The Washington Times today claimed in an editorial that Gen. Stanley McChrystal's “sacking highlights Obama's Afghan incompetence.” The editorial prefaces itself on the suggestion that “the Rolling Stone report rings true” and states that “the controversial comments from Gen. McChrystal's staff, while impolitic, are rooted in fact,” citing in part the article's revelation of the purported “wariness” of administration officials “to discuss the concept of 'victory' in Afghanistan.”

The Times is correct that the Rolling Stone article does point out that Obama did not use the words “win” or “victory” in his speech announcing an increase in troop levels. But the Times does not note that the same article includes the comments of Gen. McChrystal's chief of operations, Maj. Gen. Bill Mayville, who states that the conclusion of the war is “not going to look like a win, smell like a win or taste like a win.” The Rolling Stone article also reports that "[e]ven those who support McChrystal and his strategy of counterinsurgency know that whatever the general manages to accomplish in Afghanistan, it's going to look more like Vietnam than Desert Storm."

What the Times ignores is that the Rolling Stone article suggests that it is not that administration officials have a “wariness” of discussing “the concept of 'victory',” but as McChrystal's own chief of operations acknowledges, the nature of the conflict itself makes measures of victory and defeat difficult to quantify.