Rolling Stone magazine managed to bring down the commander of our forces in Afghanistan, disrupt the war effort, and embolden our enemies by disrupting the allied chain of command.
For what? The article did not expose any facts whatsoever. There were no war crimes revealed, no failure to follow orders exposed, no mutiny prevented.
The information in the article amounted to this:
- When drunk, soldiers talk trash among people they trust.
- When sober, soldiers talk trash among people they trust.
- Soldiers never should trust reporters, ever.
That last point really is the lesson learned, and should infuriate real reporters who actually want to report on facts, rather than seeking inglorious fame.
Rolling Stone’s hatchet job damaged both the war effort and the relationship between reporters and the military.
I hope Rolling Stone is happy with the internet traffic, although it will not last. The war, however, goes on.
——————————————–
Related Posts:
Time for Obama to Lead or Leave
Has Anyone — Including McChrystal — Actually Read The Rolling Stone Article?
Shinseki Hero, McChrystal Bum
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Ron Coleman
Comments
Here's what I don't understand: McChrystal was showing disunity. Or something. Bad mouthing the administration or allowing his aides to do so. How on earth is that any different than the CIC trotting around the world bad mouthing our country, its history, and its people? Shouldn't BO be fired for bashing the whole country? All McChrystal did was say (or allow to be said) some home truths that this admin would do well to listen to and correct. He didn't bash our country or make us weaker.
Rolling Stone did not bring down McCrystal. McCrystal brought down McCrystal.
McChrystal knew what he was doing in saying anything at all to a dirtbag from RS, for goodness sakes. Furthermore, if his staff didn't know what would happen when they "joked around" with a reporter then they are terminally stupid.
Of course RS brought the general down. Heck, if RS wouldn't have gotten McChrystal out of theater, then he might have entertained a scribbler from The Enquirer. Or, to scrape the bottom of the journalistic barrel, even the NYT.
Sorry, Bill, but I have to really disagree with you on this one. I would suggest you listen to Lindsay Graham's comments, and then really listen to Admiral Mike Mullen's comments. McChrystal clearly has violated Article 88 of the UCMJ, and even worse, has allowed an attitude of disrespect and contempt toward the national command authority to thrive within his command. He had to go. It wasn't Rolling Stone's fault; it wasn't the reporter's fault; and it wasn't Barack H. Obama's fault. You really should not let your dislike for Obama cloud your thinking on this. I think this is the first thing Obama has done that was the right thing to do. In Article 89 of the UCMJ we find that delightful phrase, "… truth is no defense …". When it comes to displaying contempt toward superior officers and the civilian command authority, it is not a defense. This is inherent to maintaining good order and discipline. Or would we all rather have a nice dose of Seven Days in May?
There is a bright spot to McChrystal's leaving. Michael Yon, who was banned from embedding with troops during General McChrystal's command, has been invited back.
Leave a Comment