Skip navigation

S.e.a.l.s

or Register to post new content in the forum

38 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Dec 16, 2009 9:30 pm

Didn’t Bush & Petraeus “change the tone” by giving bribes to the
religious leaders who were encouraging the most violence? I thought
sending 30,000 more troops was a joke. It was just a political response
to the hammering the republican party took in '06. The timing proved to
me it was a political strategy not a real military strategy…this was obvious.


I have no idea what will change the minds of the people who are causing the most bloodshed in Iraq. All I can do is trust that Obama has some smart people helping him make the best decisions. A new President, new policies and new actions all give the signal that things are different now.

As for going into Iraq without WMDs, are you familiar with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)? (If you google it, you need to view the cached files from '96-'00) A full scale ground war in Iraq was a top priority for Bush/Cheney before they were even elected.

Moraen says, “We built schools and bridges and dug wells and provided better medical care.”
…liberal!

As for disappointed with the results…I wanted to remove Saddam the same way Clinton removed Milosovich; quick & painless. Why it turned into a 7 year cluster-f***, I don’t know. But I’m disappointed.

Dec 16, 2009 9:49 pm
Im glad it was a priority. Saddam was a mass murder and terrorist. Obama has sold you and 51% of the country on the fact that he is bringing something new to the table. New doesn't mean good when our military strategies work fine with or without this jackass at the helm. He has never even fired a gun in his entire life, how the hell is he going to bring "change" to our war strategies.
Dec 16, 2009 10:04 pm

[quote=Ron 14]

Im glad it was a priority. Saddam was a mass murder and terrorist. Obama has sold you and 51% of the country on the fact that he is bringing something new to the table. New doesn’t mean good when our military strategies work fine with or without this jackass at the helm. He has never even fired a gun in his entire life, how the hell is he going to bring “change” to our war strategies. [/quote]

See, here’s where we differ…I will not believe our military strategies are working fine until we can unfurl the “Mission Accomplished” banner again! Any moron can run a long, drawn-out 7 year war. A real leader can get the job done quickly and done right.

I don’t pretend to be an expert on anything to do with the military. But as a voting American citizen, I set the bar pretty high for what I expect of my leaders by election-time. And based on my expectations, Bush failed.

You might be more tolerant because you are a life-long republican or because you own a gun store, or because you supply bullets to the military, or any of a number of other reasons why people commit to a specific party. I am independent; my expectations are high. If they are not met, I switch to the other party.

People like me decide elections.
Dec 16, 2009 10:05 pm

[[email protected]]

Didn’t Bush & Petraeus “change the tone” by giving bribes to the
religious leaders who were encouraging the most violence? I thought
sending 30,000 more troops was a joke. It was just a political response
to the hammering the republican party took in '06. The timing proved to
me it was a political strategy not a real military strategy…this was obvious.  No.  That’s the problem with being on the outside looking in.  You get your information from Google.  There’s a bit of a difference between actually being on the ground, and picking things up on the internet.


I have no idea what will change the minds of the people who are causing the most bloodshed in Iraq. All I can do is trust that Obama has some smart people helping him make the best decisions. A new President, new policies and new actions all give the signal that things are different now.   Nothing will change their minds.  But, we humans are simple creatures.  If we put our hands on the stove and get burned, we learn that we don’t like hot things.  You punish terrorism hard enough, it stops.  At least for a time.
 
As for going into Iraq without WMDs, are you familiar with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)? (If you google it, you need to view the cached files from '96-'00) A full scale ground war in Iraq was a top priority for Bush/Cheney before they were even elected. Yes.  I googled it.  There are just as many liberal pages that purport to represent Obama.  I believe neither of them.

Moraen says, “We built schools and bridges and dug wells and provided better medical care.”
…liberal!  Providing quality medical care, building schools and promoting education (Bush was a big proponent of education), and bridges are not the province of liberals.  Quality medical care can be had without socializing it.  In fact, the only way to provide it responsibly is WITHOUT socializing it.

As for disappointed with the results…I wanted to remove Saddam the same way Clinton removed Milosovich; quick & painless. Why it turned into a 7 year cluster-f***, I don’t know. But I’m disappointed.   Milosovich was not sitting on the third largest army in the world.  It turned into a 7-year war because the nature of the fighting and the searching for Saddam necessitated destruction of infrastructure and wiping out the government.  It is irresponsible to destroy a country’s infrastructure and leave.
[/quote]

Still - being a liberal doesn’t make you a bad person (or Jon Stewart or whatever).  But despite what you think about Bush and his war policies - they kept us safe.  And prosecuting three SEALS because they roughed up a guy who killed and hung four Americans as if we were in the middle ages is turning your back. 

Remember that Barack Obama is the Commander in Chief of the military.  There is one legal system that he has complete authority over.  The military’s.  The JAG of the Navy reports to the Secretary of the Navy, who reports to the SecDef, who reports to, Barack Obama.  This is not like the civilian courts. 

A president who allows such charges to be brought… I question his ability to function as Commander in Chief.

Dec 16, 2009 10:17 pm

This thread has feathered into about 10 complex topics that each deserve their own thread. 

I’ll just say that you are probably right about prosecuting the SEALS. Something like that has got to hurt the morale of our troops. Although, I am the furthest from an expert on this specific topic.

Dec 16, 2009 10:23 pm

A real leader can get the job done quickly and the job done right? What wars are you aware of that last 2 or 3 years ? What world are you living in ? This sh*t is complicated and it takes time. Especially when guys are roaming around in underground caves that are hundreds of years old.

  Independent is another name for "I bash everything and stand for nothing."
Dec 17, 2009 1:22 am

[quote=Ron 14]Independent is another name for “I bash everything and stand for nothing.”[/quote]

Are you saying that if my beliefs to not fit into one of two pre-defined boxes, there is something wrong with me? I disagree.

I can assure you I am not posting on a whim. My beliefs (right or wrong) are generally well thought out and based on facts, assumptions and life experience.

My beliefs about war are based mostly on assumptions which is probably why I enjoy debating them so much. I don’t mind being shown that I am wrong when someone can provide facts or life experiences to back their point.

I am certain I am not liberal because I get the same sick feeling listening to NPR that I get listening to Limbaugh. I like Jon Stewart mostly because he backs up what he says with interesting facts - plus, the show is funny.

Dec 17, 2009 1:37 am

I could give two sh*ts about the political parties. A man has to have core beliefs that they stand by. I find most people who claim "independent" straddle the fence on everything and often go with the flavor of the day because they don't want to offend. This may or may not be you.

Dec 17, 2009 3:13 pm

I hate America. I hate myself. I hate Edward Jones. I love the Greatful Dead.

Dec 17, 2009 3:34 pm

[quote=mlgone]I know this will piss many off…

  I think IRAQ was about oil and setting up a long term strategic base in the region[/quote]

I wish that was what it was about. 

My hope was that it was about providing a battlefield outside of the U.S. for soldiers to fight terrorists. 

Of course, you can't announce something like that.
Dec 22, 2009 8:34 pm

First thought: this sucks. let these guys do their jobs.

  Secondly: If the police kick a handcuffed subdued suspect is it a crime? And, yeah, the perp has got it coming, but? Why would it be any different in a military jail?   Third: Why is Obama's name connected to this post? Isn't the mid level of the naval command handling this?   I realize there is a lot of Obama hare on the thread. fair enough! However, if a cop on the beat does wrong, is it the mayor's fault? Not usually.   The rules suck in this situation and it looks like a lot of ass covering by the brass, but let's have a trial and three not guiltys.
Dec 22, 2009 8:36 pm

 make that Obama hate on this thread. He’s got no hare or hair.

Dec 22, 2009 8:42 pm
BondGuy:

 make that Obama hate on this thread. He’s got no hare or hair.

I have to admit, I almost dictionary.commed 'hare' to see if there was something I was missing.
Dec 24, 2009 4:38 am

It’s funny, GW screwed up everything he touched, started two unnecessary, unwinable wars, allowed sub-prime to ruin the worlds economy and left Obama with a sh-tstorm of trouble. Now the neocon nazi rebooblicans blame it all on “black” Obama.

Dec 24, 2009 8:41 pm

[quote=BondGuy]First thought: this sucks. let these guys do their jobs.  Yep.

  Secondly: If the police kick a handcuffed subdued suspect is it a crime? And, yeah, the perp has got it coming, but? Why would it be any different in a military jail?  Most people in the military are more professional that that, ESPECIALLY S.E.A.L.S and I find it highly unlikely that they would strike him unless he attempted something.  As for why it is different.... terrorists are not U.S. citizens slinging crack.  If some guy was a child rapist and you had him alone, you mean to say you wouldn't take shot at him?
  Third: Why is Obama's name connected to this post? Isn't the mid level of the naval command handling this?  President Obama is the Commander in Chief and therefore has the power to start or stop any court martial according to UCMJ.  The UCMJ is not the federal court system.  It is a military court and thus subject to the chain of command.
  I realize there is a lot of Obama hare on the thread. fair enough! However, if a cop on the beat does wrong, is it the mayor's fault? Not usually.  Nobody is saying that Obama is at fault for the sailors doing wrong.  We are saying he is at fault for not stopping it.   The rules suck in this situation and it looks like a lot of ass covering by the brass, but let's have a trial and three not guiltys.  Yes.  The brass is covering their ass because they are afraid that the administration will come after them next because they didn't make their sailors kinder and gentler.
[/quote]


Dec 24, 2009 8:45 pm

[quote=52new]It’s funny, GW screwed up everything he touched, started two unnecessary, unwinable wars, allowed sub-prime to ruin the worlds economy and left Obama with a sh-tstorm of trouble. Now the neocon nazi rebooblicans blame it all on “black” Obama. [/quote]

This thread is about S.E.A.L.s and the fact that they are being prosecuted for doing their job, numbnuts.

President Obama, as the CinC, has the authority to put a stop to this farce.  But he hasn’t.  The reason (and unless there is any evidence to contrary, or a statement), is that he would rather prosecute our service members than piss off extremists.

Once again, you have put your aged and weak mind to the task and come up with the wrong conclusion.

Don’t you have some floors to sweep?  I can disagree with BondGuy and still respect him.  You, on the other hand area  joke.

Dec 29, 2009 4:34 pm

[quote=Moraen] [quote=BondGuy]First thought: this sucks. let these guys do their jobs.  Yep.

  Secondly: If the police kick a handcuffed subdued suspect is it a crime? And, yeah, the perp has got it coming, but? Why would it be any different in a military jail?  Most people in the military are more professional that that, ESPECIALLY S.E.A.L.S and I find it highly unlikely that they would strike him unless he attempted something.  As for why it is different.... terrorists are not U.S. citizens slinging crack.  If some guy was a child rapist and you had him alone, you mean to say you wouldn't take shot at him?
  Third: Why is Obama's name connected to this post? Isn't the mid level of the naval command handling this?  President Obama is the Commander in Chief and therefore has the power to start or stop any court martial according to UCMJ.  The UCMJ is not the federal court system.  It is a military court and thus subject to the chain of command.
  I realize there is a lot of Obama hare on the thread. fair enough! However, if a cop on the beat does wrong, is it the mayor's fault? Not usually.  Nobody is saying that Obama is at fault for the sailors doing wrong.  We are saying he is at fault for not stopping it.   The rules suck in this situation and it looks like a lot of ass covering by the brass, but let's have a trial and three not guiltys.  Yes.  The brass is covering their ass because they are afraid that the administration will come after them next because they didn't make their sailors kinder and gentler.
[/quote]


[/quote]   Morean, let it play out. let's see where the CM leads. I believe there is a line you can't cross. There's a lot of PC going on here. For Obvious reasons, even if he wanted to the prez can't get involved. You shouldn't fault him for it. he's got to let his chain of command do its job. you know that better than most here.
Dec 29, 2009 4:40 pm

Ok BG.  I agree.  Let’s let it play out. 

However, these men do a VERY difficult job, but they do it with vigor and enthusiasm.  There is absolutely no reason to put them through this sham of a trial.

I hope whoever in the chain of command brought these charges chokes on a chicken bone. 

I know that presidents get involved all of the time, especially at the end of their terms.  Look at all of the people Bush and Clinton pardoned.