On 6/24/10 8:04 AM, Harold wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On 23/06/2010 3:03 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:04:45 -0600,
wrote:


I hear being a general under Obama is a short term career job.

so was being a general under truman

and remember general shinseki, under bush?


Guess he might as well polish up the fishing rods and go fishing.

notice he never complains about the rich white frat boy who screwed
this whole thing up?


Bush fired or "retired" many generals for speaking out. I think
Obama should not fire him unless he believes that McCrystall can no
longer do the job he was assigned to do.


Obama's ego will cause McCrystal to be fired.


Your ego needs to be self-inflated to compensate for your obvious
lack of intelligence.


Was he fired or not, Dippy?


He was fires for insubordination, as opposed to what Bush did... fire
people for stating facts, Dufus.

He resigned, probably was put to him, resign with full pension or I will
fire you for my ego and cause you pension grief.

He chose wisely and resigned.

--
The bigger government gets, the more it tends to rule out common sense.

He didn't have a choice. He was told to resign. He follows orders. You're
an idiot.


And I suppose you were a flea on the wall and heard every word of what
transpired.
We do know one thing for sure. Obie wasn't pleased to have a four star
general of the army spit in his face.




The general was an out-of-control asshole whose mission, the one he
designed and implemented, was failing. He has a long history of shooting
off his mouth. He also has a booze problem, and wasn't he the general
who covered up the Tillman cluster****?

Generals are a dime a dozen.

Obama let him resign rather than fire him so that the general could keep
that fourth star and the benefits it brings. The general had no class.
The president does have class.