McChrystal

I've been especially interested in the blow-out from the McChrystal/Rolling Stone brouhaha and I am especially interested to see how much quality analysis as well as sober navel-gazing it has generated from the press. This particular David Brooks article is a great case in point, but there have been many others that I shared through my reader feed (another is the great Ezra Klein collumn on the greatness of the military as an institution).

My take on the whole situation is that it was a mistake by McChrystal, and added to his past transgressions (London speech et al), Obama had no other choice, and I thought handled it very well. His closing sentiments were again testament to his wonderful oratory and Petraeus was an inspired choice.

However, it highlights one thing in modern political discourse (or in discourse in general) - this monumental fuck-up generated some of the most sensible, moderate, balanced analysis of anything on the modern world. Even people who I would have thought usually would have taken the opportunity to score political points, rallied around the issue and produced some thoughtful contributions to the collection of modern thought.

I don't want us to be hippies and all get along, but it makes for quality reading when hyperbole isn't a default option.