Hi, not_abel. I understand the distinction but I still see it as mostly another strawman. Generals with four stars on their shoulders should be used to taking questions from the press and a simple "no comment" is all that was required. McChyrstal went at some length to answer and while it may not have been in his original speech -- it would never have gotten through Pentagon vetting otherwise --he surely anticipated such a question might be asked of him and jumped on his opportunity when given.

You make an interesting point about Obama's lose-lose situation. Sometimes military actions do have shifting political realities associated with them that President must deal with but field commanders do not. I can see how the latter could become frustrated with that situation but winning a war at the cost of future peace/stability is little better than winning a battle at the cost of losing a war. Sadly, your assessment that Obama may have picked the wrong man for this job may be only too true.

Thank you for your reply.