Such a Surprise

[RetiredGySgt]

I am curious...was this in context of Bush "lying" about Saddam's WMD's and connections to AQ?

I do believe it was in one of those threads. And I acknowledge you were clear that you did not mean that Bush lied in the same vein as others were claiming, as I recall.

 

[maineman]

and RGS...you seemed to have passed this one without comment...

There have been plenty of times in my career when I was asked to implement an order that I vehemently disagreed with. The captain and I would have it out behind closed doors....I would suggest that his idea was crazy and that it would be detrimental to unit readiness and morale... I would suggest alternatives... the captain would listen, and then tell me that we were going with his option and not mine. I stood up, said "Aye aye, sir", walked out of his office and proceeded to implement his plan as if it were my idea and I fully supported it. Naval Leadership 101. The parable of the damned exec.

and if you could please quote me the sentence from my post where I called the general a quote political hack unquote, I would greatly appreciate it.

 

[maineman]

I do believe it was in one of those threads. And I acknowledge you were clear that you did not mean that Bush lied in the same vein as others were claiming, as I recall.

in reference to the definition posted herein, I believe that Bush lied in the sense of definition #2.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

and RGS...you seemed to have passed this one without comment...

Thats b ecause it is irrelevant to the discussion. Following legal orders and not openly opposing the chain of command on LEGAL orders is expected and required.

This General was ordered by Congress to testify and give HIS opinion. Claiming he did not follow THOSE orders is ludicrous and is a personal attack on this General.

None of the questions ( at least from the democrats) were "what is the Administrations position" or " What does the President believe" nor were they " when does the President think..."

As A GySgt I made it clear to my superiors that if other Superiors ask me questions I would answer them truthfully and to the best of my ability and if asked MY opinion by a superior ( not a junior) I would answer it as asked.

Now that position did get me excluded from several meetings in 2nd Mar Div, when my expert opinion on crypto systems in use , planned for use and the lack of our ability to find pin outs and schematics for new equipment needed for critical operations did not jive with the "political" position of not placing blame for our inability to operate as required in a secure manner between Camp Lejuene and Camp Gieger. The Captain made it clear I would not attend those meetings and I would not provide my opinion outside his chain of command with out first talking to him. Easy enough to do, since the officers at the meetings were not interested in any real information, just how best to spin the failure without embarrassing anybody at Quantico.

For the record, the failure was directly a result of the testing and procurement teams that purchased the equipment with out cables and with out verifing pin outs and schematics in the manuals were actually for the equipment provided. The pin outs and schematics were for older models of the equipment that had entirely different internal pin outs and capabilities and configurations. Further only testing and procurement could talk directly to the manufacturer and they had the ability to ask and receive said pinouts or cables. We went 6 months with no ability to send directly, data, securely to one Regiment of the 2nd Marine Division. Everything had to be driven to them if it involved Data.

And I was forbidden to talk to testing branch about pin outs or schematics because such a conversation would involve me telling them they failed to provide proper pin outs for cables and proper schematics for classified equipment. Which was fine with me since testing branch had already told me before the order that they had no seperate pin outs or schematics other than what was in the manuals. That they knew procurement was going to NOT order cables because of cost and did not feel it needed to get accurate pin outs or schematics for equipment they were testing with factory provided cables they KNEW would not be available to the fleet.

By the way, the Captain did not do anything to me, except privately tell me I did a good job. And when I and a SSgt finally figured out on our own with no help how to get the secure data line working again we were rewarded for just doing our jobs, and I might add protected for not doing it as fast as certain people that had no idea what was going on wanted it done. It was pure hard work and time that got us a working pin out ( since the schematics were not right either, we had to test over 60 pins for individual signals, some of which existed and some which did not, except with plugs between pins) and we had to find a modem that would work on an unpowered line over several miles long with a hell of a lot of crosspoints to drain power.

 

[maineman]

This General was ordered by Congress to testify and give HIS opinion. Claiming he did not follow THOSE orders is ludicrous and is a personal attack on this General.

wrong. Congress does not have the authority to ORDER any member of the armed forces to do anything. The general takes his orders from his chain of command. period. He was under no obligation to give his opinion independent of the president's opinion...

and as I said in MY analogy, when I walked out of the Captain's cabin, his opinion WAS my opinion. Naval Leadership 101.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

wrong. Congress does not have the authority to ORDER any member of the armed forces to do anything. The general takes his orders from his chain of command. period. He was under no obligation to give his opinion independent of the president's opinion...

and as I said in MY analogy, when I walked out of the Captain's cabin, his opinion WAS my opinion. Naval Leadership 101.

You would be wrong. The general made a personal pledge to Congress before he was confirmed he would testify to them. And Congress can and does have authority to question the Military. Specific committees have absolute authority to do so.

 

[Larkinn]

You can ask Maineman about the posted "definition" of a lie. He posted it awhile back. But wait, I forgot you are never around for those blunders, you never see them, hear of them or believe them even when one links to them.

Maineman does not speak for the entire left and if he DID post that defintion, than I disagree with him.

Further MAineman made it clear that in his opinion the definition clearly did not include any need for one to be purposefully telling an untruth, just that any untruth no matter how it came about was in fact a lie. An example being " you see a red car outside, you tell your wife a red car is parked outside. Before she looks said car leaves. Your now a liar because in fact no red car is parked outside" Maineman argued this very point. and repeatedly provide his definitions from the internet as proof he was right.

( well to be honest, it might have been you. I can't remember which of you made the posts) Since your denying it, I am ASSUMING ( yes I know how bad that can be, so if not true, Maineman, I apologize in advance) it was Maineman.

And no I won't go find it and post it for you. It is here, feel free now to call me a liar cause your to ignorant to find it yourself. It is public record on this board.

Too ignorant? Try I'm sick and tired of finding the claims you make about people that are constantly incorrect. You've claimed that I have made many claims here which I never said and when challenged you just back down and make no retraction.

Remember before you answer, this comment was on EVERYTHING the General had to say on the topic, not just a single claim or a single position, EVERYTHING.

Umm, no it wasn't. It was on the main claim that Iraq is improving.

And no someone can be wrong on something with out being incompetent. Nice attempt to turn the point to something else. This Congressman dismissed EVERYTHING the General had to say BEFORE he even said it. But ya you stick with the claim he didn't insult the General cause he said " with all due respect" and then added later " I am not attacking you"

No, he didn't. He said I'm not buying it, referring to the central claim that Iraq is getting better.

In regards all the following Larkinn I mean it with all due respect to you. And I am not attacking you personally, just your position, your intelligence and your opinion. There we go.

When I say you are wrong, you think I am attacking your position, your intelligence, and your opinion? That explains some of your actions and how incredibly defensive you get over the stupidest mistakes you make. People MAKE MISTAKES. You should be able to challenge those mistakes without making some general attack on their intelligence and position. The standard you are creating is one where we can't criticize any mistakes without attacking the person, which is an incredibly stupid standard.

 

[maineman]

You would be wrong. The general made a personal pledge to Congress before he was confirmed he would testify to them. And Congress can and does have authority to question the Military. Specific committees have absolute authority to do so.

I never said that congress does not have the authority to question the military. I SAID that congress cannot give orders to the military. Read the UCMJ and get back to me.

 

[Shogun]

<embed src="http://services.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/1138309739" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1182711223&playerId=1138309739&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://services.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&domain=embed&autoStart=false&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>

 

[Scenic Point]

The sad truth is that even if the General had appeared with the news that Iran has decided to merge with the new democratic Iraqi government and live in freedom and peace throughout eternity, the dems would have trashed him regardless.

- THAT is the only agenda we can all be sure of.

 

[Alpha1]

wrong. Congress does not have the authority to ORDER any member of the armed forces to do anything. The general takes his orders from his chain of command. period. He was under no obligation to give his opinion independent of the president's opinion...

and as I said in MY analogy, when I walked out of the Captain's cabin, his opinion WAS my opinion. Naval Leadership 101.

INTEGRITY....
adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.

You claim to believe that the General has integrity...then follow it up with claiming he is being dishonest about HIS opinions in his testimony and he just parrots what Bush has ordered him to say as his own opinion.......
just maybe, YOU have a convoluted, lopsided and erroneous idea of what integrity is....

 

[mattskramer]

<embed src="http://services.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/1138309739" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1182711223&playerId=1138309739&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://services.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&domain=embed&autoStart=false&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>

Okay. That was a cute video but I missed the point.