Tweet
If you want a sign of how thoroughly Gen. David Petraeus is taking command of the Afghanistan war, look no further than today’s surprise news that Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who ran special operations in Iraq for Petraeus during the 2007 troop surge, will be the new ground commander. McChrystal is known as one of the smartest and least conventional thinkers in the Army, and a counterinsurgent’s counterinsurgent. Over the next few days you’ll read a lot of glowing praise for him from the counterinsurgency community.
Faiz Shakir at ThinkProgress had this anti-McChrystal post not long ago, raising a quote of his from April 2003:
“I would anticipate that the major combat engagements are over,” Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal told reporters at a Pentagon briefing. He said U.S. forces are moving into a phase of “smaller, albeit sharper fights.”
The second half of that quote gives more context than the one Faiz highlighted. It certainly wasn’t the case that “major” combat engagements ended, but it certainly was the case that “sharper fights” with an incipient Iraqi insurgency escalated. While McChrystal should have known better than to use the word “major” to describe “conventional” conflict, that quote looks more prescient than wrong-headed.
Why’s Gen. David McKiernan out? I don’t know yet. I’ve heard grumblings about McKiernan being slow to adapt to the complexities of the Afghanistan war, but nothing that you’d hang your hat on, or rise to the level of outright dissatisfaction.
Crossposted to The Streak.
43 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
Any chance this is just cronyism?
I doubt it. McChrystal’s not an empty suit (uniform?) and while he and Petraeus had a close working relationship and respect each other, I don’t think Petraeus would just put his friend in charge of a major theater of war, nor would Gates kick McKiernan out early just because of a personal connection. You tweeted earlier about whether the timing had to do with the airstrikes, and that’s as good an explanation as any I’ve heard so far.
Heh, thanks for the response. Just caught the press conference and it seems like it was about something that happened but they weren’t saying what that something was. The timing just seems to make it an odd occasion to make the move.
Joe Klein has a good quick perspective on McKiernan’s career and strengths. I don’t think this should be seen as a knock on McKiernan. He did make some significant progress in reorienting what was going on, even as he was stuck in a leaderless no-man’s-land — waiting for the Surge brouhaha to calm down, waiting for Petraeus to switch hats, waiting for the election, waiting for the transition, and waiting for the “new Afghan strategy” etc.
I think this is likely to reflect a desire by Gates and what I’d call the “gradualist reformers” — those who want to reorient the direction of the air craft carrier and rebalance resources — to change the way commanders are promoted and assigned. Instead of rewarding “punch your ticket” careerism, match the right skill set and institutional support network of his combatant branch with the problems at hand. No more wrong-guy-wrong-branch-for-the-wrong-job mistakes like Rich Sanchez.
It’s also strong signal in terms of career advancement. In keeping with bringing Petraeus back to run the promotion board.
Wait- does this mean you’ve actually seen “The Dark Crystal”? ‘Cause that is one CRAZY moive…
Yeah, so when are the Americans going to get out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Iraq? Who gives a smeg about what officer is in charge of what fubar de jure?
a counterinsurgent’s counterinsurgent.
Ah, the McChrystal Method.
I know. The puns are so, so numerous. If it looks like I’m too sympathetic to him, it’s because I’ve been snorting that McChrystal. It burns!
From your update:
GEN McChrystal has never clarified why he signed an award for Tillman dying under enemy fire right before begging his colleagues and superiors to stop lying about Tillman dying under enemy fire.
I’m no expert but if he had refused to sign the award wouldn’t he have been kicked out of the army by Bush?
Is there a possibility that this is linked in any way to the rising number of civilian casualties in Afghanistan?
The article at the Lake seems longer than the aricle here?
There’s a meth thud in the madness.
Maybe the army is building him up by giving him opportunities to shine because he is linked to torture?
Given the frequent involvement of Special Ops in some of the major civilian casualty incidents – including the latest – I’ve some doubts that this demonstrates a new concern to avoid them. We’ll see.
Not really sure how that works.
Check out this WSJ piece from Friday about how McChrystal was tapped by Adm. Mullen to head the Joint Chiefs’ Afghan strategy review. (Clearly I focused on the wrong element of it in my Friday post.) He had a really interesting idea: send U.S. troops who rotate back in to the same areas as where they served their previous tours. That probably earned him a ticket to the short list.
I think this guy played ball with the Bushies forget the army’s hype about him. Its been years we won World War 2 in less time.
This guy could have asked for more troops equipment etc to get the job done sooner.
He did not and now because the job is not done we cannot afford this war.
How many Generals have rotated in and out of these war now?
Were they all not hyped as the best man for the job at the time?
If this commander shines and he is linked to torture then torture works and any attempt to try Americans for torture is an attack on our best generals.
I expect all the torture Generals to be getting opportunities to shine now.
I think the choice of McChrystal indicates the Obama policy for Afghanistan is to double down.
Why’s Gen. David McKiernan out ? He stood up to NATO Commander is why.
A month or 2 ago there was a big scandal that barely got reported Stateside. The NATO Commander, a US Gen. issued a order making anyone connected in anyway to Opium smuggling or growing a target.( That made basically everyone in Afghanistan and Pakistan a target and What he did was change to rules of engagement contrary to International Law and got called on it. McKiernan refused to follow the order and told his men not to follow it either. NATO then went into spin mode trying to cover it up. Der Spiegel covered the story in depth.
Special Forces given a free hand by this General to get the job done will get results the Army’s media flacks will see to that by pushing those talking points.
The aim is to vindicate harsh methods, torture to the public they picked this guy for a reason.
The he gets results story Sheesh all the Generals get results some kill more people others get results by not getting Americans killed either way they win.
End result our troops are still their we have not won the war so I do not believe army hype anymore.
Its over lets go home.
Doubling down is pretty consistent with what Obama has said on the subject for the past couple years. I’d held onto some thin hope that he would reconsider when it came time to formulate an actual policy but that does not appear to be the case.
Continued Nato support for McKiernan out, a Deal was made hmmm? makes sense. If a pro torture general is put in charge though of Afghanistan who likes to use special forces to fight starts stirring things up.
Well we should see if McKiernan was right especially if the new general go after the opium.
This could easily be the biggest mistake Obama has made.
McKiernan wants to vindicate torture? I truly doubt it.
FWIW, this is from a senior military officer who served with McChrystal in Iraq. Guy didn’t want to give his name, pretty much out of habit. I’ll put this in a separate post, but thought it was interesting enough to put here too.
Oh, changing generals will “win”? Looking more like Vietnam, sadly. No one yet has asked if McChrystal has a mcchrystal ball?
The conversation needs to return to:let’s get out of Afghanistan, not what general could do this fiasco better.
Is what I said that pro torture general I mention would be Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
McKiernan is being replaced I think because he would not go after Opium and Nato wanted him too.
Stopping Opium is the only way I think Europe can justify selling keeping their troops in this war however we don’t have enough troops even with the Surge to do that I think McKiernan made the right choice.
A source won’t put their name on a piece meant to puff up a reputation who is he worried about offending?
Or is loosing his Cred with a puff piece and being called an Ass kisser by his fellow troops his worry?
Or is his worry that he will be tied to the loser out of touch generals who lost this war in the history books?
We need a plan to get out.
NYCartist is right
How many times has the New General will win! PR line been played?
I think the last time was in Iraq with Petraeus when people were saying that the war was hopelessly lost.
Spencer I’m sounding Harsh this is not directed at you reporting this news is good it gives us insight the Generals minds.
Its what is in the General’s minds thats pissing me off.
The New General will Win the war PR line the Generals think that will still work?
I am insulted at the Amateur quality of the General’s lies. For the Generals to think that repeating the same lie over and over again with a new face after several years of failure is insulting.
A pro torture general implicated in the Pat Tilman coverup gets the Nod he did a great job in Iraq.
I thought Bush bribed the Sunni? For peace and thats why the Surge worked?
Yes and Petraeus played ball with Bush gave Bush cover and the Bush PR machine hyped him. That plan worked so well in the public’s minds that Congress backed down.
Although the Surge is working helped cost McCain the election.
Now Petraeus is choosing McChrystal to get the Nod as the New Golden Boy who can Win the War!
So if I understand you, if we are in a war, we shouldn’t try to find a general who will help win it.
Wars pretty much suck, but not trying to win them sucks a little bit more.
Be harsh toward me all you like. I don’t get offended. But I appreciate the note.
In general, military officers rarely speak on the record when you contact them out of the blue and ask, “So, what do you think of Colleague X?” There’s just no upside for them. The same goes for any administration official. Nine times out of ten they’ll ask for background as a matter of course.
No the time to find a general to win the war is before the war, during the war etc but after spending more years fighting this war than World War 2 with *cough* Great Generals all of whom are going to win this war for us.
Well I am not Charlie Brown and the Army is not Lucy with the football.
At some point its time to give up and go home.
Bush and Cheney 2 draft dodgers sold America on this war.
When I see their kids fighting then I might believe that the ruling class is fighting with instead of laughing at us.
After all I do not see the appointment of McChrystal convincing the Bush twins to enlist.
When I see the Elite fight then I will know that America is serious about the war.
Ok but when they lie to you like they lied to Judy Miller I think you should out them as a liar.
Who cares if nobody talks to you again Access Journalism is dead its propaganda it sold us this war.
If your source is right though about McChrystal a better question might be can he win can he end the fighting?
Another question after years of rosy projections why should the American public believe any army predictions on this war?
Tell it to Mr Lincoln. The time to find the best general is anytime and sometimes giving up and going home doesn’t work real well.
Sure, if you mean generally. There’s nothing this officer told me that isn’t pure opinion, which is what I asked for.
Ok
If Lincoln invaded Canada because he heard they had ties to the South he would still be wrong to invade Canada and not invade the South. Sure he might have won but also remember Lincoln fired Generals for not fighting.
Bush never pushed the generals to fight.
Lesson 2: Never ever ever feed the grasshopper.
That’s not a “really interesting idea”, that’s “common sense”.
Which I suppose is rare enough.