Jun 23

Read it here.

My take…. Nothing to be fired over. I like him more at the end of it than before.  But in it committed the unpardonable sin of praising Hillary Clinton and I suspect he will be gone by lunch.

And… (a bit later). He’s gone.

But… given a choice between him and Petreus, I’ll take Petreus.

He really is a patriot to take this on. He has done plenty and sacrificed much more than is called for.  But if this works, he is our Eisenhower and can write his ticket, so maybe he plays for a larger game.

2 Responses to “That infamous article on McChrystal”

  1. Carl Says:

    No matter how good Petraeus is, we don’t have an Eisenhower situation. That was multi-national victory in a war of national survival for Europe and the Pacific Rim with a substantial part of the nation directly involved and making large sacrifices. Iraq and Afghanistan are minor skirmishes with little participation by the population in a war where the American military is not the prime player. We are not ready to put aside our overblown political fighting to respond to a call for national unity behind a recognized and mature leader. And until we are ready, it is mostly irrelevant who serves as president. Elect Petraeus if you like; you’ll soon be sniping at him.

  2. Ken Says:

    Given what we had the last 20 years, standards for “Eisenhower” are lower.

    I’ll take somebody honest and earnest. That will be a big change.