I've just read the Rolling Stone article that lost McChrystal his job. There's a lot more in it than a bunch of military hooligans bad mouthing their bosses.I think they think this war can't be won, and Michael Hastings, the author, manages to convey why. Worth a read, if you haven't:"But facts on the ground, as history has proven, offer little deterrent to a military determined to stay the course. Even those closest to McChrystal know that the rising anti-war sentiment at home doesn't begin to reflect how deeply fucked up things are in Afghanistan. "If Americans pulled back and started paying attention to this war, it would become even less popular," a senior adviser to McChrystal says. Such realism, however, doesn't prevent advocates of counterinsurgency from dreaming big: Instead of beginning to withdraw troops next year, as Obama promised, the military hopes to ramp up its counterinsurgency campaign even further. "There's a possibility we could ask for another surge of U.S. forces next summer if we see success here," a senior military official in Kabul tells me." http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236?RS_show_page=0UPDATE: Here's Ron Paul (for heaven's sakes!):'That McChrystal thing is just a symptom of what we wont face up to, which is that its a totally failed policy,' Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) told POLITICO. 'If we were on the verge of a great success, do you think wed fire the general? So it was an absolute confirmation of the failed policy and yet the policy doesnt change. They should have changed the policy and kept the general.'Maybe that would have been better,' Paul said, before going on to say that it is the policymakers not the military brass who are to blame.Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/39010_Page2.html#ixzz0ryL9hcbhAnd Andrew Sullivan; headline, "Obama: Hostage to Petraeus" : http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/06/petraeus-now-runs-the-war-and-obamas-presidency.html