Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your bias is showing - Trump is pretty popular in much of the military. You really should not pretend to know what they would say.
In the last 40 years there have been a total of only 37 POWs, non was an experienced military leader so the total of military leaders who have seen combat and were POWs is zero - no group to form a majority.
The Pentagon already took a position in 2015 that they would not look to rename any of these bases - story
I would defer to the Army leadership on this decision. I would encourage them to look at changing these names, because there are many better names to honor (not because of political correctness) but whether they change these installation names or not should be their decision. Keep politics and political correctness out of the process - Congress should not force it and I believe that is Trump's position.
As I previously stated, I would defer to our military leadership, as well, on this decision.
As for Trump's popularity in the military -- you're right and I misspoke about a majority of the military disapproving of our Commander-in-Chief. According to Military Times, it's actually only about half who disapprove of Trump.
Your bias is showing - Trump is pretty popular in much of the military. You really should not pretend to know what they would say.
In the last 40 years there have been a total of only 37 POWs, non was an experienced military leader so the total of military leaders who have seen combat and were POWs is zero - no group to form a majority.
The Pentagon already took a position in 2015 that they would not look to rename any of these bases - story
I would defer to the Army leadership on this decision. I would encourage them to look at changing these names, because there are many better names to honor (not because of political correctness) but whether they change these installation names or not should be their decision. Keep politics and political correctness out of the process - Congress should not force it and I believe that is Trump's position.
Ever since the days of G. Washington the military has been subordinate to civilian leadership. The military works for (in theory), and is funded by the peeps, and while I don't favor micro management why shouldn't the military do what the peeps reps tell them to do, if the reps believe it will help solve one or more recognised problems?
As I previously stated, I would defer to our military leadership, as well, on this decision.
As for Trump's popularity in the military -- you're right and I misspoke about a majority of the military disapproving of our Commander-in-Chief. According to Military Times, it's actually only about half who disapprove of Trump.
Yeah, that newspaper is notoriously liberal and unrepresentative of the rank and file military. It represents some career bureaucrats in D.C. and that's about it. Talk to real military people-- they're like 90% pro-Trump. Both active and veterans.
Yeah, that newspaper is notoriously liberal and unrepresentative of the rank and file military. It represents some career bureaucrats in D.C. and that's about it. Talk to real military people-- they're like 90% pro-Trump. Both active and veterans.
No bureaucrats involved. Military Times used to be owned by Gannett, and now is owned by an L.A. private equity firm with interests all over the map.
From Allsides.com
Quote:
Military Times media bias rating is Center."Service members and their families rely on MilitaryTimes.com as a trusted, independent source for news and information on the most important issues affecting their careers and personal lives," according to the site's About page.The publication focuses on military news. An AllSides independent review in June 2020 found that the website rarely employs any sort of political slant or preference in its reporting.
No bureaucrats involved. Military Times used to be owned by Gannett, and now is owned by an L.A. private equity firm with interests all over the map.
From Allsides.com
Military Times media bias rating is Center."Service members and their families rely on MilitaryTimes.com as a trusted, independent source for news and information on the most important issues affecting their careers and personal lives," according to the site's About page.The publication focuses on military news. An AllSides independent review in June 2020 found that the website rarely employs any sort of political slant or preference in its reporting.
LMAO, yeah that's a totally objective source -- the website's own About page!
I've read that publication a few times and it's pretty liberal... unlike probably 75% to 90% of military folks.
I'll admit, Trump may not be well liked among some of the top officers. Mattis quit, then started bashing Trump on MSNBC like so many other Swamp creatures have done. Serve your country, resign or get fired, then betray your former commander in chief. What a tool.
And why was he mad? Because Trump went over his head and spoke directly to the commanders on the ground in Syria. He asked them why the fight against ISIS was taking so long and why they weren't going all out to defeat it. He was told, they were not allowed to use the necessary tactics. He asked them, what are the necessary tactics? They replied, they would flank the enemy, hit him from the sides, hit him from behind, leave him nowhere to run. Yes, the Pentagon's top so-called generals prevented them from using this type of strategy. Trump then ordered the top brass to allow the field commanders the latitude to conduct the war as they saw fit, and within a matter of days and weeks they had thoroughly routed the ISIS fighters and ended the conflict.
He has annoyed the top officers, for sure. He probably isn't very popular among entrenched bureaucrats in the Pentagon who have an interest in keeping a low level war going, with all the spending, procurement, and turf fights that it involves.
Well like it or not, the President doesn't exist to serve the military officer class. The military exists to serve the people, led by the President.
Okay so he's not the most diplomatic or smooth speaking politician out there. But he got a war ended and removed the bulk of the U.S. personnel from harm's way. In my opinion he deserves a medal, not ignominious defeat at the polls.
As for the names of bases. These are huge installations, some with thousands of personnel living & working there, many books, articles, texts, websites, histories, memories... imagine the costs, let alone the confusion it would cause to rename such a place just out of political correctness, because some modern day snowflakes with zero historical knowledge are having a meltdown over the "racist" names... ridiculous.
Let's just rename all the towns and states in the country while we're at it since most of them are white European names and of course America is a history of white European aggression against non-white peoples. Or so my kid tells me based on her 9th grade American history course. Which she herself finds totally laughable.
Yeah, that newspaper is notoriously liberal and unrepresentative of the rank and file military. It represents some career bureaucrats in D.C. and that's about it. Talk to real military people-- they're like 90% pro-Trump. Both active and veterans.
New York City is named for James II, the Duke Of York. No one single individual profited more from the Atlantic slave trade than him, shipping thousands of slaves to the New World. Yet I don't hear any outrage or see any street riots over that particular issue.
LMAO, yeah that's a totally objective source -- the website's own About page!
I've read that publication a few times and it's pretty liberal... unlike probably 75% to 90% of military folks.
I'll admit, Trump may not be well liked among some of the top officers. Mattis quit, then started bashing Trump on MSNBC like so many other Swamp creatures have done. Serve your country, resign or get fired, then betray your former commander in chief. What a tool.
And why was he mad? Because Trump went over his head and spoke directly to the commanders on the ground in Syria. He asked them why the fight against ISIS was taking so long and why they weren't going all out to defeat it. He was told, they were not allowed to use the necessary tactics. He asked them, what are the necessary tactics? They replied, they would flank the enemy, hit him from the sides, hit him from behind, leave him nowhere to run. Yes, the Pentagon's top so-called generals prevented them from using this type of strategy. Trump then ordered the top brass to allow the field commanders the latitude to conduct the war as they saw fit, and within a matter of days and weeks they had thoroughly routed the ISIS fighters and ended the conflict.
He has annoyed the top officers, for sure. He probably isn't very popular among entrenched bureaucrats in the Pentagon who have an interest in keeping a low level war going, with all the spending, procurement, and turf fights that it involves.
Well like it or not, the President doesn't exist to serve the military officer class. The military exists to serve the people, led by the President.
Okay so he's not the most diplomatic or smooth speaking politician out there. But he got a war ended and removed the bulk of the U.S. personnel from harm's way. In my opinion he deserves a medal, not ignominious defeat at the polls.
As for the names of bases. These are huge installations, some with thousands of personnel living & working there, many books, articles, texts, websites, histories, memories... imagine the costs, let alone the confusion it would cause to rename such a place just out of political correctness, because some modern day snowflakes with zero historical knowledge are having a meltdown over the "racist" names... ridiculous.
Let's just rename all the towns and states in the country while we're at it since most of them are white European names and of course America is a history of white European aggression against non-white peoples. Or so my kid tells me based on her 9th grade American history course. Which she herself finds totally laughable.
You need to reread both your own, and my previous post, because you're tying yourself up in knots.
I don't think you've said what you thought you were saying.
What you've actually said here is that you are LMAO at the claim on the About Page that "Service members and their families rely on MilitaryTimes.com as a trusted, independent source for news and information on the most important issues affecting their careers and personal lives,".
You haven't challenged the 2nd half of the quote which says:"An AllSides independent review in June 2020 found that the website rarely employs any sort of political slant or preference in its reporting."
You're original claim was that is was a liberal mouthpiece. I've given you an authority that says it's neutral, and you come back with a load of stuff about Matthis/Syria etc. that's irrelevant to the topic.
Republicans insisted on changing the name of National Airport in DC to Ronald Regan Airport. 30 million a year use the facility. Easy Peasy!
Yet I don't hear any outrage or see any street riots over that particular issue.
Because there has to be a practicality line between what happened way back then
vs when the reality and future had been made unmistakably clear.
In another similar thread I called that as the year 1807 when legislation was passed
that left no room or doubt from that point forward there is absolutely no cover to be had.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
