Draft General Tommy Franks(VANITY)

I think it is time that we urge our president to "draft" General Tommy Franks to be the Director of Homeland Security.

I don't know about others here, but I don't want a "cop" or a "politician" for this position. I want a proven military leader. Except for endorsing President Bush, General Franks has stayed pretty clear of politics. I think he is the right man at the right time. I don't think Franks would want this job. That makes him and even better choice. Plus, I really think if the president appealed to him, he would accept.

The fact that he was a successful combat general speaks well of him. A good general knows that his job is to exhude leadership and to pick a great staff. It is a general's staff that makes or breaks him. General Franks would have the good sense to pick a diverse staff to give him input from many views from which he can make a decision. This is what we need in our director of homeland security - many views examined with sound decisions resulting. I think Franks is the general to get this done.

Yeah, the fact that every Marine is a rifleman is a big part of what got me interested in the Corps as opposed to the Army, though I do not look down on the Army like some clowns do. I got a friend who's doing something like electronics repair, going to Iraq in a couple of months, but he's gonna be doing combat patrols like a regular grunt. I just meant I'm signing up to do full time infantry as my MOS, not any technical jobs like repair. But good luck in Iraq and come home safe. And thank you for you service to our country.

"No, we don't want a military type for this job... the Military stays in the Military"

Dang!...was ready for bed when this caught my eye, but can't pass this one up.

Not arguing for or against Tommy Franks, but want to point out a couple of thing that many folks forget or do not know

Military officers at that level usually have advanced degrees in International Politics or International Relations or Masters or Doctorates in Business or Law, yadda, yadda.

They have a lot of experience in administering large organizations, and serving as staff much the same as as in any large business organization. In many ways the military provides more opportunity for people to gain more experience across the spectrum. Operations, Procurement, Logistics and Personnel Administration are in almost every senior officers tool box.

Military folks are very aware of the differences between the "civilian" world and the perceived secular world of the military.

They are well traveled and at General Franks' level are probably more a diplomat than a warrior.

Most, if not all, military people go on to very successful second and third careers, very often in fields that have nothing at all to do with the "military".

The biggest problem I can think of is that he would have to learn to simply fire under performing subordinates instead of simply having them dragged out and shot...........that was a joke.

In short, given the level of education, experience, dedication and often distinguished records, I think excluding an otherwise qualified candidate simply because he or she has a military background might be a bit shortsighted.

You'll have to excuse me now...I have to go check the combat patrols on the street and arm the mine field....I need the sleep...I'll need all the rest I can get before the assault on the IT department in the AM.

I'm sorry that you were personally insulted that I thought General Franks wasn't the right man for the job. I apologize. It's not like I called you an astoundingly ignorant person. Oh wait...that's what you called me.

Anyway, I've decided that the use of figurative language, in this case hyperbole, may be out of place in this forum, so I will clarify. (Even us ignorant folk know what a hyperbole is. Zell Miller and I are a couple of hyperbole dishing country bumpkins I guess.)

Back to the point. I don't truly believe that Franks would impose martial law in American cities. My only belief is that a military man should not be in charge of Homeland Security. I think there are, dare I say...better people for the job. Tommy Franks may be a great guy for all I know. He knows how to wage a highly successful war, that's for sure. However, success in the battle field doesn't translate into assured success running a federal department containing various bureaucracies.

He wouldn't impose martial law. I'm sorry that I said that. The last thing I want to do is personally insult you. That wasn't my intent. If you would have rather me called you astoundingly ignorant, let me know.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.