Gen McChrystal's relief highlights an issue that is always touchy- mainly: how much freedom of personal expression does an officer have in expressing his personal beliefs on subjects such as politics, religion, the Chain of Command etc.. Was McChrystal's relief justified? Some of his defenders are now saying that they thought that they were "off the record" and feel like he was sandbagged by the reporter. Can a 4 star general ever really be "off the record"? Is it ever proper for a senior to either express or tolerate an atmosphere that is somewhat contemptuous of the Chain of Command? And a larger question- When and how is it ok for an officer to express his opinions on topics of policy, politics, religion etc...? The point of this thread is not to express either support or disparage the decisions of the administration. Everyone has their opinions and that is always the case. Rather, the point is to ask- do officers have limits on their freedom to express their opinions? The UCMJ for sure sets some limits but functionally how does that play out? It's not just politics- religion also comes to play. LTG Boykin got in trouble for expressing his personal religious beliefs a few years ago and the USAFA had a fairly big controversy over senior officers publically sponsoring what some saw as an environment that excluded or pressured those who were not evangelical Christians. This is a forum for those who are seeking to become officers- it's a valid topic that they will run into many times in your career.