COOPER: Well, President Obama cannot be getting much sleep these days. He's got a runaway oil well down here and a controversial general heading his way.
The General, Stanley McChrystal, has apologized for his remarks in "Rolling Stone" and is reportedly willing to step down if asked. And the president may ask, especially if he wants to make a point about civilian control of the military, especially during wartime. The last time this happened, President Harry Truman relieved Douglas MacArthur of his command in Korea. So, this is a big decision for President Obama. I spoke about it earlier with Democratic strategist James Carville, senior political analyst and a former presidential adviser to Republicans and Democratic presidents David Gergen, and national security analyst Peter Bergen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: James should McChrystal resign or be fired?
JAMES CARVILLE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think the most interesting thing about this whole thing, Anderson, the only guy to lose his job so far is the civilian press aide who arranged the interview. This is the perfect metaphor for the United States in the 21st century, to fire the press aide.
I don't -- I think eventually I think he's going to have to resign or be fired. I think it's a shame. This guy has obviously had a distinguished career. He's a great soldier. He's a brave man. But this thing is -- he's not going to overcome this. And a lot of his senior staff are not going to overcome this. A lot of careers are going to be ruined over this.
And it's a tragedy, but this is -- this is going to be what happens here. Obviously, he's not going to be able to continue. He will not be able to be effective in his role anymore.
COOPER: David Gergen, do you agree with that?
DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I think -- I think there should be a severe reprimand, both for what the general said and for just allowing a press guy into this sort of locker room talk, Team America out of a "South Park" movie. And it was insubordination.
And the President's dilemma is that he said, you know, Tony Hayward, from BP, if he worked for him, he would have been fired a long time ago for some of the dumb things he has been saying.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: And also, David, to your point, though, it's not the first time that the president has had to take this guy to the woodshed. I mean, there were public comments he made about Vice President Biden's policies in Afghanistan that the president called him in on about. There were documents which leaked out which were -- he was blamed for, whether or not he did actually leak those documents, that the White House was furious about.
So, you're saying, still, this is not enough for him to be fired?
GERGEN: I think the president has every reason to fire him if he wants. But, on the other side, we're on the eve of the Kandahar offensive. He's a terrific soldier. We've had presidents in the past -- Harry Truman put up with Douglas MacArthur for a long time before he did relieve him.
Lincoln put up with McClellan for a long time, and despite humiliations, because it was so necessary for the war in both cases.
So, I would say a severe reprimand is in order. If the president wants to fire him, he can. But I think it would be a setback for the war. And that's more important.
COOPER: Peter Bergen, this is obviously difficult for the President, because McChrystal was the guy he selected after getting rid of the last general.
PETER BERGEN, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Indeed. On May 11th of last year, General McKiernan, who was a holdover from the Bush administration, was very publicly fired by Secretary Gates, and, in effect -- and Stan McChrystal effectively became President Obama's pick for this position. And, so, you know -- and, obviously, is widely regarded within the U.S. military as the best man for the job.
So, you know, President Obama has a very difficult decision to make.
COOPER: It's interesting, Peter, though. I just talked to the author, who was saying that he kind of -- his belief was that they were kind of intentionally saying this stuff around him. It wasn't as if this author, this writer, or this journalist spent a lot of time building up their trust.
I mean, he literally showed up in Paris, and they took him out drinking, and started -- you know, and made fun of Vice President Biden. He thinks almost they were trying to kind of send a message or shake things up. Does that make any sense to you, Peter?
BERGEN: Well, I think -- let me say something slightly different, which is I think it would be very hard for -- it's very hard to imagine General David Petraeus or his team allowing a journalist to get this kind of access or making these kind of comments.
I think it showed a certain naivete of General McChrystal and his team. It -- would the fact that a number of the most disparaging comments came from his aides is not a sufficient excuse for General McChrystal. The aides who work for somebody like General McChrystal work with him 24/7.
It's reflective of the kinds of things that he's thinking or saying. So, I don't buy just simply because most of the -- many of the disparaging comments came from the aides, that that doesn't necessarily represent McChrystal's thinking. It was obviously a very, very -- lapse of -- a great lapse of judgment by somebody, by the way, who is described by everybody who knows him as one of the most disciplined men in the U.S. military.
And so he obviously let his guard slip on this one.
COOPER: It's strange, though, James, because, I mean, McChrystal's sniping wasn't really about strategy. It was about politics. And I mean, McChrystal and his allies basically won the argument within the administration about how to handle Afghanistan. CARVILLE: Well, it was. And he attacked the Vice President. I mean, look, people that -- this is a very difficult situation over there. It's the longest war in U.S. history. There's going to be differences of opinion. You would think somebody like General McChrystal, more than anybody, would understand this.
And -- and you know here is the senior staff engaging in this kind of talk and behavior, I mean, it -- it doesn't give you very much confidence in the high command over there. And I'm sure they are all, in their own right, brave and distinguished soldiers, but there's something beyond that.
And, in terms of -- look, De Gaulle said the graveyards are full of indispensable people. And the fact that if the United States Army is at a point where we can't fight a war unless we have one general, I -- I just don't buy that. It just can't be.
COOPER: David, how do, then -- I mean, to James' point, how do they -- how does he continue working with these people who he has disparaged, I mean, not Vice President Biden, but -- but Eikenberry, the Ambassador, and other folks?
I mean, Hillary Clinton seems about the only person that -- that his team had respect for.
GERGEN: Well, that's true, Anderson. But that was true before the article came out. He wasn't getting along with Dick Holbrooke. He wasn't getting along with Ambassador Eikenberry. That's a three- man team.
The one person he has been getting along well with is President Karzai. And they have formed a very strong partnership. Karzai has said today he doesn't want to see him go, because he thinks he is -- he is very important to the war.
Look, I just want to go back to this. The guy was insubordinate. The president has a right to fire him for that. It is a firing offense. The question is who can prosecute this war well? And General McChrystal at this point is the man who is in the position. And if we pull him out right now, it's a very, very sensitive time, and it could be a real setback for the war.
COOPER: James Carville, David Gergen, Peter Bergen, thank you, guys, very much.