Posted on 07/08/2008 9:58:26 AM PDT by rdb3
LOLOL, Oh yes he would; he'll say anything to anybody to achieve stature in the world, and I dare to say he has no idea what he's REALLY gotten himself into yet. To think that I once thought Hillary Clinton was a peasant, but this, Barack Hussein Obama is much less than that. At least she had the hellish fire to disturb people, he has none of that. I'm rather confident in the belief that his wife kicks his rear end regularly. LOL
Obama knows more about the chief joints than about the Joint Chiefs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater-Nichols_Act
The Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 Pub.L. 99-433 reworked the command structure of the United States military. It increased the powers of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
It made the most sweeping changes to the United States Department of Defense since the department was established in the National Security Act of 1947.
Named after Senator Barry Goldwater (R-Arizona) and Representative William Flynt “Bill” Nichols (D-Alabama), the bill passed the House of Representatives, 383-27, and the Senate, 95-0. It was signed into law by President Reagan on October 1, 1986.
Among other changes, Goldwater-Nichols streamlined the military chain of command, which now runs from the President through the Secretary of Defense directly to unified combat commanders, bypassing the service chiefs who were assigned an advisory role.
Those are the joint chiefs that Obama knew.
When the President needs to transmit a military order, it will get to the right person. He would only make the mistake of sending it to the JCs once, and even if he did, it would get there.
Focus on his policies, that's what will have traction with the American people, not nit-picking.
Actually, the President may orders via the JCS. But not to worry about all these details of how to run a superpower. When Tony McPeak or Wesley Clark is appoint SecDef I’m sure their first task will be some “national security” OJT for the big O.
Actually, the President may transmit orders via the JCS. But not to worry about all these details of how to run a superpower. When Tony McPeak or Wesley Clark is appoint SecDef I’m sure their first task will be some “national security” OJT for the big O.
"Hey c'mon man, let's get chinese eyes!"
This is NOT some minor matter, as you've posited. It's a biggy.
How many people understood how to undermine Intel, FBI, and law enforcement AS it was happening? The Democrats knew, their allies in politics, knew. And the Democrats did exactly this. They knew. They built the Gorelick Wall. Crime grew in the US; and attacks on American soil grew.
Knowing how the military works is critical to not only understanding what counsel to accept, but who to get it from.
Obama, not knowing much if anything at all about things military WILL put America in harm's way.
And the bloody damned MSM press can count on having no protection from enemies, should Obama be elected. And they'll cry rocket tears as problems mount in and for America.
Oh, won't they all get so damned rich reporting the news, and writing opinions.
Bush didn't know Musharraf's name at about this point in the campaign. He sure as hell knew it on 9-11. You learn much of what you need to know by doing the job.
Any crime expert will tell you that the first 24 hours after a crime is crucial to solving that crime.
President Bush's dad was President. President Bush's dad not only worked with the joint chiefs of staff, but his being dad to George, probably held the high likelihood that George would also know how things work militarily.
Then there is the simple matter of both Presidents Bush having been MILITARY THEMSELVES.
I don't know a single military person (male, female, veteran, active duty) who DOESN'T know how the chain of command works.
Obama doesn't know. The MSM doesn't know and doesn't care that it doesn't know.
You take a guy, like Obama, who knows less than NOTHING about things military -- and what do you think happens in a 24 hour span after a "crime", an "atrocity", an "attack", "terrorism"? Gore Dialoging? A Clintonian Rennaissance to decide who gets to wear the "advisor" hat for the meeting to discuss how to "defend ourselves"?
Assuredly, a pharmacy tech should be able to prescribe meds as good as a Pharmacist, being that a pharmacy tech is "doing a job in a pharmacy"...
And you don't think President Bush knew who Musharraf was in 2000? You've got to be kidding. Musharraf was under orders by Supreme Court to hold open elections. Musharraf was siding with Taliban.
Musharraf pulled a military coup d'état in 1999 in Pakistan, and suspended the constitution of Pakistan. And you don't think Bush knew who he was.
tsk tsk tsk
Well, the lefties claimed the last two election cycles that N.G. service during Vietnam was draft dodging.
This cycle they seem to have decided military service isn't so important after all!
He’s a gaffe a minute. If Bush had said this, I would have seen it on TV.
I disagree. Strenuously.
If he didn’t know how the military operates in the middle of a protracted period of peace- it would be one thing.
WE ARE AT WAR.
For someone who is the presumptive nominee of his party in the middle of a war it damn well behooves him to LEARN how the military works before making pronouncements.. It’s yet another example- of all the many ways Obama is NOT prepared to be the CiC.
This is not a complicated, arcane bit of knowledge, it’s the Joint Chiefs for Pete sakes.
great post tarpon
Bush didn't know Musharraf's name at about this point in the campaign. He sure as hell knew it on 9-11. You learn much of what you need to know by doing the job.
I think you are right - except that Bush wasn't going around saying, "First thing I'm gonna do, I'm gonna talk to what's his name in Pakistan."This is a case of Obama being Obambi - gratuitously exposing his own ignorance on a national - hence worldwide - stage. It is in fact inconceivable that a Republican could make that sort of gaffe and escape humiliation at the hands of the Associated Press Monopoly.
And, speaking of Musharraf, how cooperative do you suppose he would be motivated to be with a president-elect who had already rhetorically invaded his country?
How old are you? 12?
In mid-2000, Bush gave an interview to CBS or 60 minutes, I don't recall which. It was a typical MSM ambush. They asked him, "Who is the President of Pakistan". He stuttered and stumbled and in the end said he didn't know.
It didn't make me want to vote for Gore.
I guess you don't remember back 8 years.
If you read history, you would know that Lincoln knew absolutely nothing about military tactics and strategy. He actually went to the library of congress to check out books so he could learn about it. He had experts tutor him. He eventually figured out what he needed to know to do his job. But you would say that Lincoln was unqualified to be President because he didn't know the first thing about military matters. We are electing a civilian to the job, not a general. I don't care if they know that the UN Secretary is now a cabinet post and not part of the State Dept., or which cabinet member supervises the FDA. In time of war, I want them to have the disposition of taking the fight to the Muzzies, but if they don't have the command structure of the Pentagon memorized, I really don't care.
It is important for the President to understand military strategy in time of war. He needs to know our country's interests and have an idea how he will protect them. He can then explain where he stands and let the people decide.
It doesn't matter if he knows the ins and outs of the Pentagon. It is a political maze over there, literally and figuratively. If he is elected, he will figure that stuff out soon enough.
Yours in re Abe Lincoln is very interesting. And, as a homeschooling mom of 3 children who went on to wonderful futures, I'm self-taught, Defiant. I am a self-taught, motivated learner, who taught others how to be self-motivated learners.
However, did Abe Lincoln live in a time of "rapid response"? Was he carted away by limo to lunches, press appearances before the eternal cameras? Missiles? Taking phone calls from all around the world?
Your analogy is wonderful and good to know. But, do we really have the time for "self-teaching" when it comes to military? Bill Clinton was "self-teaching" while in office, and that really was productive, right? No.
We are CURRENTLY in a war.
Barack said he would order/tell/demand the Joint Chiefs to do his bidding. <== that is the issue. He doesn't comprehend that's NOT how it works. That is such basic data, so core, having nothing to do with memorizing the various departments and department heads, knowing their names and the names of their children and pets, Defiant.
The absurdity of Barack's assertion is along the lines of declaring himself as head of National Security, that he can dictate "National Security". Let me quote exactly what he said: “I will call my Joint Chiefs of Staff in and give them a new assignment and that is to end the war.”
The Joint Chiefs "advise" but are not a "department" under the President. Like, a secretarial pool.
Do you really think Obama has any greater respect for the Joint Chiefs of Staff than to treat them as a "beneath" President department group? Middle Managers?
And do you really think your self-teaching essay in re Abe Lincoln is so important as to cut Obama slack on this matter? We've been in a highly publicized war now for nigh 7 years.
I guess Obama just couldn't have bothered being "self-taught" in real time about things, military. He was obviously, too busy being so wonderful.
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.