About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Rush laments that "poor" Gen. McCrystal has to "sit there and listen" to President Obama "tell him how to run a war"

November 13, 2009 1:47 pm ET

From the November 13 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh show:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by pilotshark (November 13, 2009 1:56 pm ET)
      6  
      See rushbuttboil you have no cred about military things at all Coward.

      you bet the Gen will sit there and be dam glad he still has a job!!!!!!!! as who stab who in the back.....

      i would not be surprise that you do not understand any thing.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Midnight Kevin (November 13, 2009 2:06 pm ET)
      8  
      President = Commander In Chief

      Is Limbaugh really that silly to believe McChrystal is the only voice of the military? Get in touch with reality!
      --------------------------------
      The Midnight Review
      Mum Is The Word
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (November 13, 2009 2:23 pm ET)
        4  
        "Is Limbaugh really that silly to believe McChrystal is the only voice of the military?"


        Well, there was a time not long ago, that the right wing thought David Petraeus was the only voice of the military . . .


        Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (November 13, 2009 2:36 pm ET)
        2  
        That's what I was thinking. Just because Dubya wanted to (pretend to) defer all decisions to "the generals on the ground" doesn't mean that those generals don't answer to the Prez.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mjh (November 13, 2009 2:48 pm ET)
          2  
          Plus, Dumbya would defer to the Generals -- until they retired and told him Rumsfeld had to go -- then, he didn't care about their opinions anymore . . .

          Report Abuse
          • Author by shaggles (November 13, 2009 2:57 pm ET)
            2  
            I don't think he ever really deferred to the generals. I think he was just wimping out in public when he said that. After all he canned a couple for not agreeing with him.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Midnight Kevin (November 13, 2009 4:52 pm ET)
            2  
            I think the attempts by the conservatives to place the military at odds with the command structure and the Democratic administration is dangerous, and they should not infuse politics with the military. Look at what happened to Pakistan!

            Report Abuse
        • Author by JLP (November 13, 2009 3:58 pm ET)
             
          If only GW had listened to Shinseki.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by SMTDL (November 13, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
      4 1
      Yes Rush ..but The President doesn't have to sit there and listen to YOU telling him how to run a war either..Just what do you think Commander in Chief means!!!!!?
      Why should a military opinion be the only one that counts as far as the mission strategy is conterned....managing the action on the ground is something else!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (November 13, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
      2  
      Yeah, 'cause that's the way our government is set up. We don't want a military without civilian control. Doesn't usually work well for the guys with the big guns to have more control than the civilian.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (November 13, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
      4  
      Rush laments that "poor" Gen. McCrystal has to "sit there and listen" to President Obama "tell him how to run a war"


      Well Limpy, there's a reason for this.

      Obama, as US President, is the COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the Armed Forces.

      McChrystal, as a uniformed officer, is one of his SUBORDINATES.

      Congratulations, Limpballs -- you just got a lesson in something called the CHAIN OF COMMAND.

      If you had actually served, you'd already be familiar with it . . .
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Boxer1979 (November 13, 2009 2:14 pm ET)
      3 1
      Rush laments that "poor" Gen. McCrystal has to "sit there and listen" to President Obama "tell him how to run a war"

      Rushie does not read the constitution at all I guess. The president is the commander in chief. He can take as long as he wants! Especially when it deals with soldier's lives. SMH!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (November 13, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
      3  
      Short answer is Yes.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by moe (November 13, 2009 4:09 pm ET)
      1  
      Rush knows a little something about sitting...out wars.

      Anyway, in this country, the President gets to call the shots; but Rush apparently skipped class that day, kind of like he skipped Viet Nam. Dumb ass.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by WhatImlost (November 13, 2009 5:25 pm ET)
      1  
      I feel bad for McCrystal as well I mean the poor guy is forced to you know follow the chain of command laid out in the US consistution.

      How dare Obama follow the consistution to the letter!

      I know what Rush wants though is a military command independant of the politcal structure cause history has shown just how effective that can be

      exhibit 1) Germany in 1911 which led to WWI
      exhibit 2) Japan in 1931 which led to WWII
      exhibit 3)pick your favorite military coup


      but hey if thats the system you want Rush I'm sure many military dictatorships would be happy to have you
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sharpe (November 13, 2009 5:33 pm ET)
         
      Yea, if we listened to the generals about how to run a war instead of the people or the president, we would still be fighting IN VIETNAM. The generals never wanted to stop, it was the people and the exec office that finally ended the war.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by oustudent1 (November 13, 2009 5:51 pm ET)
         
      remember that president who did everything that anyone told him and started an endless war?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rockfish (November 14, 2009 10:26 am ET)
         
      Obama is commander in chief who faces the ultimate responsibility for the welfare of our troops.The General merely advises,and Generals are inherintly pro active.Obama need not rush in without an exit strategy as our former commandsr in chief irresponsibly did.
      Report Abuse