• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

USA Politics Thunderdome

Spekkio

He bowls overhand.
So then you think a retired FOGO should be prohibited from running for political office, as that would involve them embracing a certain set of political views?
No, I don't think that.

If GEN (ret) McChrystal announced candidacy for political office and gave the same interview as part of his campaign, the context of his interview would be entirely different.

Let's keep in mind that the only reason that he was even invited on the show in the first place was because he gets to sign his name with GEN (ret) and was, at one time, commander of all forces in Afghanistan. A regular Joe Schmo civilian doesn't get called to do interviews on CNN about his opinions on Donald Trump. You want retired FO/GO to be treated like regular Joes? You can't have your cake and eat it, too - you can't use your former position as a GO/FO to get on national TV, and then expect everyone to treat your comments like just another civilian.
 
Last edited:

Spekkio

He bowls overhand.
I interpreted pickle's statement as implying that GEN (ret) McChrystal should be able to say whatever he wants [without any consequences or repercussions]. I took that not only to mean legally, but also in terms of his reputation or any other repercussions for the military.

When a public figure like a retired GO/FO speaks in public, there are always consequences.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
When a public figure like a retired GO/FO speaks in public, there are always consequences.
I don't disagree, and am a strong proponent of the ideal that being apolitical in retirement for GOFOs strengthens the civ-mil relationship. I think we also agree that what Stan McChrystal can do, and what he should do, are not always the same thing.
 

wink

VS NFO. Blue and Gold Officer
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
I can't hardly imply the good General is lacking in courage, but it is a good bit easier, and serves other unrelated purposes, to make a public statement then it is to sit with the president (or whatever highly placed aide you can get to) and speak with him face to face. With this president , a sure way to get automatic push back regardless of the soundness of your points is to go public and make him look bad. Everyone should know that by now. You want to advise and hope to influence Mr Trump, make your argument in private. But if you have other motives, by all means go ahead and sound off.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
He's not going to be the Secretary of Immigration. How is that website or grade relevant? I'm mean, he "voted against an amendment that prevented illegal aliens from acquiring credit cards." How can we possibly trust him to administer DoD?

What seemed creepy about him?
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
What are your thoughts Chuck? I guess you're just chucking the proverbial hand grenades in the thunderdome for effect?

I've said this before: I met him once and I got a creepy vibe from him. So, I'm not a fan. This page gives him a D+.
I saw the alert on my smartphone and just quickly typed the post - not trying to lob grenades (walking to flight line tapping out post). That said - the opportunities provided to me were a result in large part to Sec. Lehman and Sec. Webb so I have a sentimental spot for the man. Mr. Webb has demonstrated time and time again that he is an honorable man of conscience. While I don't agree with some of his positions (I'm not even sure of all of my positions now that I think about it) I do not doubt his sincerity.
 

Hair Warrior

JO 1835
Contributor
No, that's not the larger point here.

GEN (ret) McChrystal was a high-ranking member of the military. Right now he's a civilian. If he still was a high ranking officer, the comments he made would make sure that he didn't hold his position much longer.

This is why his interview was poor headwork. He knows that CNN is going to spin this as "military leadership has lost faith in Trump" that active duty military personnel are going to have to clean up. Not only that, instead of using his rank and experience to comment on something meaningful (conflict in the middle east, foreign policy, etc), he used it to hurl insults vis a vis "Trump is immoral."

I think that when you get as far as GEN McChrystal, you should be able to recognize that you shouldn't use your rank to go on CNN to disparage sitting presidents. This is especially egregious when Obama was nice enough to give him a waiver to keep his 4-star retirement the last time he had diarrhea of the mouth. My $0.02.
That’s a pretty narrow view of the First Amendment you’ve got there.
 
Top