Blame Bush now?

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
if the guy had been any good at his job, he would have kept it. pure and simple.

at least Team Bush saw the handwriting on the wall and did not renominate him. He was the Harriet Meirs in the pantheon of CJCS's.
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
and YOUR panties are all in a bunch because he was the first jarhead to hold the post and couldn't hold it. ah well. ;)
 
OP
RetiredGySgt

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
10,029
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
That is an assumption on your part and one NOT supported by the facts. All I am pointing out is that Generals are NOT removed for disagreeing with Bush. In fact this one is being let go because the Dems do NOT like him. He is not, as most were not, fired, his tour expires in October and he won't be reappointed, JUST as the other Officers that the left have claimed were fired were "let go".

Of course you won't acknowledge the point, par for the course. Instead you try to change the subject because you know the POINT is bad for your party. And what do Liberals do when they can not refute facts? They attack the messenger in the hopes they can obfusicate the real point.
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
I never suggested for a minute that he was fired for disagreeing with Bush. I suggested that he was not renominated, even though the initial plan was to do so, because it was clear that congress, if not the rest of the administration, felt he was incompetent.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
144
Reaction score
11
Points
16
Location
East of the Pacific
It doesn't matter which officer holds the job.

Bush broke something that's impossible to fix. The military in particular bought the story hook, line, and sinker, and now they're STILL in denial. It'd be funny if we didn't have so many dead kids. :sad:
 

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
30,528
Reaction score
2,257
Points
1,045
I wouldn't say IMPOSSIBLE...


we just dont seem to have much luck moving the fragile china by tossing a grenade into the room.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
It doesn't matter which officer holds the job.

Bush broke something that's impossible to fix. The military in particular bought the story hook, line, and sinker, and now they're STILL in denial. It'd be funny if we didn't have so many dead kids. :sad:
Unsubstantiated rhetoric. The military does as the CinC orders it to. It doesn't matter whether or not it buys what.

To the contrary, I would say military personnel are head and shoulders above the whiney-ass civilians I see every day. We still possess the belief that if you give us a shitty job, we'll get it done so long as we're allowed to do what is necessary to accomplish the task. Unlike the whiney, snot-nosed left-wingnuts who, the very second the going gets the least bit difficult, toss in the towel and declare the situation "unwinnable."
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
I never suggested for a minute that he was fired for disagreeing with Bush. I suggested that he was not renominated, even though the initial plan was to do so, because it was clear that congress, if not the rest of the administration, felt he was incompetent.
He wasn't renominated because he isn't a kiss-ass roll-over political proxy in uniform.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
He wasn't renominated because he isn't a kiss-ass roll-over political proxy in uniform.
My understanding, Bush failed to renominate, knowing the dems would make an issue. Pox on both.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
My understanding, Bush failed to renominate, knowing the dems would make an issue. Pox on both.
Traditionally, Commandant of the Marine Corps and Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps are terminal posts. You have to go back 50+ years to find a CMC or SgtMaj of the MC that served more than 4 years.

The CMC is a member of the JCS.

I'm not sure how that factors in with Gen Pace since he is Chairman, JCS, but Gen Conway is CMC.

If what you say is true, that is a completely different issue and doesn't surprise me one bit. The Corps is probably th emost overall conservative of branches of the armed forces. Liberal Marine officers DON'T wear 4 stars. From what I ever say, they never even made it one.
 

Superlative

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
109
Points
48
Unlike the whiney, snot-nosed left-wingnuts who, the very second the going gets the least bit difficult, toss in the towel and declare the situation "unwinnable."
The very second?

How long are Dems supposed to wait for there to be signs that this is winnable??

The second the going gets the least bit difficult?

If the going was ever good, that would be something different, but the last time the going was "OK" Saddam was running things.

Is there a law for distribution of oil yet?

a constitutional review processs?

OK, OK, there is ONE PLAN.

Now we're arming the fuckin Sunni's?


The very people that we've been fighting.

But its OK, they promise to - only fight al Qaeda.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend?

This is the kind of plan id expect from the same people who started a war with no strategy or clue.

And you complain about Dems, at least they wanted to hold the Iraqi's to benchmarks, some kind of timeline, or actual plan.

But that idea wasnt good enough, so we'll just give the insurgents weapons.

good idea.
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
Traditionally, Commandant of the Marine Corps and Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps are terminal posts. You have to go back 50+ years to find a CMC or SgtMaj of the MC that served more than 4 years.

The CMC is a member of the JCS.

I'm not sure how that factors in with Gen Pace since he is Chairman, JCS, but Gen Conway is CMC.

If what you say is true, that is a completely different issue and doesn't surprise me one bit. The Corps is probably th emost overall conservative of branches of the armed forces. Liberal Marine officers DON'T wear 4 stars. From what I ever say, they never even made it one.
democrats would not make an issue about his confirmation based upon his political leanings. I doubt that there have been ANY CJCS who have been what anyone could possibly call "liberal". Democrats and republicans have been routinely confirming the nominations of CJCS appointees since 1942. I know of NONE who were not confirmed. Republicans should not try to make this "political". From discussions with one former marine classmate as early as thanksgiving of last year, his contacts on active duty did not have exactly glowing praise for Pace, and I must say, from my limited experience watching him behind the podium, he seemed ill-equipped for the scrutiny and media attention incumbent with that position... and the fact of a failed execution of a flawed strategy in Iraq unfortunately falls on him first.

A commanding officer of a navy ship, in the dead of night, asleep in his bunk underway when his officer of the deck on the bridge makes a grievous error and has a collision or runs aground, always loses his command.
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
There is a vast differance between giving up in a winable fight and ceasing to throw our kids lives away in an situation which has no solution.

I am not willing to leave the blood of our bravest in Iraq for 30 years until the various groups of the Iraqi "might" stop wanting to kill each other.

Continuing this war in the "hope" that they will change their hate for each other is folly and will destroy this country.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
144
Reaction score
11
Points
16
Location
East of the Pacific
You know, I've been on tons of boards like these and have yet to see one active member who openly claims to be a commissioned officer. Just one. So far, it's been nothing but a bunch of enlistee and noncom slobs with endless buddy-rah-rah horsehockey. It gets tiresome.

Are there ANY officers out there who can provide some REAL perspective? Please??? :eusa_shifty:
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
You know, I've been on tons of boards like these and have yet to see one active member who openly claims to be a commissioned officer. Just one. So far, it's been nothing but a bunch of enlistee and noncom slobs with endless buddy-rah-rah horsehockey. It gets tiresome.

Are there ANY officers out there who can provide some REAL perspective? Please??? :eusa_shifty:
you tawkin' to me?:eusa_naughty:
 
OP
RetiredGySgt

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
10,029
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
You know, I've been on tons of boards like these and have yet to see one active member who openly claims to be a commissioned officer. Just one. So far, it's been nothing but a bunch of enlistee and noncom slobs with endless buddy-rah-rah horsehockey. It gets tiresome.

Are there ANY officers out there who can provide some REAL perspective? Please??? :eusa_shifty:
Commissioned Officers have no special knowledge and are not any better then Non Commissioned Officers. Find me ONE Officer that can run his command without Non Commissioned Officers. Officers at the Higher levels decide Strategy, but guess who does the bulk of actual work? Want to know the capabilities and limitations of a Unit? Don't ask a Colonol, ask a Sergeant.

Want to know WHY we go somewhere, ask an officer, want to know what we will do when we get there, ask a NonCommissioned Officer.

There is a very appropriate joke for this.... What is the difference between a 2nd Lt and a LCpl?
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
There is a vast differance between giving up in a winable fight and ceasing to throw our kids lives away in an situation which has no solution.

I am not willing to leave the blood of our bravest in Iraq for 30 years until the various groups of the Iraqi "might" stop wanting to kill each other.

Continuing this war in the "hope" that they will change their hate for each other is folly and will destroy this country.
You're not really willing to do much but sit on your ass and criticize, and perpetuate lies. It is THAT, and those like you that are a far graver threat to this country than any war.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
You know, I've been on tons of boards like these and have yet to see one active member who openly claims to be a commissioned officer. Just one. So far, it's been nothing but a bunch of enlistee and noncom slobs with endless buddy-rah-rah horsehockey. It gets tiresome.

Are there ANY officers out there who can provide some REAL perspective? Please??? :eusa_shifty:
Noncom slobs? Obviously your knowledge of the military is as ignorant as your remark.

You're just typical of uneducated, no-experienced civilians who talk out their asses about something they gained the vast majority of their knowledge on watching Hogan's Heroes reruns.
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
So the roughly 70% of America that realises that the Iraq war is not in Americas best interest are a threat to America?


Gunny you cant even admitt that Valerie Plame was OUR agent when our own CIA, The president, the congress and the rest of the entire world Knows this as fact.

What hope do you have to understand the differance between a lie and the truth?
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top