- Military bans troops from Baptist church event honoring ‘God’s Rescue Squad’
- ‘Pocket drones’: U.S. Army developing tiny surveillance tools for the next big war
- Belgian cafe posts sign: Dogs allowed, but Jews stay out
- Gen. Dempsey: Pentagon studying Russian readiness plans not viewed ‘for 20 years’
- John McCain: Botched, two-hour execution of murderer is ‘torture’
- House GOP ready to move border bill
- Bomb squad called after live WWII artillery washes on Cape Cod beach
- HAYDEN: Intelligence, evidence and the case against Russia
- Ohio university quiz implies atheists are naturally smarter than Christians
- Rep. Henry Cuellar on border crisis: ‘Playing defense on the one-yard line’
General faulted for awarding Tillman medal
Question of the Day
Cpl. Tillman, a National Football League star who turned down a $3.6 million contract offer from the Arizona Cardinals to enlist in the U.S. Army after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, was mistakenly killed, along with an Afghan soldier, by fellow Rangers after their platoon was ambushed.
Officials initially announced that he had died at the hands of the enemy, and it was more than a month before the Army finally told his family the truth, though senior officers - including Gen. McChrystal - knew within three days that there was at the least a suspicion of fratricide.
Although Gen. McChrystal wrote in his memo that he did not believe Cpl. Tillman’s death by friendly fire detracted from his valor, or invalidated his Silver Star, the inspector general’s 2007 report criticized him for signing off on a “misleading citation that implied Cpl. Tillman died by enemy fire.”
The investigative report added that the episode had “caused the [Tillman] family to question … the Army’s true motives” in making the award.
Cpl. Tillman’s brother, Kevin, told a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in 2007 that the evidence “revealed a series of contradictions [in the medal citation and other records] that strongly suggest deliberate and careful misrepresentations … intended to deceive the family, but more importantly to deceive the American public.”
The inspector general’s report recommended “appropriate corrective action” against Gen. McChrystal, but in the end he was the only general officer criticized by the report to be spared disciplinary action by the Army, partly because he had raised the alarm about the fratricide up his chain of command.
Gen. McChrystal’s role in the Tillman affair, and questions about detainee abuse by special forces teams he later oversaw in Iraq as commander of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), were all investigated thoroughly by the Senate Armed Services Committee last year when he was confirmed as director of the Joint Staffs, according to a congressional staffer, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media.
The detainee-abuse questions surrounded a secret interrogation center called Camp Nama at the Baghdad International Airport run by a JSOC task force hunting “high-value targets” in Iraq. Five Army Rangers pleaded guilty in December 2005 to kicking and punching prisoners there, and an investigation by Human Rights Watch revealed that Gen. McChrystal was a regular visitor at Camp Nama.
“There was a thorough and rigorous review of these issues. … [Gen. McChrystal] answered all the questions, and the committee voted for his confirmation,” the congressional aide said.
Partly because he was so recently subjected to such a thorough review, other congressional officials said, Gen. McChrystal is expected to be easily confirmed for the new Afghan job.
The approval of the NATO foreign ministers council - required because Gen. McChrystal will also command the NATO International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan - is also a “done deal,” according to Daniel Korski of the European Council on Foreign Relations in Brussels.
“U.S. allies will accept him as the man trusted by Washington to carry out the military parts of Obama’s strategy,” Mr. Korski told The Times.
“But,” he added, “McChrystal would do well to build on [his predecessor’s] work with the United Nations and other allies even while - or especially because - the United States is taking over the Afghan mission, if he hopes to maintain what little NATO cohesion there is.”
Paul Hughes, a retired army colonel and executive director of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, said Gen. McChrystal is “the right guy for the job because he understands the nuances of counterinsurgency. He is the best available officer to put in that position.”
John Nagl, president of the Center for a New American Security, praised Gen. McChrystal as a man of “extraordinary energy and drive and a real dedication to the cause of making the military more effective in Afghanistan.”
TWT Video Picks
Second- and third-stringers eye 2016 if front-runner stumbles
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- 'Pocket drones': U.S. Army developing tiny spies for the next big war
- Russia shipping sophisticated weapons systems to Ukraine separatists
- NAPOLITANO: What if our democracy is a fraud?
- Michelle Obama says money in politics is bad, asks donors for 'big, fat check'
- White House readies for House GOP impeachment push: 'Foolish' to ignore
- Hamas rejects Kerry's call for cease-fire; Fears grow others could join fight against Israel
- EDITORIAL: Detroit's water 'spigot bigots'
- Ted Nugent loses second casino gig for 'racist remarks'
- Let it roll: D.C. Council hits Las Vegas on taxpayer's dime, leaves $14,000 tab
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq