Those transients are the duly elected representatives of the government that runs the country which we serve. Like it or not, that’s the pecking order, unless you want the military to run the country. I may be VERY unhappy about DADT being repealed, but it’s not like ANYONE will give a damn if I throw a temper tantrum at BDE HQ. The CDR will tell me, “You have your orders, now move out.” Period.
If you are looking for a four-star general to get before the cameras and shrug his shoulders and tell the Muslim savages to get a grip, then you have no idea how we’ve been attempting to gain control over Afghanistan.
Besides which, you people are attacking the wrong guy. Petraeus doesn’t make policy. You all should be far, FAR more concerned with the likes of Obama, Reid, and Graham who are making noises about hearings and limiting free speech. Petraeus couldn’t do that, even if he wanted to.
I honestly don’t know what you people expect from the military. EVERYONE answers to someone. It’s time you all realize that.
Petraeus could have said a short "no comment" and that would be the end of it. How hard is that? My question is whether the media sought a comment from him or if he sought out the media to lodge his complaint about an American citizen exercising his God-given rights.
I honestly don’t know what you people expect from the military. EVERYONE answers to someone. It’s time you all realize that.
I expect the military to do their job with honor and respect the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold. If that's too much to ask from a General, then maybe he should step down. FWIW, I think most of the military does take their oath quite seriously, but it's obvious that one does not get to the upper command ranks without having the "correct" temperament.
Maybe you’re not able to answer my question, why an oath then?
I wasn’t just referring to the commander in chief, but all officers or NCO’s as transient, in the sense that throughout time in the military personalities in the chain of command are going to vary.
“If you are looking for a four-star general to get before the cameras and shrug his shoulders and tell the Muslim savages to get a grip, then you have no idea how we’ve been attempting to gain control over Afghanistan.”
That’s not what I expect. Please read my first post on this thread. He has to balance several things in his media comments and he perhaps took a calculated risk in doing so, but it seems like it will fail in the long run, for the reasons I’ve stated there, and that in doing so he’s not only not assuaged violent Mohammadans, but alienated the segment of Americans that are normally his strongest supporters.
“Besides which, you people are attacking the wrong guy. Petraeus doesn’t make policy. You all should be far, FAR more concerned with the likes of Obama, Reid, and Graham who are making noises about hearings and limiting free speech. Petraeus couldn’t do that, even if he wanted to.”
Those people are the greater concern, and I’ve commented on them in other threads. This one’s about Petraeus though.
“I honestly don’t know what you people expect from the military. EVERYONE answers to someone. It’s time you all realize that.”
I can’t speak for everyone else, but I do know that. And the military ultimately answers to the American people, through the political system, and discussion here is part of that political process.
I don’t think, I KNOW everyone is aware that the leaders are the ones culpable in this mess. It didn’t start with 0, or his minions. GW has a large hand in this politically correct pile of Muzz manure, and no one party has the right answer to correct our missteps.