Added: 3 years ago
From: CharlieRose
Views: 9,252
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (34)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Brigadier General McMaster is one of the best and brightest Army officers, He won the Battle of 73 Easting as a Captain during Desert Storm in 1991, and in doing so redefined the role and tactics of modern armored formations in warfare. I will be surprised if he doesn't end up rising to the top of our military establishment eventually. One day we will see him as Army Chief of Staff, or maybe even as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. I didn't serve under his command, but I am a big, big fan of his.

  • am i the only one that thinks the Col looks and sounds like Christian Bale?

  • Way to rock the crossed Sabers, Sir. Tojours Pret!

  • H.R. McMaster will go down as one of the great Generals of military history. Having served under him, i can tell you he is not only highly intelligent, an amazing leader, but he was one of the most approachable officers i have ever met. He was always one of the guys and could drop "F" bombs with the best of them! He has all the bases covered and as others here have said "i'd follow him through the gates of hell"! Nomad 07 (RET)

  • I served with BG H.R McMasters and must say he is one hell of a leader!!!!!! Army Strong.

  • i served in the 3rd acr in OIF 3 and he is a great leader and i would follow him into the gates of hell

  • You don't know nor have you ever met BG McMaster. He's a Soldiers' Soldier and a great leader. I'd follow the man into the gates of Hell.

  • Since you seem to think you know things let me explain he doesn't have too many medals most of those are military ribbons which can be theater ribbons to schools ect...

  • If I had ten Divisions of these men. I could lead them into the network and delete the enemy. what a fucking tool.

    Gain on the people you served with and delete those who do nothing to better yourself. McMaster. Your a fucking tool.

  • ...sustainable security?...for Iraq...who cares!!?>??..NOT a good mission...not worth American lives...

  • yes i was under him as well in OIF III 1/3 tiger squadron, was a great man

  • I served under him in Iraq as well. He is definitely a great mind and well spoken. I was definitely intimidated, and I sure as heck didn't want to be on the blunt end of one of his butt-chewings, which I was a few times. But it's a good thing he's on our side, and we need more generals like him and Petraeus.

  • good last name

  • Man he is highly decorated wouldnt wanna fight him

  • Yeah, great strategists the US has--winning battles and losing wars!

  • US ability, never sux

    and I have to admit the militarys logistics capabilities are breathtaxing

    what i meant is that xilling or being xilled for false policy, unintended consequences or lac of intelligence dishonors all on the battlefield who want the supreme honor of the country with the greatest endowments, human and material, on earth

    The United States of America

    but enough is enough, i will criticize the military because

    of its missions, but organizationally its still has great

    components

  • us military history sux

    except for one man

    pat tillman

    rest in peace, we will always love you

    my brother

  • obviously u dont know us military history or u just simply dont have the intellect to interpret it.

  • US military history has strategic fallacies and failures and has consequences that were not intended

    whether you want to accept it from me or people who have devoted their lives to studying it, its up to you, morgoth295

    but i can assure you, that there is ample evidence of strategic failure and consequences that were not intended

    not all of these guys are so heroic

    even if a lot of them are braver and greater than I

    but why die for a lie

    live for the truth

  • from a historical p.o.v. the u.s. military has yet to lose a war. i know what ur probably thinking: VIETNAM. yeah but let me tell u we one nearly every battle; we "lost" cuz the home front lost the will to fight, not the military. and the current military strategy in iraq (dont think that i support the war though) is working albeit slowly. if you can provide any statistics and evidence to back up ur claim, im really interested (honestly).

  • Valid point, the fight in Vietnam was a police action, and nothing more.

    Clearly, Vietnam wasn't worth the fight, no matter what the perspective. The U.S. sacrificed 58K people, and created such huge social disorder at home that our minds could never be won over for the cause.

    And what was the cause anyway, communism? No, military and corporate self interests...

    What Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz­/Bremer/etc. have done to this country is unforgivable - debt and destruction is their legacy.

  • @Morgoth295 That's right, but to say that we lost in Vietnam is not really accurate. The home front may have lost the will to fight due to incompetence on the part of the civilian leadership, but every single fight with the NVA and the VietCong was won by the U.S. Military, hands down. We did not suffer military defeat in Vietnam. We suffered the incompetence of a set of civilian leaders who had no clue of what their goal was, and therefore had no well-defined strategy.

  • Obviously the illegal invasion was a travesty. What equals that though is Rumsfeld's total disinterest in post-Saddam reconstruction. Especially since there were a bunch of guys like McMaster standing around who knew how to quell an insurgency even before one began. We had the will and the knowledge but refused to use either. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush should be in irons.

  • You're are not bright. Why don't you educate yourself of post VE Germany.

  • help me understand what you're talking about. What does VE Germany have to do with today's conflicts? Any comparison is a stretch of the imagination. But I'm apparently not bright so, keep doing what you're doing because it's gone so well for you so far.

  • Bolster Iraq's legitimacy?

    We put a gangster puppet in charge of Iraq

    Iraq is Martin Scorsese's, Gangs of New York!

  • i am sorry to say.

    but there was not a underestimation of the enemy. nor a mistake regarding strategy.

    the problem was going to war for imaginary weapons of mass destruction with a commander in chief that does not have an iq above 90.

  • No need to Bash the Colonel though..he did, ultimately, what he was told to do..

  • No don't bash this man, bash the one who told him what to do. The Colonel is a great American and great soldier.

  • I don't think you know BG McMaster; he wouldn't agree with the anti Bush administration rants that continue to get the thumbs up. Give Obama 3 more years and you will truely see the depths of failure. Than again he'll just blame Bush and the lemmings will lap it up.

  • It should be clear that we made fundamental strategic mistakes from the very beginning in conducting the Iraq War. I think the idea that our "hearts and minds" campaign at the time consisted of airdropping propaganda fliers, instead of street level and governmental level action, underscores how inept the strategizers were.

  • Algerians, who at first were mostly in favor of peace, turned increasingly toward the goal of independence, supported by other Arab countries and by worldwide public opinion fueled by anti-colonialist ideas. Meanwhile, the French divided themselves on issues of "French Algeria" (l'Algérie Française), of the maintenance of the status quo, the acceptance of negotiations and of an intermediate status between independence and complete integration in the French Republic, and complete independence.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more