Kerry Statement On McChrystal Rolling Stone Profile

[ProSense]

Kerry Statement On McChrystal Rolling Stone Profile

“When General McChrystal called me this morning, I emphasized that my concern is our policy in Afghanistan and what it will take to be successful there. I respect General McChrystal as a soldier and always have. What’s most important is the 94,000 American troops serving in harm’s way in Afghanistan. Their safety and their mission should be the priority we stay focused on above all else. The Commander in Chief and his national security team, including his top commander on the ground, must have confidence in each other and confidence in the path forward in Afghanistan. It would be a grave mistake to allow this unfolding news drama to distract anyone from the mission at hand. Now is not the time for Washington to be sidetracked by chatter. Everyone needs to take a deep breath and give the President and his national security team the space to decide what is in the best interest of our mission, and to have their face-to-face discussion tomorrow without a premature Washington feeding frenzy.”

[Rageneau]

1. So what did he say?

I can't tell what Kerry is trying to get across to the public.

Not a new problem.

Never use one word when 23 will do just as well.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

3. "So what did he say?" ... He tries to cover all the bases, as usual.

Kerry didn't say anything.

We'll have to wait for President Obama's decision.

[politicasista]

5. Nope. People thought he was a-kissing

the General and told him to STFU.

[Mass]

7. People cant be bothered reading. Too hard. No surprise some like Sara Palin

or her equivalents on the left or the right.

Even some reporters did not read the statement to the end and said Kerry was supporting McCrystal, something he did not do.

[politicasista]

8. That is scary

Went and deleted other comment because it wasn't constructive or helpful. :hide:

[Mass]

6. Which was his point. I am not sure why so many people are not getting it.

I guess it is getting too hard for some to think rather than twit.

His point was simply to ask to the DC microcosm not to make things work and force a decision (any) on Obama, so that he could weight his options.

Obviously, this will not satisfy those who think yelling is always the good option, but I thought what he was saying was crystal clear.

[karynnj]

38. I have no problem understanding

1) The real issue is getting the policy in Afghanistan right. (background - Afghanistan is not going well. When McChrystal wanted 40,000 more soldiers, Kerry and Reed were with Biden on the side of caution. The four hearings Kerry had came to a conclusion that we needed to have Afghan "good enough" governance and security to immediately take over areas after we eliminated the Taliban there. That is precisely what did NOT happen in Marjah. At this point, there are stories that the Taliban is resurgent there and is brutally murdering anyone who they saw as cooperating with us. This will make the next province harder as fewer people will be willing to side with us. This is Vietnam all over. Kerry had a Marjah hearing a few weeks ago and another Afghanistan hearing today -which I haven't watched. Point - the issue is getting the policy right - and that could determine if McChrystal is the right person. )

2) There has to be mutual trust between Obama and the top general. (guestion - can Obama get there from here. I would bet that could happen only if McChrystal is significantly better than anyone else and their is a sincere apology and a real commitment to change on his part.)

3) It is Obama's decision.

[blm]

13. He's saying stay FOCUSED on the MISSION and the troops performing the mission and deal with the

other stuff in the confines of the oval office...for Pres Obama to deal with it and the rest of us to support his decision.....Sheesh...what is so difficult to understand?

Sometimes I think obtuseness is deliberate.

[politicasista]

2. delete

not appropriate.

[JuniperLea]

4. "and what it will take to be successful there"

So, they talked miracles? Fairy tales? Munchkins and flying houses? There is no winning there... we've known that for a very long time. I think McChrystal knows this too and instead of "failing" in the un-winnable wars, he's finding a way out.

No matter what Obama does, or McChrystal does, the GOP are going to bludgeon Obama with it.

[ProSense]

9. I think what Kerry is saying is that

this is Obama's policy, his decision. He is going to base his decision on the his administration's assessment.

I don't think he's going to do it based on what the right thinks.

[JuniperLea]

10. I get that...

And I never meant to suggest that he would bend to RW criticism... I have a real problem with Kerry speaking of the war in Afghanistan as if it were "winnable" when everyone knows that's hogwash. It taints everything else he said.

[politicasista]

11. He needs to admit that

Iraq and Afghanistan were/are both mistakes.


Stay true to yourself Senator. :)

[JuniperLea]

15. Exactly right...

I've always liked Kerry... but this gives me a very bad vibe. He's been pushing this "win" thing, and it's a myth.

[politicasista]

17. Bingo n/t

[Mass]

29. His statement is a statement of support to Obama and the troops. It is clear when you read it.

I am not exactly sure what the problem is. This morning, Spencer Ackerman had a post in the Washington Independent where he was stating that Kerry was asking Obama to decide what to do about this war. I tend to think he is right. Of course, it is worded carefully, which is Kerry's style, but so what. I am not sure it is a time for histrionics.

Somehow, the fact that he is a serious man that takes things seriously seems to be seen as a bad thing.

[karynnj]

45. I read it that way too - after all Kerry brought up getting the policy right

- which the question did not ask about and which few are speaking of. It is not going well.

It is consistent with his VERY tentative support of last year - after his hearings and Obama's decision which was for far more troops than Kerry suggested. (Obama gave McChrystal less than he wanted - Gates and Clinton initially agreed with McChrystal then proposed about the number that Obama agreed to.

The hearings Kerry had came to a conclusion that we needed to have Afghan "good enough" governance and security to immediately take over areas after we eliminated the Taliban there. As these were scarce in Afghanistan, Kerry thought we couldn't move beyond that. Having "good enough" governance and security is precisely what did NOT happen in Marjah. At this point, there are stories that the Taliban is resurgent there and is brutally murdering anyone who they saw as cooperating with us. This will make the next province harder as fewer people will be willing to side with us - and we will need to "win" Marjah again. This is Vietnam all over.

[ProSense]

12. Kerry isn't saying anything he hasn't said before,

He's been holding hearings on Afghanistan since Obama took office, and has visited the country a few times. He knows the situation there as well as anyone.

[politicasista]

14. How many people know that the Senator is chair of a committee that focuses on FP?

Probably not many. Many in the MSM don't even know. Go figure.

[JuniperLea]

16. Of course...

But he's still pushing the meme that we can be "successful" in this war. We cannot. This is an intelligence and police effort situation, not a military war situation. Afghanistan and Iraq should never have been... he needs to tell the truth.

[ProSense]

18. You cannot put words in his mouth.

If you want to know his position on Afghanistan, read his speech from December.

[JuniperLea]

19. I'm not, ProSense... read your own OP...

“When General McChrystal called me this morning, I emphasized that my concern is our policy in Afghanistan and what it will take to be successful there."

[ProSense]

20. That's not what I meant. I know the word is in his statement.

I was referring to the comment "tell the truth."

I'm simply saying that Senator Kerry's position has been stated clearly for a long time, long before January 2009.

[politicasista]

21. key word = successful n/t

[ProSense]

23. Successful, what does that mean?

Unless you know the Senator's position, what does successful mean?

The President is remaining in Afghnistan. Do you think he is doing so to be unsuccessful?

[politicasista]

25. It seems that he

thinks this mission can still be successful. Don't think winnable, but this is what is being interpreted. Not just on DU, but in the MSM where Americans may pick up on that comment.

It's bad enough that his comment is being taken as "kissing McChrystal's ass" and since he did not call for his firing/resignation, he should "STFU."

This is just like the IWR and Iraq all over again. And he got burned big time for that.

Obama wants to end the war, and he wants to be successful at it. Firing the General and listening to his VP and SFRC Chair among others rather than the warhawks will help accomplish his goal.


Every night on the news, there are always reports of casualties in Afghanistan and Fort Campbell, KY (near TN) has taken a hit the last few weeks.


I have no problem with Kerry defending Obama, but he knows the horrors of war and it seems like he is holding back.

[JuniperLea]

26. Perspective is absolutely everything...

And people (other than freaks like most of us here who live and breath by details) aren't going to remember Kerry's stance on anything he said prior to this statement.

It's like being an actor... only as good as your latest film.

[politicasista]

31. Yep.

Though he does some good interviews, media savvy has been an Achilles heel.

[Mass]

32. Nope, but if you prefer to think so, feel free.\nt

[politicasista]

34. No need to n/t

[JuniperLea]

22. And how long do you expect anyone except a DUer or the like to remember that?

What he is saying now is what matters, and his statements today make him appear to believe there can be success of some sort in this war... and this is what people will believe, regardless of what they thought in January of 2009, or before.

[ProSense]

24. "his statements today make him appear to believe there can be success of some sort in this war"

Of course that what it means, but you say it as if he needs to make another determination. It's not going to happen. He has laid out his views on what the strategy should be.

[JuniperLea]

28. Then he will win no favors with the public at large...

And that is a shame. You and I will remember him for what he believes... most of America will only remember the last thing he said... which isn't in keeping with what he believes.

For the record, I love Kerry. I still think he needs media training in a big way.

[ProSense]

30. I don't think that's the point.

Let's face it: The President's views on Iraq aren't much different from Kerry's (or Biden's), except Kerry has called for a more cautious and comprehensive approach, that is not committting troops without such a strategy.

[politicasista]

33. His staff has needs to learn how to be more media savvy

Don't think his spokespeople (minus Wade) are not on the ball as they should be. He had some good ones, but they are in public office themselves now. :)

[Mass]

35. So, you think the statement would have been better received if he had said

we should withdraw from Afghanistan. In what world do you leave?

Or do you think Kerry should have criticized Obama and told him what to do? Because it is hard to understand what you believe should have been done.

[politicasista]

37. Unfortunately, we can't leave

And no, he should defend Obama. Especially since a lot of bloggers at Jack and Jill Politics complain daily that Obama's allies are M.I.A. In the end, it will be Obama's decision to make and I agree with him there. Maybe just sick of the bashing of people trying to help Obama.

Maybe frustration that people don't "get" the Senator, or don't see what he has to offer with the Climate Change bill and/or an Obama Administration. Or maybe frustration that people closest to me can not see what you all see. Some other Democrat besides Obama, Biden, and the late Uncle Ted that has spine.

Have stayed here long enough, so will exit this thread. Peace.

[Mass]

39. But it is all he was doing in this statement. Telling people in DC to let Obama decide.

People may disagree on that and think he should have less loyalty toward Obama (sometimes I wished he did disagree more often with him), but if you dont disagree, I am not sure what the object of the criticism is?

[JuniperLea]

42. Up-thread you accused others of not reading/understanding...

Methinks you may have assumed something here... and it led you astray.

[Mass]

70. No clue what you are talking about, but it may be that you are not that clear yourself.

[JuniperLea]

71. Looks like the 'not clear' is on the other foot, dearie...

Mass (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-22-10 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. People cant be bothered reading. Too hard. No surprise some like Sara Palin
Edited on Tue Jun-22-10 03:59 PM by Mass
or her equivalents on the left or the right.

Even some reporters did not read the statement to the end and said Kerry was supporting McCrystal, something he did not do.

[politicasista]

50. Frustrated

observations in and outside of DU. (no depression or anything).

Will stop there because not the most prolific poster and maybe I am getting tired of the day to day political drama because I made a mess in this thread. I don't always agree with them both, but I always wish them best.

[ProSense]

36. Why? Does the media need to be convinced that the Senator supports a mission in Afghanistan?

You seem to be concerned that Kerry's statement will be taken at its word.

[JuniperLea]

41. No one is concerned with what the media "thinks"...

Or even if it does, which I'm inclined to doubt.

The concern is with "We The People" or, rather, those of us who are not as hip to the latest political compass points. The public at large doesn't get the nuance, the inferred, the history. All they "get" is in the here and now.

[ProSense]

43. "The public at large doesn't get the nuance, the inferred, the history."

So you believe he should make his decision based on polling?

[JuniperLea]

48. Oh for fuck's sake...

No... now who is putting words into mouths? Jesus H. Christ on a cracker... please read the last of your posts that I responded to... I can't make it any more plain and simple than that... and with that, I must follow another wise DUer who decided too much time had been spent here, and has bid you adieu...

Later 'gator... Peace

[politicasista]

44. No, but when

someone says he needs "media training," that is not good. What was taken from the interview was "STFU Kerry, you just a-kissing, bla, bla," instead of the situation on the ground and Climate Change.

Of course, Obama knows how the media operates and they are not interested in truth, just spin and distortion.


To be honest, me don't know what to think. We should have a smart end to the war, but Afghanistan is a messy situation all around.

Maybe it is just frustration that no matter what the Senator does (and for that matter Obama too), it is not quite good enough (not that he should not try). Look at the Climate Change feedback. Obama is a strong messenger and hopefully, he can convince the "Who cares?" people on why we need a Clean Air Energy bill.

Not easy when you have people who think and act like Obama, Biden, and Uncle Ted (R.I.P.) were the only Dems that have/had spine.



It's ok, if I get called a whiner or whiny that's fine. I was called that back during the SOS debate in 08, and not welcome anywhere anymore.

[ProSense]

47. What are you talking about? n/t

[politicasista]

52. Frustration that some (not all) of Obama's supporters don't appreciate

what the Senator is doing for the Obama Agenda. See what I mean?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8615415

Just ranting at frustration that people don't "get" the Senator, or just don't get it, or get anything. :shrug:


Probably made the Ignore list of many of late (due to some biting unhelpful sarcasm) :rofl:. It may be time for me to go back in lurk mode for a while.

[JuniperLea]

55. "you are ignoring the author of this thread"

:rofl:

I wish I could see the hubbub! But it's probably the reason that person is on my list!

I think a good 50% of my ignore list have received a pizza delivery, however.

I think you are the only person on this thread who got what I was saying... the rest of it has been reiteration and redirection... herding cats and nailing jello to walls...

[politicasista]

63. It was a

silly Kerry for President in 2012 thread that brought out both Kerry and Obama bashers. The OP is probably on ignore for a good reason.

[JuniperLea]

46. My Dear ProSense...

I'm not criticizing Kerry's stance... I am well aware of it and I'm very much in his camp! What I'm saying is PR 101... no one is going to remember what he has said in the past... they only know what he says today... and tomorrow they will forget today and only know tomorrow. What I'm saying is he needs to choose his words more carefully. It's not a stretch by any means to draw on the word "success" in this quote. There can be no "success" in this war... Generals think in terms of "winning" wars... there is no "winning/success" in this war.

[ProSense]

53. I'm not understanding why you think he's saying anything different?

Despite this being about the current situation with the General, what is different about Kerry's position on Afghanistan?

You keep emphasizing "success," but why do you think that changes his views on what the strategy in Afghanistan should be?

[JuniperLea]

56. Oh dear... I'll try one more time...

It doesn't change his view... and that is NOT what I'm saying.

I'm concerned about PR... it's my job... and he needs to understand, much like you need to understand, that what people read today isn't going to recall what they read last January, or any other month.

He is speaking to a General. To a General success in a war means winning a war. People are going to think that is Kerry's concern as well. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT MYSELF!!!!! It's a perception thing.

He has never wowed via media; he needs some training in that area.

[ProSense]

57. "I'm concerned about PR"

Why? What is it that you expect the media to do with this statement?

"People are going to think that is Kerry's concern as well."

I don't anyone is going to remotely connect Kerry's position with the General's.

The policy is Obama's not the General's.

[JuniperLea]

58. I'll leave you now... I'm not sure why you can't get this...

I'm on Kerry's side. Kerry is lousy at public speaking, speaking to the media, etc. I wish he were better. I've given information here on how he can become better. I've done everything but draw you a picture and you still don't get it.

I give up. Your comments have ceased making any sense because you don't get it. I give up. Sorry... nothing on you... you seem to have something stuck in your craw and you aren't listening, so be it.

[ProSense]

60. "Kerry is lousy at public speaking, speaking to the media, etc."

This is a written statement.

Kerry is not lousy at public speaking. Did you miss the 2004 debates? Did you miss his 2008 convention speech? Have you missed all the times he smacked down Republicans on the Sunday talk shows?

What are you basing your opinion on?

[JuniperLea]

61. Buh bye... really... eom... n/t... th th th that's all folks! eom

[politicasista]

65. It depends

Have not seen him speak live, but last summer, I saw the Kennedy Memorial Service with him, Biden, Dodd, Caroline, et. al. speaking.

Though Kerry did good, my father thought that Biden connected more on a personal level, and he was funny and as always tell it like it is.

He was surprised how good of a speaker Dodd was. He was impressed with MA Gov. Patrick and that funny politician.

When I told him that Kerry spoke too, he just thought that while he did good, he was rather "boring." (His words not mine). He pays attention. He saw the 2004 debates. He left the room after Clinton spoke, so he missed Kerry's 2008 speech.

The problem, he isn't Teddy and/or Obama. My dad remembers the Kerry of 1971 and did not see that in 2004. He saw another Democrat who "went along with with a BS war." The 71 dude spoke the truth. This is one of the reasons why Climate Change is not getting much attention, besides having Lieberman on the bill, people just don't care about it or do not see that Kerry is good on the environment and has a lot to offer to a President Obama agenda.

It sounds unfair to compare him with Uncle Ted, but most align him with Dukakis (whom my parents think was a zero) than Uncle Ted, which is unfortunate because Kerry was close to Uncle Ted, but he can't change the flaws of how the 04 went down, which is what people remember. He can't change the IWR vote either. That's the way it is.


To some, he may not be a lousy speaker, but to others, it leaves a lot to be desired. Not everyone can be an Obama.

[ProSense]

66. It always depends.

Everyone has an opinion.

"The problem, he isn't Teddy and/or Obama. "

No, that's not actually a problem. That's like the problem with Obama not being Kerry or FDR. Not a problem.

[politicasista]

67. Well,

it is observation.

When asked who is the true inheritor of the Kennedy legacy. Most will say Obama.

When asked who should take up Kennedy's mantle in the Senate, most say Franken, Feingold, Sanders, or even Grayson. Not many has said the considered the Senator (despite the progressive/liberal creds). Interesting he gets attacked for being an environmentalist here and BCCI.

Not easy wishing that people could see what you see and realize what a decent person the Senator is and what he could offer to an Obama agenda or realize that another Democrat besides Obama, Biden and Kennedy has/had steel in spine.


JAHO.

[ProSense]

68. "When asked who is the true inheritor of the Kennedy legacy. Most will say Obama."

The President is going to inherit Kennedy's legacy?

Who is going to inherit the President's legacy?

[politicasista]

69. Thought the Kennedy family passed the torch to

Obama when they endorsed him for President. As far as inheriting Obama's legacy, wouldn't that be Malia and Sasha? He will hopefully be one of the best presidents in our lifetimes.

[karynnj]

72. What was your opinion - not your dad's

Kerry's speech was considered by many who reported to be one of the best. My opinion was that it was obviously sincere, personal and poetic at the end when Kerry sketched an image of Kennedy still sailing on the sound. The speech was pretty obviously written by Kerry from his heart.

Kerry first attained notice through a speech - a speech he wrote. A speech good enough, that his enemies have tried for decades to claim he didn't. The media has designated many - including Bill Clinton and John Edwards as wonderful speakers - yet give me one line either said that will be remembered 39 years after they said it. Kerry has that and it is a deep, meaningful, thoughtful line. Bill Clinton had 8 years as President with many speaking opportunities and he does not. To this point, it is not clear what Obama speech will enter books on important speeches.
(Re-reading this - include only lines that will not embarrass them.)

People also forget that the NYT (not a Kerry fan) called Kerry's speech for Obama as the best non-acceptance speech at a Democratic convention in over two decades. This also was a speech he wrote for himself. (Note that would even cover the speech that did so much for Obama) I could link, but I'm lazy.

As to Biden - he had a very emotional true story to tell. It is not because he is a good speaker - he usually is pretty mediocre and he can be amazingly bad. (think 26 minutes on the Alito committee in atream of conscious torrent that had people here and on Daily Kos tearing their hair out) He is also far more likely than Kerry to get in trouble speaking off the cuff.

I know you love Obama and he is a great speaker. However, I really think Kerry at his best is easily equivalent. I find I love Obama's speeches, but when they are over I really don't recall any lines and often no images. With Kerry, not only do I remember how he said somethings - they surface nearly verbatim in comments from others. Where Obama wins is that the media is in love with him and he has a huge easy smile that comes very naturally and often - he is more extroverted than Kerry.

[politicasista]

73. To be honest

am still trying to find one.

Not saying that Kerry's speech was not heartfelt or well written, but IMO, many (not even Democrats or Liberals) do not realize that he and Uncle Ted had a pretty good bond. Some people just think there is negative (don't want to say bore) factor with him, but you almost could say the same for Obama when he goes into policy details.

As far as remembering lines from B. Clinton's speech. The only thing remembered is "I still believe in a place called Hope." (too young to vote then, but I remember that being quote). From Edwards it was the "Two Americas," but it was all fake. A lot of people still love Obama's speech from 04, especially the line about not being a "Liberal America, Conservative America, but the United States of America, skinny kid with a funny name, red states, blue states, purple states." Paraphrasing

Do think that about Biden, but he is funny.

I like Obama and Kerry. Hopefully, he will still value the Senator's opinion as an independent voice. Though it is too bad that people could not/can not see that the Senator has integrity just like Obama (IMHO, the "rich" label used against him and Momma T hurt him). True, Obama is more extroverted, with a life story people can relate to, but there is nothing wrong with being reserved.


Maybe just tired of the disrespect. Disrespect of the President, Senator, of everything right now. Maybe wishing that people would pay more attention to who is really on our side. :shrug:

[karynnj]

74. Thanks

I think that most people know that Kerry and Kennedy became very close - particularly during and after 2004. It was Kerry who was always with him in the few trips back to the Senate in the last year. Always walking right behind him (with Vicki) entering the building. In one of the last ones, Kerry quickly, smoothly and as inconspicuously as possible moved to keep him from falling when he lost his balance. It was also Teresa Kerry who helped Vicki when Kenendy had a seizure at the inauguration - and it was JK who caught him as he started to fall. I saw a video filmed at a celebration for Kerry after he was sworn in again in 2009. Kennedy was there - and the comments each had for the other were the most moving comments I ever heard between 2 politicians. Kerry even spoke of the love had for Kennedy, who had joked that "Kerry would always be his President". This was no disrespect to Obama, who both MA worked hard for, but Kennedy never dropped his support for Kerry until Kerry left the race. it was not a surprise that Kerry was the first person Vicki Kennedy hugged when the Health care passed the Senate.)

Now, Dodd was for a very long time Kennedy's best friend in the Senate - both divorced and both enjoying drinking and partying - in addition to the hard work in the Senate. Hatch also had a special relationship - he persuaded Kennedy to stop that life style, Through both periods, Kennedy was a mentor to Kerry - especially in the beginning. (It was also clear from what he said in his endorsement of Tour of Duty, he always saw Kerry as special.

I actually DO see people credit Kerry with integrity. I just think some place a lower value on it than I do. In fact, there is no politician, Obama included, who I have seen the words integrity, honesty, moral or ethical - associated with. The next closest is probably Jimmy Carter, which shows that although these are all important qualities, they are not near the top of what people really want in a leader. Even in the wake of the loss in 2004, I remember a 2005 Daily Kos thread when Kerry went to a MA funeral of a soldier. There was an enormous outpouring of sentiment that he was a good man - even when the vast majority there had not wanted him as the nominee and were often angry with him.

I actually think it is Kerry's seriousness - not that he is wealthy.

"Two Americas" is just the name of Edwards speech. As to Clinton, "I still believe in a place called Hope." was simply the tag line of the film made for Clinton's first convention - when the media covered 9 hours - rather than 3. It was written by the AR friends Linda Bloodworth Thomason and Harry Thomason. I think this was the last line of his speech as well. It is an emotional line - but it is not clear what it means - which is as the Thomason's wanted.

[politicasista]

75. Makes sense.

Thanks.

[karynnj]

49. What does "successful" mean?

The fact is that McCrystal's approach has NOT been successful. Kerry's 4 hearings last year make it clear that he is not with Hillary in thinking we can create a new Afghanistan or McChrystal's near neo-con plans.

Kerry had a hearing on Marjah - and it was not success. (I didn't watch today's hearing.)

[JuniperLea]

51. To a General at war...

Success = winning the war.

[karynnj]

54. To President Obama or to Senator Kerry, it would be achieving their objective

Here Kerry had four hearings last year where figuring out what the object is was a major goal. It came down to a pretty minimal goal of not allowing a shelter for terrorists and to prevent destabilizing Pakistan.

I think the point though is that Kerry was saying that the order of importance is:

- Getting the policy right
- Having the right people working respectfully together
- Worrying about who said what to Rolling Stone - wrong though it was.

The first suggests the current policy needs to be re-thought - something you obviously agree with.

[karynnj]

40. It depends what you mean by succeeding or winning

If you read any of his serious op-eds last year or the summaries of his hearings, it is very clear that his definition is simply to prevent a state that harbors terrorists.

This is why he was NOT in line with Hillary, Gates and McChrystal.

[JuniperLea]

59. Please read what I said again...

You don't get it. It's all about perception in the here and now. I'm on Kerry's side; always have been on Kerry's side. I think he's a genius... he's just a lousy speaker.

I never said any of the things you are accusing here... I give up... really...

[wisteria]

27. Senator Kerry is saying this is a serious matter and it should be handled as such.

Knee-jerk reactions are not appropriate here.

[ProudDad]

62. Now is the time to get the fuck out of Afghanistan!!!

And everywhere else the USAmerican Empire has its hooks in...

[Spazito]

64. This is what I get from it....

Separate the mission from McCrystal. McCrystal is NOT the mission.

Why I read it that way is:

"What’s most important is the 94,000 American troops serving in harm’s way in Afghanistan. Their safety and their mission should be the priority we stay focused on above all else. The Commander in Chief and his national security team, including his top commander on the ground, must have confidence in each other and confidence in the path forward in Afghanistan."

We know from the article McCrystal adheres in neither key areas stipulated by Kerry: no respect for civilian authority, and no confidence in the path forward in Afghanistan. From what Kerry stated and from what we know from the Rolling Stones article, I am surmising McCrystal's ass is grass, his resignation will be accepted and the mission will go on.

Just my take for what it's worth.