About Us

[email protected]

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:10:01 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:34:22 -0800, wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:32:03 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:27:32 -0800, wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:14:05 -0500, wrote:

Clinton could have pulled the plug too but he didn't. It just went
down hill from there.

So, he should have listened to his generals? Just a while ago, you
were claiming he shouldn't have. Pick one please.

I have never changed my opinion about Iraq. I have always said get out
now.

Listening to generals will give you their plan to win, not whether you
should be there at all.

So, in a war you don't want to know how to win, you just want to
decide without any facts.

I am saying it is the general's job to have a plan to win, no matter
what the cost.

But, he shouldn't be listened to, even if the plan sounds reasonable.
Since Bush barely served in the Guard, I'm sure that would make him
qualified to know.

You are simply obsessed. We were talking about NOW and GW is back in
Texas.

You can't seem to focus on what happened in the recent past. You're
claiming that what Bush did was wrong, but well, he's no longer in
office, so we should just forget about it. Sorry, but that's not going
to happen. He's one step removed from a war criminal.

They are not the people to ask if you want to know if you should be
there at all. No general who wants to stay a general will tell his
boss "this is hopeless and there is no way to win". They come up with
something and it is usually "I just need more (troops, guns, air
support or whatever)"

I don't know any generals, but it seems to me that honesty is the best
policy, esp. if asked by one's boss. Are you saying all of them lied
to Bush and all of them are lying to Obama??

No I am saying it is not their job to question policy, they only say
"can do sir" and give you the plan to do it.
It is the president and congress's job to decide when and where we go
to war.

And, when a general gives his best, honest assessment, that should be
ignored because he just wants to win? What nonsense.

If there is any lying at all it is in what they really think they need
and what they ask for.
Patton used to call it "rock soup". You make a modest request and then
keep needing a little more until you get what you wanted in the first
place. That is how we get into these wars that were only supposed to
take 3 months and a few thousand covert operatives. Then 10 years
later we are asking whether we should "double down" and put in another
50,000 guys.

Wow... quite a reach going back to WW2. Try quoting Petraeus.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Forced Back Into Sailing in Toronto	BeeRich	Cruising	17	April 10th 08 05:45 PM
When USA Forced Injections Regimes Comes, Run Away From Them	Kurt Brown	General	0	August 6th 07 08:33 PM
FDR: Internment Camps and Forced Labor	Bob Crantz	ASA	6	December 12th 05 08:57 PM
GM Forced to Lay Off Thousands	Skipper	General	98	November 25th 05 11:28 PM

Menu

About Us