Probably the ones in afgan. It was pretty clear here in the states. I watched die hard republican military call in and say he has got to go and Obama needs to fire him on c-span.
I seen something along the lines of resignation, but chances are he would have been canned anyway. Obama definitely jabbed at Ol' Mac in response to what was stated in Rolling Stone magazine. Resignation looks better than fired anytime. I know people that were forced to resign, because their employer didn't want them to have 'fired' on their rap sheet.
That's a bunch of horseshit. Rolling Stone isn't anti-military at all, and that article was in no way a hit piece on McChrystal. If you actually read the article and listen to his subsequent interviews, it should be clear that the author, Michael Hastings, is actually quite enamored with McChrystal.
Who the hell is Geraldo Rivera to go hard on anyone? Aren't we talking about the failed faux reporter who's two most famous moments were getting his ass kicked on his own shock talk show, and finding nothing in Capone's vault? Aren't we talking about the same guy who himself gave away troupe locations, thereby endangering national security? What the Rolling Stone reporter did is shocking. It's something that hasn't been seen in decades. It's called journalism. It's the sort of thing that people who used to hold Geraldo's job used to do, and now can only be found from freelancers working for magazines that specialize in assessing popstars. This reporter's a national hero, and if the death count in Afghanistan starts to come down, it'll be partly to his credit. Crazy drunks who can't do their job shouldn't be in charge of so many American lives. WTG freelance reporter-dude. WTG.
Obama got lucky Gen. David Petraeus happens to be there and accepted the invitation to over see the Afghan post. Petraeus is very well respected among his peers due the success of the surge in Iraq. I think Petraeus is actually being demoted by taking this job. This job is a step down from his current job.
He's only "lucky" from a political standpoint because the right has invested so much in praising Petraeus that they'd look like complete fools for criticizing him as McChrystal's replacement. The war in Afghanistan is an exercise in futility. It doesn't matter who's at the helm.
The Afghan war is protecting those trillion dollar poppy fields and looting the American people....and nobody is saying shit....it's serving it's purpose to a Tee.
Reasons why (amongst others) I make a note to remind myself to *miss* any broacasts from him. LOL! OpinionsCartoonStudios@Yahoo.Co.UK
Who can forget geraldo drawing a map in the sand, compromising the location of the unit he was embedded with, during the Iraq invasion? That foul up led to him being booted and subsequent parodies of him on YouTube.
Probably hasn't had his head on straight since being pasted in the puss with that chair (or whatever).... OpinionsCartoonStudios@Yahoo.Co.UK
Censorship was non existent during the invasion. Reporters were sending live footage all day long. Geraldo was literally drawing in the sand and saying 'this is our current position and the republican guard is here and we plan on moving there.'
I had not heard about this. It amazes me that people have no common sense. I live in and around some a few of the richest neighborhoods in America, but yet the rich and influential are in my opinion, more of the idiots, the stupidest, and just generally lacking in common sense people that I ever have and ever will meet. What fucking idiot would do some ish like that, he deserves to be thrown on a roadside bomb.
No he was not. There is such a thing as newsworthiness, and troop locations are not a part of that. He revealed information putting American soldiers in danger for no purpose. There was no scoop there, no information Americans needed or wanted to know. Meanwhile, he's slamming an actual reporter for reporting actual news, so your point in defending him is odd to me. How can you defend Geraldo leaking troop locations while Geraldo himself is slamming an actual journalist for reporting real news?
Yes he was doing his job. The military is not to allow the media to do those kinds of things. This is not the first time the media has given classified information before at the risk of the United States. If no american wanted to know it then no one would have tuned in and we wouldn't be talking about it. I am not defending the guy but that is what the media does. They report. They don't care if you think it is worth reporting or not. The Government is suppose to keep them out of classified information. Something McChrystal failed to do.
Do you simply not remember when Geraldo revealed the troop locations? Because you seem to be talking about something completely different. I have a BA in Journalism. Not much, but enough to notice the difference between the historic piece in Rolling Stone and Geraldo's etchings in the sand. I also have a number of peers who went into the field. They absolutely do care if you think it is worth reporting or not. Probably too much. Far too much of journalism is based on what they think people "want" to learn. But the bottom line is this: the media doesn't simply report "everything". They report *news*. Troop locations, in the specific Geraldo case, were news to no one but the enemy. No one "tuned in" for it as it was an unexpected, live, mistake. McChrystal's comments, by contrast, are news by every definition of news.
I use McChrystal/rolling stone and Geraldo as proof that some(media) don't care. General McChyrstal has been in there for so long. He was a helpful hand to the war and yet rolling stone chose to print this article. It cost us a well informed General that formed a freindship with the president of Afghanistan. Now we have to bring another to catch up on everything that General McChrystal was informed about. The article was put out any way knowing the cost. What is defined as news is subjective. I have seen people reporting on dogs as news. People did tune in for Geraldo.