Where Do I Get My Reputation Back?

Yawn.

By resigning, McChrystal was able to save face and retire as a four-star. Technically he was not in grade long enough to retire as a four-star, but he was given a waiver, presumably as a parting gift.

 

He tried just as hard to embarrass his boss as any of the other generals.

 

Yeah, but you only cover him when he makes an ass of himself!

 

But he wasn't an area general.

 

Sure

Sure. As soon as Islam is attacked.

 

Because that's the type of thing that 93Devil does. Over and over and over again.

 

"The report goes on to say, Not all of the events at issue occurred as reported in the article."

 

Safe to say, I think, that if the variation in those "events" and the telling of those events had any material bearing on the outcome of things, they'd have been specified.

 

AZ I urge you to reread the Rolling Stone article and pull out any direct quotes from McCrystal that disparage the administration.

 

Now you're talking about two different things.

McChrystal was bounced for derogatory comments made by his staff. Comments made in front of a reporter from a national magazine. Comments so out-of-bounds that the reaction even inside the military was shock. http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/06/tns_reaction_062210/

What you posted above,

"Not all of the events at issue occurred as reported in the article."

is a different matter entirely, and implies some inaccuracy in the story.

I'm saying that if those "inaccuracies" were glaring enough to have changed the outcome of things - ie., to exonerate McChrystal or his staff - the report would have specified them.

 

Doubtful, since such a statement would have thrown Obama under the bus.
Think report was vague on purpose but result speaks for itself in exonerating McCrystal.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/rolling-stone-statement-on-the-pentagons-mcchrystal-report-20110418

The report by the Pentagon’s inspector general offers no credible source – or indeed, any named source – contradicting the facts as reported in our story, “The Runaway General.” Much of the report, in fact, confirms our reporting, noting only that the Pentagon was unable to find witnesses “who acknowledged making or hearing the comments as reported.” This is not surprising, given that the civilian and military advisors questioned by the Pentagon knew that their careers were on the line if they admitted to making such comments. Asking unnamed sources to reveal their identities strikes us as an exercise in futility. Rolling Stone stands by our story, which is accurate in every detail. We also note that Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s own response to the story was to issue an apology, saying that what was reflected in the article fell “far short” of his personal standard.