Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Let's Not Forget Gen. McChrystal's Connection to Pat Tillman's Death

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:07 PM
Original message
Let's Not Forget Gen. McChrystal's Connection to Pat Tillman's Death
Tillman's father stated "I do believe the guy participated in a falsified homicide investigation".

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/zirin2

If that's not enough, McChrystal's unit was involved in abuse of detainees in Iraq, with 5 of his troops convicted of abuse.

http://washingtonindependent.com/45193/former-interrogator-presses-for-mcchrystals-stance-on-abuse

The reasons why McChrystal was put in charge of the Afghanistan operation don't outweigh the fact that he is dishonest and thinks nothing of abusing the enemy. So his memo was 'leaked' - do we have a case of a General trying usurp the Commander in Chief? There's a reason why the military doesn't call the shots and civilians are put in place to keep things in check. At least that's how it should be.

Obama needs to get rid of McChrystal. He doesn't need a renegade General with allegiances to the Cheney Chickenhawks sabotaging his decisions in Afghanistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. "Obama needs to get rid of McChrystal." Wait, Obama wasn't aware of this and the hearings?
Edited on Thu Sep-24-09 10:48 PM by ProSense
Didn't he appoint McChrystal with these facts in mind?

Why do you think Obama would get rid of McChrystal based on information that came up during the hearings?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I don't think Obama can trust McChrystal.
Edited on Thu Sep-24-09 10:54 PM by Avalux
He did appoint him - it was a case of the good outweighing the bad. However with what's come to light in recent days, I do not think the good General is acting in an appropriately respectful manner. Seems orchestrated and underhanded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. That's not your decision to make. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Why are you defending McChrystal?
I have an opinion and there's nothing wrong with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Who's defending McChrystal? Obama picked him.
Like he picked Hillary, Geithner, Rahm and the rest. He picked them, it's his administration. Now, if there is a case that can be made against any of them, one that's not based on dredged up known information, that would be different. This OP is simply you stating that you don't like McChrystal and Obama should get rid of him because you don't trust him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. While I would like to think Obama doesn't make mistakes, he certainly does.
Edited on Thu Sep-24-09 11:05 PM by Avalux
McChrystal's past was brought up and he was picked anyway. Maybe his inclination to lying didn't seem important at the time but it does now in light of the way he's pushing Obama.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Again, that's Obama's decision. As for your other claim
Maybe his inclination to lying didn't seem important at the time but it does now in light of the way he's pushing Obama.


Maybe you need to realize that Obama is the Commander in Chief and McChrystal isn't making these decision in a vacuum. Also, too many people jump on misinformation before they know all facts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. It's OK. I don't expect you to ever disagree with an Obama decision.
Most of the time I agree with you and love your posts. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Well, I certainly will not spend time expressing outrage about someone Obama appoints
after the choice is made and confirmed.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-24-09 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. I would think there is a
close watch on mcchrystal now..he's not running things and neither are the neocons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-25-09 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
12. Thanks for posting. K & R
Surreal to see people on this forum asking you not to question authority, FWIW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC