Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Dec 9, 2005.
Nothing wrong with our military. The record of the Secretary of Defense isn't up to speed, though, IMO. Perhaps the rumors are correct that he will retired and Joe Lieberman is in the pipe as the next nominee. We'll see maybe after the first of the year.
But armchair quarterbacks (primarily liberals) always seem to think it's the wrong one for the wrong war.
Carpro, you are so correct about armchair quarterbacks.
Being a military civilian, it is clear that the public does not and cannot know all of the things that take place behind the scenes.
It is imperative that security be maintained for the safety of our troops and the success of our operations.
It is easy to critique, what you do not know. and it is essential to the security of our country that we MUST learn to trust our leaders to make the right choices. I know that some people think they are smarter than these leaders and can make better choices, but it is impossible to provide them with all of the input necessary for them to make these decisions.
I'm not saying that going to Iraq was bad thing for the future safety of the U.S.A. and Middle East operations. Not that Iraq was that big of a threat, but that the Middle East in general in 10-20 years, if not sooner, will be uncontrollably lost with big enough militaries and nuclear programs from the proceeds of American bought oil that they will be able to dominate American interests at will and without mercy. The whole preemptive doctrine has to consider the future eco-political state and dangers and try to influence it in the present. It will be beneficial to have a big ally in the Middle East where many U.S. bases can operate from and infiltrate other neighboring countries to propagate the spread of God-blessed democracy.
What does being a 'military civilian' mean and how does it give special insight? (That's a real question - I have no idea.) Of course the public cannot know all or even much, especially as it takes place; no one on earth can know all.
I agree with the first part - not simply maintained, but increased.
But I don't know what the "success of our operations" really means - all WMDs in Iraq are ours (heh, heh, heh), Saddam is on trial (too bad his lawyers keep getting knocked off), Iraq has "democracy" (no matter that they may not know who they are voting for exatly, they get inked fingers) - what more can there be?
I disagree; we critique what we do know. Incomplete as it is, it's all we got and it isn't nothing.
Lack of oversight and accountability will nearly always lead to disaster. Our political leaders are elected from among ourselves based on charisma as much as actual competence. It seems particularly foolish to trust an administration which bandied about "justifications" for the invasion and finally settled on the one it felt would be most palatable - which, uh-oh, turned out to be, well, untrue. The senators and congressmen are our leaders, too. Should we trust them as much as we trust the president? When there is disagreement, should we trust the one who seems the strongest or the one who seems the most correct (within our limited knowledge)?
Can we hold them accountable when what they've said has proven false?
Military civilians are department of defense workers. You will find them on every base worldwide, often in positions of authority (mostly over logistical and budgetary issues and not troops). Some of them even embark on our ships and go to sea with our Sailors (okay not many, but some lol).
The man who delivers milk, laundry, and the mail will often have a specific insight on troop strength and ability that the media could be shown first hand by the DoD and completely miss. Personally seen that happen. After all these years, I just figure some people see only what they want to see. Cant help them there.
You are correct Daisy in saying that nobody could possibly know it all - but it is often very eye opening to sit and listen to someone who ought to know better speak out on something they feel the military should be doing, and we have been since day one.
Hopefully that gives you the perspective of most people, both in uniform and out, on how we now just shrug at the screeching cassandras. It is very typical to see that kind of thing. Not much we can do but shake our heads and get back to work.
For the record, I have never in all of my 13 years of serving in the military seen anyone not be held accountable - civilian or military.
About Cassandra - her curse was to be right yet disbelieved.
Thanks for the explanantion of "military civilian". I amazed, though, that in 13 years of service you've never seen anyone get away with something. That is a different world than the one I work in (local government bureaucracy).
Last night I watched the History Channel and the Battle for Ramadi. These are re-enactments of particular battles, with some of the actual soldiers (some wounded), who were there talking about them, post-battle, and reliving the experience. Could not find where the Ramadi program will air again, but, following it, this program came on:
Tune In for the next airing:
Saturday, December 17 @ 7pm ET/PT
Has anyone else seen these?
Our troops are the bravest in the world, most courageous, awesome young men in the world in combat, in urban warfare in unfamiliar territory; I cannot express how brave they are.
I have been guilty of not praying enough for them and will redouble my efforts to do so - it is the LEAST I can do, as an American, who is thankful for the sacrifices they are making doing their duty for my country. God Bless Them, each and every one.
I saw part of that show. It was pretty well done.
For Daisy, here's a Marine officer's answer to many of your contentions:
That was an intelligent, well-written essay - thanks, Scott.
I'm not sure you understand my position if you think Maj. Connable answers my contentions. About the only one he counters is whether Iraq is a quagmire - I'd much rather he be correct on that point. I'm hoping he is.
I still think Washington did a poor job planning the aftermath of the fall of the Iraqi government.
Sorry. I thought you contended that we should have never gone in the first place and that we were now losing.
BTW, another success story... Iraqi voter turnout was better than ours while their lives were at risk.
Kind of puts a new light on the claim that conservatives/Republicans "suppress" the minority vote, huh?
You're right about that, but I didn't see that contradicted in the essay. Perhaps I should reread.
We're not doing as well as Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld have contended but the situation may improve. I'm not convinced that this war can be won any further primarily by military means, but possibly politically.
Yes! Cause for optimism. Most the gunfire was post polls.
Uh, no...the claim was in reference to US elections, I thought.