Yes you did. You think she should redistribute her income.
She can do anything she wants.
Not according to you.
Franks was not involved in a tragedy like Lynch was.
Franks was overseeing the War! What do you mean he's not involved? LOL Isn't his book going to be dripping with the blood of all those that ever fought under him, as you guys like to say about Lynch? You are inconsistent.
Apples and oranges.
No, it's the same.
That would make thing easier for you wouldn't it? The issue isn't gender, it's poor decision making.
You made it gender. You admitted it.
Yes you did. You think she should redistribute her income.
I think it was wrong for her to cut a million dollar deal while the heroes around her and the familes of the heroes who died protecting her aren't given nearly the same level of treatment. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I struck such a bargin
She can do anything she wants.
Not according to you.
She can do what ever she wants. My point is, just because a person CAN do something doesn't always mean that they should. There are ethical and moral responsibilities that we all must consider.
Franks was overseeing the War! What do you mean he's not involved? LOL Isn't his book going to be dripping with the blood of all those that ever fought under him, as you guys like to say about Lynch? You are inconsistent.
He was not directly involved in this particular incident with this one small team getting lost. He's brilliant, but he's not a micromanager.
And his story, in his own words can be easily found in many interviews and articles. He's not holding out for an exclusive rights deal, he's an honorable man.