• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Top Marine to Obama: Get in the Fight

So Amos and other brass have always been accepting of their subordinates down the chain of command openly criticizing them in public? :2rofll:

Dude...your post is either the most blatant deflection I've ever seen...or the most pathetic misunderstanding of a post I've ever seen.

In either case, your post deserves no other comment or consideration from me.
 
I take your word for it.

But there seems to be more today who say they always opposed going to war in Iraq than there was in 2003.

Ok. But I can only speak for myself.
 
I'm sorry Apache, obviously we weren't here on this message board at the time, so I can't prove this to you. But its not hindsight for ME, I was a huge outspoken critic of the plans to invade Iraq at the time, and it created quite the caustic work environment at the time, opposing it earned me the label of Taliban John, anti-American, un-patriotic, Muslim lover and more. I was right.

Having read - and admired - numerous posts of yours on this subject, I believe you.

To be honest, I came later to the party.

Back in 2003, I thought the salivation the GW Bush administration clearly had for invading Iraq was creepy...but I was more neutral on it otherwise.

But I am an investor, so I was caught up in the investment side of life...but by about '06 I finally began to realize (and lose all faith in) government's ability to do the right thing.

Ever since 9/11 I have seen one cowardly act after another by both administrations in the name of American security...Gitmo, Iraqi Freedom, rendition, propping up corrupt regimes, drone strikes, meddling in the Libyan civil war, NSA spying and so on - it's disgusting.
Mixed in with the incredible meddling of the Fed and one massive fiscal deficit after another...I now have ZERO faith in the U.S. federal government (or any other for that matter) and I assume whatever they do MUST be wrong until I have unbiased, factual evidence to the contrary.

I am not an anarchist...but the present system is NOT working and must be radically altered.

The masses must stop having all faith in their elected, federal officials if America is to turn around, IMO.

But I fear they will not until it is too late.
 
Having read - and admired - numerous posts of yours on this subject, I believe you.

To be honest, I came later to the party.

Back in 2003, I thought the salivation the GW Bush administration clearly had for invading Iraq was creepy...but I was more neutral on it otherwise.

But I am an investor, so I was caught up in the investment side of life...but by about '06 I finally began to realize (and lose all faith in) government's ability to do the right thing.

Ever since 9/11 I have seen one cowardly act after another by both administrations in the name of American security...Gitmo, Iraqi Freedom, rendition, propping up corrupt regimes, drone strikes, meddling in the Libyan civil war, NSA spying and so on - it's disgusting.
Mixed in with the incredible meddling of the Fed and one massive fiscal deficit after another...I now have ZERO faith in the U.S. federal government (or any other for that matter) and I assume whatever they do MUST be wrong until I have unbiased, factual evidence to the contrary.

I am not an anarchist...but the present system is NOT working and must be radically altered.

The masses must stop having all faith in their elected, federal officials if America is to turn around, IMO.

But I fear they will not until it is too late.

I concur with you on that! And have the same desperate hope.
 
You are partially correct in that assessment. Left to their own devices, then you would be correct in saying that it is up to them. However, Iraq was a functioning democracy while we were there because we ensured that the Sunnis wouldn't get cut out of the government. That's why these democracies that have cropped up of late keep biting us in the ass when these people keep electing radicals that want to kill everyone.
Radicals who want to kill everyone don't necessarily campaign that way. We can see that in our own governments.
 
Radicals who want to kill everyone don't necessarily campaign that way. We can see that in our own governments.

Are you really comparing going to compare people who cut other people's heads off to ANYTHING in American politics? Regardless, it's not like these organizations hide who they are and they don't need too. Everyone knew what groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas were all about. They just didn't care.
 
Are you really comparing going to compare people who cut other people's heads off to ANYTHING in American politics? Regardless, it's not like these organizations hide who they are and they don't need too. Everyone knew what groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas were all about. They just didn't care.

I never mentioned head lobbing. What I am saying is that candidates will lie as to their real intentions. I assumed that was something with which we could all identify.

And everyone didn't know what the Muslim Brotherhood was all about.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/opinion/roger-cohen-working-with-the-muslim-brotherhood.html?_r=0

Or did they?
Obama, Muslim Brotherhood, and Mideast Chaos: Presidential Study Directive 11
 
I never mentioned head lobbing. What I am saying is that candidates will lie as to their real intentions. I assumed that was something with which we could all identify.

And everyone didn't know what the Muslim Brotherhood was all about.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/opinion/roger-cohen-working-with-the-muslim-brotherhood.html?_r=0

Or did they?
Obama, Muslim Brotherhood, and Mideast Chaos: Presidential Study Directive 11

When our politicians lie, they just go and past stupid laws ... or don't do anything at all. When their politicians lie, people get killed in brutal fashion. But I suppose that yes, at it's core, politicians do lie. Though, I suspect many in the middle east know just what the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas was all about, and sympathized with them.
 
Oh malarkey! They wanted this change. Do these people look scared to you:



Of course people want out from under a dictator but this isn't a black and white situation which you seem to be putting out there. Dictators are oppressive but can create an overall stable respite in a relatively unstable region. Saddam did that for Iraq. Tito did it in Yugoslavia. Nobody wants to be under a dictator but that doesn't mean people want to be in anarchy... especially religious nutjobs fighting in your front yard anarchy.
 
Of course people want out from under a dictator but this isn't a black and white situation which you seem to be putting out there. Dictators are oppressive but can create an overall stable respite in a relatively unstable region. Saddam did that for Iraq. Tito did it in Yugoslavia. Nobody wants to be under a dictator but that doesn't mean people want to be in anarchy... especially religious nutjobs fighting in your front yard anarchy.

I sure wish more people saw it that way. Somebody will accuse you of supporting dictators though! That's only allowed by the US government.

Over the last century, the United States government has often provided, and continues to provide today, financial assistance, arms, and technical support to numerous authoritarian regimes across the world. A variety of reasons have been provided to justify the apparent contradictions between support for dictators and the democratic ideals expressed in the American constitution.[1

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_of_authoritarian_regimes
 
Having read - and admired - numerous posts of yours on this subject, I believe you.

To be honest, I came later to the party.

Back in 2003, I thought the salivation the GW Bush administration clearly had for invading Iraq was creepy...but I was more neutral on it otherwise.

But I am an investor, so I was caught up in the investment side of life...but by about '06 I finally began to realize (and lose all faith in) government's ability to do the right thing.

Ever since 9/11 I have seen one cowardly act after another by both administrations in the name of American security...Gitmo, Iraqi Freedom, rendition, propping up corrupt regimes, drone strikes, meddling in the Libyan civil war, NSA spying and so on - it's disgusting.
Mixed in with the incredible meddling of the Fed and one massive fiscal deficit after another...I now have ZERO faith in the U.S. federal government (or any other for that matter) and I assume whatever they do MUST be wrong until I have unbiased, factual evidence to the contrary.

.

Before Bush, 9/11 and opening of a prison for terrorist, Gitmo was the worst duty station in the Marine Corps and the Navy.

I knew Marines who would rather do 39 months in Vietnam than 30 days at the Marine Barracks on Gitmo.

But when Bush opened a prison for captured Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters, soon the Army showed up to run the prison and with the Army came fast food restaurants, all kinds of sporting activities and girls which means sex.
 
When our politicians lie, they just go and past stupid laws ... or don't do anything at all. When their politicians lie, people get killed in brutal fashion. But I suppose that yes, at it's core, politicians do lie. Though, I suspect many in the middle east know just what the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas was all about, and sympathized with them.
It wasn't the Egyptians who wanted the Muslim Brotherhood, it was the Obama Administration. They replaced a long time American ally (Mubarak) by having him overthrown and replaced by the MB. It's there in the links and has done the US great harm for the years to come.

Who trusts America anymore?
 
It wasn't the Egyptians who wanted the Muslim Brotherhood, it was the Obama Administration. They replaced a long time American ally (Mubarak) by having him overthrown and replaced by the MB. It's there in the links and has done the US great harm for the years to come.

Who trusts America anymore?

Do not mistake acceptance for wanting. The Egyptians made their choice and we knew we had to make the best of it. Tell me something, why do think that after all this time, the Obama white house hasn't cut funding to Egypt's military. It's because while they couldn't openly do it, they did support the decision to remove the government.
 
Of course people want out from under a dictator but this isn't a black and white situation which you seem to be putting out there. Dictators are oppressive but can create an overall stable respite in a relatively unstable region. Saddam did that for Iraq. Tito did it in Yugoslavia. Nobody wants to be under a dictator but that doesn't mean people want to be in anarchy... especially religious nutjobs fighting in your front yard anarchy.

Hey, if I had my choice, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq. But that has nothing to do with this situation. The Egyptians didn't just want out from under Mubarak's rule, they wanted Democracy to have a voice and say in what their government will be. Well they got their voice, and they chose radicals to head their government. We'd be better off with Mubarak in charge.
 
Hey, if I had my choice, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq. But that has nothing to do with this situation. The Egyptians didn't just want out from under Mubarak's rule, they wanted Democracy to have a voice and say in what their government will be. Well they got their voice, and they chose radicals to head their government. We'd be better off with Mubarak in charge.

tunisia chose democracy around that same time, and it adopted a constitution this january that is considered to be very progressive.

BBC News - Tunisia assembly passes new constitution
 
tunisia chose democracy around that same time, and it adopted a constitution this january that is considered to be very progressive.

BBC News - Tunisia assembly passes new constitution

They are also the only ones to reject the Islamic hardliners and focus on a Secular government. That isn't something that the other democracies in the middle east are willing to do. Plus, 1 in 5 isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for democracies in the middle east. It's rare for the Arab world, women hold more than 20% of seats in both chambers of parliament. Their Code of Personal Status remains one of the most progressive civil codes in the Middle East and the Muslim world. All that said, the exception doesn't make the rule.
 
Hey, if I had my choice, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq. But that has nothing to do with this situation. The Egyptians didn't just want out from under Mubarak's rule, they wanted Democracy to have a voice and say in what their government will be. Well they got their voice, and they chose radicals to head their government. We'd be better off with Mubarak in charge.

Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi, Assad, dictators to be sure, but forces of stability in the ME. Intentional destabilisation of the region.
 
This isn't really a fight we can win. Anybody who has the talent, vision, or good nature to make Iraq into a better place usually applies that talent into getting out of Iraq and into a more civil and prosperous country. That leaves the terrorists to rule everybody else.
 
You got to love this guy, he tells it like it is......we should have more senior officers like him..........


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/top-marine-obama-fight-191600744.html

Let that "top Marine" run for the Office of Commander-in-Chief, then he'll get to make those decisions. Until then, his job is to do what he's told and stay out of politics. He doesn't know all the facts, anyway, OR have the same interests as everyone else in the country. He has a singular interest which doesn't take into account what's best for others. Sounds like he's chomping at the bits to get into the fight, is all.
 
Hey, if I had my choice, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq. But that has nothing to do with this situation. The Egyptians didn't just want out from under Mubarak's rule, they wanted Democracy to have a voice and say in what their government will be. Well they got their voice, and they chose radicals to head their government. We'd be better off with Mubarak in charge.

That didn't even come close to what I was saying about they "why." Neither have you attempted to broach the topic of why they vote they way they did.
 
Let that "top Marine" run for the Office of Commander-in-Chief, then he'll get to make those decisions. Until then, his job is to do what he's told and stay out of politics. He doesn't know all the facts, anyway, OR have the same interests as everyone else in the country. He has a singular interest which doesn't take into account what's best for others. Sounds like he's chomping at the bits to get into the fight, is all.

If this incompetent stumble bum president starts listening to his senior officers instead of firing them we would be in a lot better shape.
 
Let that "top Marine" run for the Office of Commander-in-Chief, then he'll get to make those decisions. Until then, his job is to do what he's told and stay out of politics. He doesn't know all the facts, anyway, OR have the same interests as everyone else in the country. He has a singular interest which doesn't take into account what's best for others. Sounds like he's chomping at the bits to get into the fight, is all.

he has some of the "facts" that make up the big picture.

competent civilian leadership consists of input form those in tune with their own areas of influence...weighing those concerns against all the others, and then deciding on a course of action.
competent leadership is not " stfu and do what I tell you"

I guarantee Amos knows more about what's going on in Iraq than Obama or his progressive cronies (the nature of his past commands requires extensive knowledge on operational theaters.).....I do not like the General or agree with his opinion ( partly), but he's a solid performer.

he is correct in saying that we should have been present to work with Iraqi leadership these past years.
not only do we share a certain responsibility for stabilizing that particular country, we're one of the few that actually can.
where i disagree in is deploying marines to Iraq again or having a sizable military presence.... we have Obama's robotic assassins ( drones) that can provide valuable intel and ,well, dead bodies .
 
If this incompetent stumble bum president starts listening to his senior officers instead of firing them we would be in a lot better shape.

He did just that with regards to Syria last summer, and you didn't like that either.
 
Back
Top Bottom