be canned. Now the question is whether practically you can fire the top commander at a time when the war is [...] in a very bad stage." -Watch
As far back as last October, pundits and historians were comparing the conundrums Gen. McChrystal posed for President Obama with the troubled relationship between MacArthur and Truman, who famously reflected on the end of that affair: "I didn't fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was." This column by David Greenberg, a professor of history at Rutgers University, is a good example, in part because of its clear caveat about drawing too direct of an analogy:
"Like most historical analogies bandied about in the media, this one is overdrawn. Yet the story of Truman and MacArthur remains useful to remember — not because it directly mirrors today's but because it created a dynamic in which subsequent presidents felt unduly constrained by the prospect of military commanders undermining them." -via The St. Petersburg Times / tampabay.com
Click here to see the McChrystal / MacArthur comparisons popping up in a Bing News search.
Leave a Comment:
Not even close !
By 1935 MacArthur had retired. He lied about training the Philipinos military/ and language.
He lobbied for the job in early 1942 by finding his old cronies.
He wasted the 32nd division on Papua, waiting for the forces to capture Red Beach, (New Hollandia) so he could move in to the ranch house with his wife and 5 year old.
He continuously usurped Nimitz and Lord Mountbatten.
His track record is clear he believed that slaughter of the troops was just fine.
There is absolutely NO comparison of the two men and their behavior.
Please make an effort to do some actual research before cobbling history fragments to make a story.
regards
de ostler
MOBC
Truman never used the word "FIRED" at the press conference in 1951. Truman said that he had "RELEIVED" General MacArthur of his command.
There is a difference between being "fired" & being releived of a command but I guess to the press it is all the same thing.
Billy Bob: You're right that Truman didn't say he fired Truman at the press conference, but that doesn't mean he didn't say it. TIME reported in 1973 that journalist Merle Miller heard Truman utter the "I didn't fire him because..." line during a serious of interviews recorded in 1961 and 1962. Those interviews were re-worked into an oral history of Truman, Plain Speaking, which is still in print.
If we are to remain a free democratic society, a commander in the U.S. military can not undermine the authority of the president, no matter their intent, their beleif or their candid opinion. Leave that to Rush!
"If we are to remain a free democratic society" That is a question that becomes less clear with each passing day. When the government transfers the public wealth to private organizations in the name saving us from ourselves we may have already gone too far.
I agree 100%. I also believe a Commander in Chief should have military experience before they should have the authority to give orders or make military decisions. Our military is voluntary shouldn't our President/Commander in Chief at least do the same. By the way I am non partisian not for or against President Obama
Put on Van Halen 1 on maximum volume, unwrap that Big Mac, and fire up a doobie. THIS, my friends, will solve any problem, great or small, that we could ever face now, or in the future.
Threadguy, I add picking up a Rolling Stone and reading it to the list you gave.
The only thing these two men have in common is their title. Mouthing off about one's boss is justification for firing -- McChrystal should go. MacArthur, on the other hand, would have fought Communism in the same manner he fought Japanese. Truman was right -- another world war could have been the result. Bring McChrystal back along with all of our troops from Afghanistan. The war Bush fought has been moved to Pakistan. Let the Taliban deal with the corruption in Kabul.
Don't be so simple minded to think The United States of America would be safe if we pulled out of Afghanistan and left the war to Pakistan. We join the military because we believe in what this country stands for. You finish the job no matter how long it takes. It's a choice not a chore.
McArthur was a prima donna and should have never been in command. McChrystal is a soldier. For those that bad mouth our military, if it were not for them you would be speaking Japanese or German right now so the next time you see a soldier be sure to thank him/her for the good life you have.
Attention!!
Let me make on thing McChrystal Clear:
"I am a Phrog and not a crook"
That being said, I guess we'll know tomarrow if Rolling Stone, and a volcano that has a name I cannot spell or pronounce, has taken down a Commanding General.
At ease.
I am Retired Army (1983) and you better believe I would have been court-martialed and possibly booted out of the Army had I spoken out that clearly with such venom against my Commander-in-Chief, in addition to allowing my subordinates to speak out the way they did without fear of retribution. Insubordination is insubordination in peace or war, he should be fired along with his deputy. Maybe the reason the war is not going so well is because the Commanding General is not paying attention to the right things, LIKE THE CONDUCT OF THE WAR & THE WELFARE OF HIS TROOPS and leave his republican politics at the door-step. Politics should be banned from the Military PERIOD!!!
Rich, FYI: McChrystal voted for Obama. Obama handpicked McChrystal. I don't think he's pushing Republican politics I think he's pushing for what he believes is best for the war effort he commands even though he has yet to be granted the resources he asked for. Should he kept his mouth shut? Sure. But was what he said true? Nobody seems to care.
I also note that if the Arizona immigration bill had been published in Rolling Stones magazine then maybe more people would have read it before declaring it unconstitutional. McChrystal is a diversion from all the other problems pouring forth from this Administration.
I am retired from the Army as well, and I agree 100 percent with your sentiments about disrespectful speech toward your superiors. I have no basis to judge McChrystal or his conduct of operations in Afghanistan, but his granting an interview with Rolling Stone in the first place, never mind what he actually said, was, to say the least, inappropriate. He is not in the business of making public statements or rendering personal opinions; he is in the business of conducting military operations under the direction, ultimately, of his commander in chief. If he does not agree with the policies he is sworn to uphold and execute, it is time for him to retire and go be a military consultant for some news organization. Either be a professional military officer or don't.
Well said!
Thank you for offering your experienced insight! I am a 46 year old woman--an educator, wife and mother. I have never served in the military, but I find McChrystal's actions shocking--not only disrespectful and insubordinate, but positively treasonous! How can our military function properly if military personnel engage in partisan politics? Guaranteed, McChrystal will be offered a job as an "expert," some media specialist position on Fox News. In many spheres, McChrystal will be encouraged to continue his blathering insults to fan the flames of discontent. I think he should be arrested because he acted against our national interest. If he were a political pundit, then he would be entitled to criticize the current administration as much as he liked. That's his Constitutional right, but in his position as general, his actions were dangerous to our national security.
Another far left "educator" with a short memory, outraged only because it's your guy being challenged.
At 46 you are old enough to remember the "Generals Revolt" under Bush, and how the media lauded those who 'couraageously" spoke "truth to power" . In fact, they openly encouraged active military to criticize and challenge the President and the Secretary of Defense. One of those, in fact, was Richard Holbrooke, who now has his knickers in a twist when the criticism turns on him.
Pardon me, but I despise hypocrites with selective amensia
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401451.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/velvel04212006.html
http://www.slate.com/id/2139777
http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20070923-9999-1n23generals.html
http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2006/04/being_the_good_.html
Now educate yourself, and see if you're capable of understanding that the left have been the most vociferous critics of the active military. It is disingenuous to suddenly spout the importance of chain of command, and respect for the presidency, when Democrats did nothing but actively encourage insubordination and revolt during the Bush years. ah, but it's different when you think those Generals and military men are "right", isn't it?
mcchrystal is on the money,we have cowards and wimps in the whitehouse. The worst enemy of the usa is actually us! people voted for these fools in the whitehouse so what can i say. second so what if he spoke out about obama's policy, obama is a fool. we have freedom of speech rights. look at patton he spoke out against russia, he wanted to to fight them and kick there tail so we would not have to deal with communisim. Patton was right we had to deal with them thru the cold war. then mcarthur, he wanted to nuke china because they would be a future threat,truman fired him now guess what we are dealing with china. during desert storm stormin normen wanted to level iraq and the middle east.he told bush sr that the middle east will be a huge problem one day.sr would not let him fight, so now we are still in iraq. The point is that the generals are fighting solders,let them fight,history will repeat everytime.
According to your logic, we should have invaded Russia, nuked China and leveled Iran and entire Middle East so that they would not "be a problem" someday. Great dedication to freedom there. Freedom for US death for others. God bless the US of A
Were this Bush being dissed by a subordinate general, the media would be hailing the general as a hero.
Didn't Beck already say this?
No General would have spoken out against the Bush Admin, bc the whole top rank was filled by Bush/Rummy supporters.
Right on Sir right on
Article 2 of the Constitution makes the President the Commander in Chief.
Of course you're right about the officer's oath, but the enlisted oath should apply to officer's as well.
"I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
If you lead, you must also follow. Speaking ill of your leaders is also called sedition. If only 50% of the Rolling Stone article is true, McChrystal is a seditious cowboy and needs to retire.
What would happen to an enlisted person who was caught criticizing or making jokes about superior officers? Since I am not in the military, I honestly do not know. I can only imagine that such insubordination in the ranks would have serious consequences. The higher the office, the more responsible the position, the more dire the consequences--that is the way it should be. I would have complete respect for McChrystal if he disagreed with the president by resigning from his post. Then, he would be legitimately free to speak his mind on the matter--as long as he did not disclose classified information. I see the interview with Rolling Stone as a cheap attempt to attain fame and a political name for himself. How are his obsequious remarks against the president's policies serving to "defend the Constitution...against all enemies, foreign or domestic?" In fact, it is an advertisement to the world that there is disunity among the ranks. This could endanger the entire U.S.A. because foreign powers could view us as distracted and vulnerable.
It is against UCMJ to speak out against your superiors as enlisted personnel. Keep in mind though, McChrystal isn't the one who said anything in this article, his aides did.
His hands are tied by this President, by his inaction for all places our military are deployed to, at home and overseas. And there is "disunity among the ranks" and because our president has managed to apoligize for American all over the world, we are already endangered because "foreign powers do see us as distracted and vunerable" with a President who REFUSES to listen to his generals on the ground.
So America is already in danger. As military, former or active, reserve or guard, we are not supposed to speak out? That is our right, we are defending the very consitution that gives everyone else the right to tell our General that he was wrong and are persecuting him, but without men like him and the lowest ranking member in the service, freedom would just be a dream.
And the President appointed McChrystal so that we could be out of afghanistan in 16 months of him taking office.... that timeline has passed. McChrystal asked for troops in February.. it took the President over 6 months to give him an answer. Tell me you would not be frusterated yourself
I still can't figure out how a man that never served in the armed forces cold become the commander and chief.....Good going America!!!!
Amen. How about the natural-born citizensip issue?
Army Vet you have hit this on the head!!! Rolling Stone is not a credible publication and as you can see from the info from just-the -facts-1912739.......! McChrystal is a soldier and he happens to know his job!
I can't wait to see McChrystal's book deal when the Community Organizer in Chief loses in '12!
As a young hot headed ironworker, I was fired more than once for criticizing my boss. I can't remember the issues anymore, but whatever they were I was right and they were wrong. The bottom line here is that Obama will be remembered for being an idiot and McChrystal will be remembered for having the cajones to say so.
MacArthur may have had a huge ego, but he was perhaps one of the best military commanders this nation has had. To paraphrase him..."the trouble with the US military is that it owes allegiance to the temporary occupants of the Whitehouse”. We have a not-ready for prime time Administration being in charge in a time of war, 2012 is not soon enough!
Generals never had to criticize Bush, for he never had a strategy for them. He let them make it up as they went along.
You can't be serious? Man do people have short memories... maybe you should look up General Eric Shinseki.. he spoke out against President Bush and his policies and was labled a hero and whistleblower. And he was the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and spoke out before the Senate Armed Services Committee. He was not crusified the way McChrystal has been.
I suggest you look back a few years ago before making a comment
At his level, talk is not cheap. Maybe now he can become the titular head of the Hayseed Brigade in Texas.
I agree with his sentiments, those I know of, but agree with the retired Army man who said that he should've kept it under his hat and, in so doing "live to fight another day." Imagine the morale of the troops now.
Some say that if he didin't like the responses coming from Washington he should have retired. Of course, just playing devil's advocate here, he most likely stayed to fight the way he thought was best for his troops rather than quit and have some Obama puppet take his place, thus putting his troops in even more danger.
He should have been relieved of duty. That Obama didn't fire him only proves McChrystal's right. This administration is a 'wimp'.
Good. The Admin stood firm. Obama did exactly what he should have done.
Old loose cannons never stop; they just keep firing away. Maybe he could get a lucrative position inventing cheeky comments for Governor Perry, Rep. Barton and Sen. Cornyn.
A rolling head gathers no moss.
I am a Vietnam Vet and I can tell you that all soldiers question the competency and authority of their superiors. There were ways of dealing with surperiors if things got out of hand. I would never risk my life or those of the squad following some stupid order from some 20 year old 2nd luey or career soldier who couldn't cut it in civilian life. It might not have been smart to let his opinions get out in print but just the same I appriciate the General for telling us the way it is. We can respect that and we need that honesty if we are to survive.
criticize the Chosen One? how dare he? do recall what Gen. Douglas McArthur said: "the problem with the US military is that they owe allegiance to the temporary occupants of the Whitehouse". Obama's time will come we are almost half way there, 2012 is just around he corner.