- Banned
- #21
http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon
why read an article about the Esquire article when you can read the real deal?
why read an article about the Esquire article when you can read the real deal?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon
why read an article about the Esquire article when you can read the real deal?
I read it. What is the big deal? Other then the guy proclaiming all the while Fallon will be fired and then trying to create just that by making claims that simply are not true?
Fallon had few differences with the Administration. And again, for the slow, why would Congress EVER agree to a war with Iran? One Admiral is not going to prevent a war. As was stated if Bush REALLY wants a war and is willing to IGNORE Congress to get it, some 4 star Admiral is no problem at ALL.
did you read all four pages? did you read the quotes from Fallon? Not ONE of those quotes is disputed. And MY point was never that Bush fired Fox Fallon in order to invade Iran. MY point was that he fired him because Team Bush does not want anyone but yes men.
Yes as a matter of fact if Fallon said all the things in that article to a reporter or anyone for that matter he was not showing very good perception as an Officer. Several of the quotes are nothing more than whining I find hard to believe a 4 star would resort to, at least to a reporter.
I would suggest that his "perception" of the geopolitical realities in the middle east is excellent, and his departure from active service is a major loss to our nation.
I did not address that, I addressed the obvious lack of tact of some of the comments he supposedly said to that reporter. A young Lt might make those mistakes but I sure do not expect a grizzled 4 Star Admiral to.
Weren't you on about how you always toed the line of your Commander in public? Never groused about any problems to anyone lower than you? The Admiral, if he actually said those things in the article was openly complaining about how he was just misunderstood and how no one above him seemed to understand his job requirements. In other words WHINING.
Further if he resigned for any other reason then he PUBLICLY declared he is a liar. He specifically stated he had no problem with the Administration and its goals. That others ascribing that position to him had destroyed his ability to properly function.
I guess Integrity and Morales do not matter as much to you as you claim if your going to insist he was railroaded out.
Ohh and if you have never heard the term "light bird" I suspect your military experience was missing something.
I stated that I believe he was "asked" to resign. And he complied. Nothing he said contradicts that.
again..light bird is a non sequitor. light colonel is not. bird colonel is not...but maybe your marines were easily confused.
And of course, keeping well within character.....you will cherish and believe that rumor, without proof, as if it was muttered by Jesus Christ himself as the truth...
I'll believe it when the proof is presented....
Just as in 1951, when Harry Truman cut McArthur off at the knees, the lesson needs to be learned....Elected, civilian leaders are in charge and make policy (hundreds of them)....not the military, who is given their limited authority by those same elected, civilian officials.....
Ironic, that in '51, Joe McCarthy supported the General against the Democrats and Truman.......
Here, in '08, its Democrats that snidely support the Generals against the Republican President...
IMHO, Truman was worthy of support. Bush is not... and I would have the same disdain for his boneheaded foreign policy if he were a democrat... as a matter of fact, if Bush had been a democrat and had acted as carelessly and recklessly as he has acted, I would have argued strongly for a primary opponent in '04.
Sorry if I gave you the impression I was interested in your opinion....
The point is...as it was true in 1951 it is still true....when a military leader finds he or she cannot or will not support the policies of the elected civilian authority, its time for them to retire and pass on the military responsibilities they were entrusted with to those that will support the agreed upon policies their elected Government....
neither of you made it pasted Light Bird status.
Everyone is blind but the Gunny. In the valley of the blind the one eyed many is Gunny R.
I didn't wait around for it, Gunny. And your remark is about as biased an useless as many of those you paste. Don't deal in facts, do the personal attack.
Forget the partisan hatred and just try to deal with a dialogue.
Bush has a history of having his senior military leaders depart early when they aren't on his band wagon.,
You remember General Shinseki, Chief of Staff of the ARmy, who was pushed aside for the rest of his tour because he dared to say we needed 300,000 or more troops to do the job right.
I guess you will still argue he was wrong? Please answer me on this one. Was Shinseki wrong or was Bush wrong on what it would take?
Your the king of unsubstantiated personal attacks and attacks on anyone not a Liberal Democrat.
As for troops and the Invasion, explain to us how another 200k troops would have been inserted INTO Iraq. Come on tell us where they would have staged and advanced from. And then explain how we would have maintained 300k troops in Iraq for 5 years?
You are a damned Joke, stick to helicopters, we may believe you on that stuff.
You are a damned Joke, stick to helicopters, we may believe you on that stuff.
Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. During groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. A variety of motives for this may exist such as a desire to avoid being seen as foolish, or a desire to avoid embarrassing or angering other members of the group. Groupthink may cause groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the groups balance. The term is frequently used pejoratively, with hindsight.
LtCol Evans Carlson debriefed every battle the Raiders did. He listened to all the troops who had input. I don't care if he was a socialist later in life, he had the best kill and lowest casualty ratio. That defines military success.