Article

2010-04-17 Iraq

Yon: McChrystal not to be trusted, in over his head

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-04-17 13:02|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Progress of the bestest...

Yesterday (see the Fort Hood story), the bestest, onlyest SecDef who ever "really got it," turned out to be another ass coverer.

Today, the guy who was "going to fix everything" that was wrong with the US approach in Afghanistan, is reported to be "in over his head."

Today, the onlyest, reallest "reporter" in the ME war zones turns out to look like John Kerry's weathervane.

The difference a day makes...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 15:16|| 2010-04-17 15:16|| Front Page Top

#2 Today, the onlyest, reallest "reporter" in the ME war zones turns out to look like John Kerry's weathervane.

Seemed uncharacteristic to me as well...maybe we should invoke the 48-Hour Rule on this one & see if the Context Fairy leaves anything under the pillow.

Posted by RIcky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2010-04-17 15:22|| 2010-04-17 15:22|| Front Page Top

#3 Further down in Yon's Facebook page:
Our boys (U S Army) aren't revolutionary in urban warfare. WIth Stanley Mc Chrystal's plan of fewer civilian casualties there has been a quantum leap in US dead. Expect more of that in the population centers just like Iraq. Some people have no sense of history.

Posted by ed 2010-04-17 16:35|| 2010-04-17 16:35|| Front Page Top

#4 McChrystal may have terminated his embed:

On Saturday, 10 April, a message came from military that this embed has ended. No reason was offered. The troops here have no idea why. On Sunday a reason was given: overcrowding by journalists. Havenât seen a journalist in weeks.

I had gone to great expense to be here with 5/2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team and promised to stay with them until they leave Afghanistan. Then suddenly a nameless feature decided to pull the plug. The decision likely came from General officer level. It is a bad sign indicating that they think they are losing the war and donât want anyone there to see it. Saw this in Iraq.

It has been said that between Iraq and Afghanistan Iâve spent more time embedded with combat units than anyone in U.S. history. I do not know if this is true but it sounds good. Itâs been a long journey and fortune favored my every step. Many people have been killed or maimed and I am walking out without a scratch. I will continue to cover the war but will not give the military another chance to pull the plug. I will cover the war from outside the wire where itâs far safer. Many people erroneously think that embedding is the safest way to cover the wars. This is untrue. Journalists who are afraid or reluctant to endure long periods of stress and combat will brag that going alone somehow seizes the high ground of truth. There is no truth in this. In many cases the journalists are missing crucial information because they fear the combat and the difficult living. The infantry company on this mission has lost twelve comrades KIA during this tour, with others wounded for life.

Itâs just as easy to accurately sense the direction of the war winds alone as with troops. The military media machine is playing games during a time of war.

My thoughts will always be with the combat soldiers. My body will be elsewhere.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2010-04-17 16:35|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com 2010-04-17 16:35|| Front Page Top

#5 As in previous wars over the past 40+ years, General McChrstal must contend with not one but two enemies. The enemy in the field and the enemy in Washington. Yon's comments are ground truth and a reflection of what Marines and soldiers at the pointy end of the spear are saying and feeling.

Posted by Besoeker 2010-04-17 16:40|| 2010-04-17 16:40|| Front Page Top

#6 Further down in Yon's facebook page:

Facebook, the new source of all truth. Gawd save us all. Oh, no, the twits on twiter will...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 16:53|| 2010-04-17 16:53|| Front Page Top

#7 It shows a glimpse into Yon's evolving thought process of McChrystal. Take it for what it's worth, or not.

Posted by ed 2010-04-17 17:04|| 2010-04-17 17:04|| Front Page Top

#8 Not saying your take on his take is wrong, Ed, just saying I've never been in thrall of the guy's POV and am certainly not in thrall of social networking outlets...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 17:12|| 2010-04-17 17:12|| Front Page Top

#9 Yon has had a negative evaluation of the Afghan situation for a long time. Even pre McChrystal. That he does not think McChrystal is the leader to turn it around is not surprising. Even if Yon thought McChrystal was Petraeus's and Catherine the Great's love child, McChrystal still takes orders from above.

Posted by ed 2010-04-17 17:27|| 2010-04-17 17:27|| Front Page Top

#10 Agreed, Ed, there may be no Alex the Great redux for the US in Afghan, but yon's take isn't uniquely valuable...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 17:29|| 2010-04-17 17:29|| Front Page Top

#11 As far as "tip of the spear" goes, two words: Being There

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 17:31|| 2010-04-17 17:31|| Front Page Top

#12 Being There

Yes, but this surge has an 18 month expiration. I don't thank that's lost on the folks in SW Asia. The thing I don't understand is that with 60 percent of the Afghan population anti-Pastun and 80+% anti-taliban, why are western soldiers taking the lead in fighting instead of providing the means of conquering the enemy?

Posted by ed 2010-04-17 17:40|| 2010-04-17 17:40|| Front Page Top

#13 but yon's take isn't uniquely valuable

It a data point in a very complex geopolitical battlefront. But he has some credibility from his previous predictions w.r.t. Iraq and Afghanistan.

Posted by ed 2010-04-17 17:43|| 2010-04-17 17:43|| Front Page Top

#14 why are western soldiers taking the lead in fighting

Same reason people who actually *work* and *earn money* are expected by the obama regime to do all the *heavy lifting* here at home. Afghan peasant type *folks* are the protypical obama voter...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 17:46|| 2010-04-17 17:46|| Front Page Top

#15 I've never been keen on yon. Some people will decide that makes me a bad person. No more or less a bad person than those who ate up the anti-US propaganda that cnn and other outlets spewed...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 17:50|| 2010-04-17 17:50|| Front Page Top

#16 Never been exceptionally keen on Yon either. Even less keen on Fox's left leaning Jeraldildo.

Posted by Besoeker 2010-04-17 17:53|| 2010-04-17 17:53|| Front Page Top

#17 Thanks, Besoeker...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 17:55|| 2010-04-17 17:55|| Front Page Top

#18 I've never been keen on yon

reeeeeally? I choose to not make any decisions about you as I've always found your comments reasonable, but I donated several times to his funding, and found his reporting always respectful of the units he was embedded with, and critical of Mil Mgmt when inevitable logistic and force support was slack

Posted by Frank G 2010-04-17 17:56|| 2010-04-17 17:56|| Front Page Top

#19 makes me a bad person

You're not bad, you're just drawn that way.

Yon is a (sort of) independent info source available to the public. He's shown previous credibility but is not a prophet. No one is, and no one should form conclusions about something as big and complicated as Afghanistan based on one man's Facebook blurb.

Posted by ed 2010-04-17 17:57|| 2010-04-17 17:57|| Front Page Top

#20 Frank's got it. Yon's a good writer and great photographer. Gates of Fire was perhaps my favorite stories out of Iraq.

Posted by Bobby 2010-04-17 18:03|| 2010-04-17 18:03|| Front Page Top

#21 found his reporting always respectful of the units he was embedded with

Help the person, hurt the cause. I have no proof that's the case, but at times, that's my fear.

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 18:03|| 2010-04-17 18:03|| Front Page Top

#22 While there is, in my opinion, room for improvement in his work, Yon is better than most any reporter that has reported on either Iraq or Astan. That's why his disembed is a damn shame.

FWIW, it's not just Yon. There's many people on the ground in Astan that have tremendous respect for McChrystal, but don't feel he's the right man for the job.

I won't be surprised if McChrystal proves to not be the savior of the war in Afghanistan. I couldn't fault him for that though: I feel even the 'perfect' man for the job wouldn't be allowed to win it. As a result, I think that realistically McChrystals (and Americas) best option here is to keep Astan from getting out of hand until we get someone in office whom will allow military success. If he does that, he's a hero in my book.

Posted by Mike N. 2010-04-17 18:10|| 2010-04-17 18:10|| Front Page Top

#23 The "perfect" man for the job would understand how to lethally irridiate wide areas without being blamed for ordering it..

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 18:15|| 2010-04-17 18:15|| Front Page Top

#24 Sorry, peasants, irradiate...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 18:19|| 2010-04-17 18:19|| Front Page Top

#25 McChrystal has a shi* sandwich on his hands. Personal shots (I do not trust McChrystal...) at him from the media do nothing for troop morale. When mission and event reporting start taking back state to personal emotions and conjecture.....it's time to ruck-up and unass the AO. McChrystal can only go as far as Obama and the Pentagon let him. The curtailment of the highly successful SOF night operations is but one example of the political realities McChrystal faces.

Posted by Besoeker 2010-04-17 18:25|| 2010-04-17 18:25|| Front Page Top

#26 No prob Murcek. I couldn't spell shi* on this box if I had a turd in both hands.

Posted by Besoeker 2010-04-17 18:26|| 2010-04-17 18:26|| Front Page Top

#27 Re: comment 25: True. If you're not killing them, you're kissing them...

Posted by M. Murcek 2010-04-17 18:28|| 2010-04-17 18:28|| Front Page Top

#28 if McChrystal has political realities that curtail his job, and get our young people killed unnecessarily, the proper thing to do is retire and put that on your exit interview(s). It would stop this shit. To allow it to continue is unconscionable

Posted by Frank G 2010-04-17 18:47|| 2010-04-17 18:47|| Front Page Top

#29 McChrystal is not a magician. He is not going to be able to change the fact that the Afghans are about 300 years behind the rest of the world. He is not going to be able to change the fact that Afghanistan is about as hard a place to supply as anywhere on the planet. He is not going to be able to change the fact that all resupply has to go through enemy or quasi-enemy territory.

The Afghan war is a no-win in anything less than 10-15 years. Our country can't afford that commitment either in blood or treasure. I respect Yon's opinion, but in this case, I don't think it matters much. The best thing we can do is get out as quickly as possible and let those who remain know that we will turn the craphole into an ashtray should trouble come our way from there.

Posted by remoteman 2010-04-17 20:04|| 2010-04-17 20:04|| Front Page Top

#30 WIth Stanley Mc Chrystal's plan of fewer civilian casualties there has been a quantum leap in US dead.

It's also possible that the increase in US casualties is also due to the increase in US troops.

It would stop this shit.

Doubtful, Frank.

Posted by Pappy 2010-04-17 20:08|| 2010-04-17 20:08|| Front Page Top

#31 I should be clearer, I guess - have absolutely no doubt the increased commitment of US troops led to a decrease in both "civilian" deaths and actual insurgent last breathes...We are good at what we are trained to do. My concern is only with the ROE mods as noted here. I fear that the General doesn't do enough "reality-based" pushback. I'm not party to the innerworks, so I'm pulling that out of my ~~ass~~ judgement based on ROE info. "Civilian" harm has overridden real warzone ROE

Posted by Frank G 2010-04-17 20:47|| 2010-04-17 20:47|| Front Page Top

#32 The bottom line is that there is no way, no how, we can win in Afghanistan. A few hundred thousand troops cannot hold land, make alliances, or even build up the Afghan army enough to last.

And the last I checked Factbook, Pakistan is damn close to 175m people!

About the only thing we could hope for would be for the Pakis to invade and annex southern Afghanistan, and the Pushtun. This would leave the mostly settled northern Afghanistan to go its own way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Ethnic_Groups_in_Afghanistan,_by_district.svg

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-04-17 21:22|| 2010-04-17 21:22|| Front Page Top

#33 The bottom line is that there is no way, no how, we can win in Afghanistan.

There's a difference between not 'winning' and losing. Losing only puts you back in the position of pre-9/11 awaiting the next 'ah $hit' moment. For Afghanistan and its history the need is to move the area to a point where it is no longer a threat as it was 9/11. It's the old story, you don't have to be faster than the bear, only faster than someone else in the group. What has to be done is to reduce the power and influence, effectiveness, of the Taliban and AQ - to the point that they become vulnerable to other parties in the region. They then become the slow mover. There are multiple parties in play and given the opportunity, those parties could emerge to keep the boys occupied and worried about their basic survival. Now that may meet the traditional definition of 'victory', but it works for our interests. Just remember, things are not going 'rosy' for the other side either. They too have problems and fears.

Posted by Procopius2k 2010-04-17 22:14|| 2010-04-17 22:14|| Front Page Top

#34 Yon has been right, sooner, in the past. So in general, I do generally trust his reporting even if his ego is getting big at times.

I've been out of the loop long enough now to where my opinion is based on stale info regarding the brass, so I'll refrain form comment on McChrystal.

That said, I disagree with a lot of the ROE limitations. "Strong Horse" still runs in the culture over there.

The worst part of it, is that unlike the Iraq surge, this one came with a deadline, which means the bad guys know exactly how long they need to wait -- and the locals know that too. Its a strategic set-up for failure.

Posted by OldSpook 2010-04-17 23:41|| 2010-04-17 23:41|| Front Page Top

23:48 Rob06
23:41 OldSpook
23:28 Barbara Skolaut
23:26 Barbara Skolaut
23:25 JosephMendiola
23:22 JosephMendiola
23:22 Frank G
23:05 49 Pan
23:04 JosephMendiola
22:52 tipover
22:39 Pappy
22:14 Procopius2k
21:53 trailing wife
21:22 Anonymoose
20:58 trailing wife
20:57 swksvolFF
20:47 Frank G
20:31 Nimble Spemble
20:30 Gabby
20:27 ed
20:18 Pappy
20:12 Pappy
20:08 Pappy
20:07 Barbara Skolaut