Do you think McChrystal should or should not be let go (either by firing or resignation) tomorrow?

By either route. The effect will be about the same.

He should be fired, or resign, that announcement to be followed up with the President flying to Afghanistan to meet with troops to announce McChrystal's replacement and to reassert the respect he has and that we have through him for the men and women there as human beings.

McChrystal is reported by some sources as already having offered his resignation. I think he's shrewd enough to know how the game is played and that he has not played it particularly well.

:evilgrin:

VIDEO of today's "special comment" - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/37862690#37862690

I'm pretty sure conservative detractors of Obama have a narrative cooking about why it shows he's weak no matter what he does. My gut instinct says "Bounce him, hard." The reasons for that are:

1) Insubordination. We have a civilian C-in-C for a reason, and the Gen. forgot forgot who has rank. I'm pretty sure the conservative angles against a good tossing out would go something like: first, it *proves* Obama thinks he's a king because he's treating this like lese majestie or something (grr--I know I prob. spelled that wrong, but I won't interrupt my thought-train....) and then, doesn't it just show he's not taking the war in Afghanistan seriously? (Anyone want to bet me both don't get used if he dismisses him?)

But the reality is, respect for the chain of command is very much a leadership issue on McCrystal's part, and if he wants to vent outside of it, he's the weak link. I think Obama needs to make it very clear that he's asserting a necessary prerogative to insure that the leadership there is strong and intact.

2) It's Obama's call, and it can't look like anyone else is making it for him. I feel like McCrystal is playing a game of chicken to move a narrative about who's really in charge. So he needs to get told who is.

3) Nobody's irreplaceable. Okay--maybe your loved ones, maybe the only specialist who can do "operation X", but in the war effort? I don't think there's such a thing as an "irreplaceable guy." I hear McCrystal has Karzai's full confidence. How do we like Karzai? (Nobody's irrepla....*whistles*)

And again--if it has to be done, it's got to be done explicitly in a way that puts it down to the way this impacts the leadership, not down to the media "tizzy" the article generated. I mean, I think thoughtful people should for the most part get that personnel decisions on this level aren't lightly made for PR reasons--but okay....media/thoughtful? Um....yeah.

Although McCrystal's offer of resignation had me thinking somewhat along the lines of "Was this what he wanted? To get out for something better? Write memoirs, perhaps? Speaking engagements?"

Oh, hell no General Palin, I think we still have some unpleasant uses for you!

It would be a "no-drama" Obama political akido open-hand style take-down. You resign--you're your own man. But if you aren't "resigned" or fired, you still work for the Commander in Chief. And it's no big deal if you have opinions--oh, no sir. They just don't matter. Up until you look like a fool who needs to be fired, a coward, or a quitter. Then, oh then....But of course, a professional wouldn't want to be those things--right?

Slow death, of the "story" anyway.

Still torn. Cavegirl not like 11th Dimensional chess. I only watch through slitted fingers.

So yes he should go.

Again if a Soldier under McChrystal's command would have done this to him, he would have been charged.

I was in the "I don't know" camp - but you are right. The General would not tolerate this level of insubordination towards himself, why should his Commander in Chief accept if from the General and his staff. And why did the General allow it to be displayed by his staff in front of a reporter who at the least would not be sympathetic to their opinions? I get the feeling that the General and his staff are contemptuous of civilians and Democrats and wanted Obama to know that.

;-)

and he's today running a black site at Bagram.

and take the heat over his failed strategy. Give him a tongue-lashing, but maker him be there when the whole thing falls apart, as it's doing now.

I say let him go because he can't be trusted. In ANY relationship trust must take priority. Personally, I would be afraid that McChrystal would sabbotage the mission. Hopefully, if someone new is chosen, the decision won't affect Afghanistan much.

Let Obama pick the new guy rather than Gates. If Gates subsequently loses interest down the road then replace Gates. Only then will Obama truly own these wars, or what is left of them. To some extent Gates, McChrystal, and Karzai all owe their positions to Bush and Cheney.