And all this justifies you encouraging the enemy to kill more Americans.
Didn’t the nuns teach you about rationalization when you were in school?
Where is the honor in ecouraging the enemy to kill more Americans?
There is none. It is treason. Although I don’t know of any Americans on this list advocating this. If they are, they need to take a break and rethink what they are saying.
When i was in uniform i hated bush and rumsfeld’s guts. and i knew alot of others who did too. but…maybe i was a little harsh on our other senior leadership. They really can’t teach that kind of thing at the academies or canidate. You have to agree with me that we need to blow this thing wide open and get the troops the things they need over there.You started off okay but somehow found yourself back into realm of ad hominem. Most of us in uniform love Secretary Rumsfeld. Sure some of the senior leadership get worked by his style but that is because he is forcing the military, traditionally an organization that at times becomes set in its ways, to think about things a bit differently. Much needed in this day and age if you ask me.
I am interested in which senior officers you know that are “skilled in getting that next star, or what their stock portfolio looks like” rather than doing their job. Please list names. I will be glad to discuss.
President’s don’t need war experience. That is why they have Generals and Admirals. Lincoln had some. Wilson had none. Roosevelt had none. Kennedy and LBJ had some (whoops bad example.) And then I will give you Bush senior did have war experience. But all in all, not necessary for the job. But if we want to make that the standard then I guess I would be open to it. Still leaves me eligible.
If you were in uniform you know how Clinton devistated the military. In a lot of cases, there simply isn’t the stuff to send over there. You can’t build up the force overnight, especially running it the way the US citizens demand it be run. And especially without the support of one of the major political parties.
Only if the Dems let us.
Sorry, meant to visit them today. See the shape they are in.
I don’t happen to think that at all - many are misinformed, not informed at all and are like sheep who follow the loudest voice or mob carrying placards and using all kinds of “positives” to entice them into divisive factions pitting one class, one group, one party against the other.
So you caught that remark too? I mean, if that doesn’t tell you more than you want to know regarding this kind of thinking…good grief. Talk about the “me” syndrome.
I won’t even bring up the Sicilian campaign with an extraordinary number of planes and crews taken down by friendly fire…war is what it is - and as MacArthur once put it, a true soldier hates it, he just knows he has to deal with it.
The honor of dissent - gimme a break. Save it for a Berkeley love fest.
Hate? Interesting choice of words. As much as I disagreed President Clinton’s approach of “shoot and run” I never hated him. As much as I disliked Secretary Aspin’s REDUX plan I never hated him. I’m not quite sure if Secretary Cohen did anything though.
I believe you are speaking of the initiative to privatize military housing (maybe not) which will ultimately put more BAH money in the pockets of our most junior personnel and give them greater options in where they choose to live. Living in base house is my absolute last choice. It’s like like living in a housing project.
And they are
I don’t work for politicians, they work for me. If you consider yourself to be owned/managed by them, I’m sure they are quite happy with that relationship.
It’s interesting to note how the vertical pronoun dominates the thinking of those who are willing to aid the enemy.
Irrelevant and a broad generalization. Needs assessment is subject to reasonable examination. If a nation is war-ready then it has reasonably examined what are predictable needs. For example, in Canada, I can’t believe we are still talking about problems with the Seaking helicopters. :banghead: Years ago it was evident they should be taken out of service. They cost lives. Canada is a prime example of what the U.S. does not want to do with its military.
Needs assessments will never be perfect nor will absolute needs be absolutely “predictable” except after the fact as most do now.
You’re dodging what I said. Just because needs assessment will never be perfect does not let people off the hook for going all out to do it the best as they can. You are suggesting that we not bother. If you don’t bother then you will end up with the Canadian military: the best darn forces in the world who are doomed to jimmyrigging the piles of junk they are given to operate, to wear bright green camos in the middle of the desert, to go against the soldier’s code of no-scrounging, and to places one’s injuries at the whims of exhausted and few-and-far-between medics. If you’re going to do a job, then make sure you do it right.