Why you CANNOT demote a General Officer

let's forget Stanley for the moment. I know that many here mean well when they say... why not DEMOTE the guy? Here is why. He wears his rank on his shoulders, not his upper arm. In other words, he is an OFFICER.

The only way you can demote an officer is to hold a General Court Martial. At times. like what happened with the one star forced to retire after Abu Ghraib, that might be done administratively on the way out, for retirement purposes, to AVOID a general court martial. But the only way that US General Stanley McKrystal could be demoted would be a GENERAL COURT MARTIAL, in which case his offenses are such, that I could see some real prison time. Now to save face, nobody will go through that, and in the military legal system he'd have, in order to defend himself, reveal some pretty deeply classified information... so to save face... he is going to be strongly encouraged to just quietly retire.

Now a sergeant IN THE FIELD, can be demoted administratively. This is one of the differences between enlisted and officers. The only exception for enlisted, who woudl also need a court martial, are USN Chiefs...

Oh and boy he is does not have enough time with a four stars so will be retiring as a three star. This is an administrative demotion on his way out, according to Jacobs, per CNBC... I forgot, you need to be at a certain rank for a minimum of time in order to retire at that rank... so he is going to pay to a point. GOOD!

One can't be blamed for wishing he'd have to pay a higher price. As it is he's suffering the indignity of being relieved of command, but he still gets to play the martyr. Such is life.

he crossed. Right now he is radioactive in the Pentagon... and he might very well be radioactive among vets.

Now fox nooze, if he decides to go that way... see about a certain Colonel and Iran Contra...

What I cannot fully understand is how he didn't realize he was going to bring his military career to an abrupt, and messy, end? Everyone I know who serves, or has in the past, predicted his removal after this came out. How could he have not known as well? Or did he and he still did it anyway? We may never really know the truth of the matter I suppose.

oh from the time he was a Cadet, he's pushed the edges since he was a cadet. why he did so well in Special Forces...

So this time he went too far, and personally, he should be court martialed, but that ain't gonna happen.

to a dumb, boring, non-influential position? Like, General Nadinbrzezinski you really pissed me off but I'm going to let you remain in the service, keep all your benefits and perks, but am reassigning you to towel girl at the WAC pool?

the longer the tittle, the more trouble he is in, oh and the least amount of REAL influence he has. Politics at that level gets down right byzantine.

The mere offer to have charge of the very long tittle here, command might make him go... no thank you.

To be a four star or three star general you have to hold a billet that requires a general to have that many stars. If a four star general leaves a command and remains on active duty but does not have a four star billet, he will revert back to a two star general. This almost happened to Gen. Casey between being in charge of Iraq and the time he took over as Army CoS. It was also the excuse Cohen used to move Clark out of Europe early, so another four star could remain at that rank.

as a four, so he will as a three...

If Stanley follows Ollie's footsteps he will become massively wealthy by appealing to the right wing. From the comments Stanley made it's obvious he doesn't care for democrats. I wouldn't be surprised to see him on the right wing hate-speech circuit talking to Hannity, Beck, Limblah and then get a multimillion dollar deal with Fox Noise.

McChrystal can't write a book without going into his delta days and tf ops in Iraq. If Stan does do that he is going to be be given the boot from that community that every member who writes about it gets. (see Dalton Fury's intro in Killing Bin Laden). He can take refuge in that community after being fired because they understand the frustration with the civilian leadership that McChrystal had.

Also, it doesn't matter what McChrystal says, he is the guy who got fired and that will stick with him the way it stuck with Wes Clark. He has no shot at a political career because of this. And I doubt he wants to hurt the war effort by second guessing the Obama Admin during the war.

he is a Special Forces Commander, who had charge of the FULL SOC... and in that he excelled... but I am willing to bet he is the last from that community in a generation to go beyond a two star. There is a reason why YOU DO NOT want Spec Ops guys in a wider setting, and him going where he went verbally is VERY MUCH a special forces trait.

McChrystal never had a very public commander before this last one and never had to handle the media and reporters. I guess he learned the hard way.

this guy not so much. The first mistake was accepting the interview, the second was... giving the unfettered access, which was bound to lead to some lose lips. What they said to the reporter is exactly what they were thinking, and special forces are necessary, but special forces don't like authority... military or civilian and they should be able to think outside the box.

Why I wasn't too shocked they said what they said... but being published... nobody will make that mistake again. Or rather not in this generation of officers.

It's a big black stain not just on his career or the media spotlight, but in written American History.

Talk about demotions or dishonorable discharges, etc. are just beating a dead horse.

Oh wait.


:grr:

you can blame George Washington... as to Chiefs... somebody must have slipped that.

It actually makes sense, to a point.