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.
Sure he is. Maybe he will write a book one day or maybe never. Maybe he has written a bookt and hasn't had it published? Maybe Gates' book will encourage him to publish a book? That's his call.
I do expect a lot of those serving under Obama will write books - praising him as the greatest president in history and that we will never see another one like him (personally I hope so) and maybe they will also tell how they saw Obama walk on water and turned sand into gold dust.
And of course Obama will be writing his book, which will come in a volume set. What do you think the title would be?
"I". God only knows that's all he does is talk about himself. It will be filled with what a great leader (from behind) he was.
"I'm Still Laughing"
"The Joke Was on YOU America" Dedication page: To my "brother" Mohamed Morsi.
"For Once I'm Going to Tell the Truth". First page will have an inscription: Thanks fool for buying my book.
"I Proved How 50% of Americans are Dumber than a Door Knob"
Last edited by softblueyz; 01-12-2014 at 12:02 PM..
Any chance that Obama told him that he wanted a certain outcome and gave him an order to find a way to achieve that outcome?
Well, that's pretty much the way war is done.
Or are you saying that Obama ordered Petraeus to raise the casualty rate and Petraeus merely saluted?
Of course, we don't really know one way or another, but I doubt the whole of the officers in the DoD are keeping it all that secret just to protect Obama.
Sure he is. Maybe he will write a book one day or maybe never. Maybe he has written a bookt and hasn't had it published? Maybe Gates' book will encourage him to publish a book? That's his call.
I do expect a lot of those serving under Obama will write books - praising him as the greatest president in history and that we will never see another one like him (personally I hope so) and maybe they will also tell how they saw Obama walk on water and turned sand into gold dust.
And of course Obama will be writing his book, which will come in a volume set. What do you think the title would be?
"I". God only knows that's all he does is talk about himself. It will be filled with what a great leader (from behind) he was.
"I'm Still Laughing"
"The Joke Was on YOU America" Dedication page: To my "brother" Mohamed Morsi.
"For Once I'm Going to Tell the Truth". First page will have an inscription: Thanks fool for buying my book.
"I Proved How 50% of Americans are Dumber than a Door Knob"
If he DOES write a book, he will have to submit it to DOD for their clearance to ensure he doesn't reveal any "classified" information. Of course, they can conveniently "classify" anything they want contained in the book.
If you do a bit more Googling, you can find lists naming the officers "purged."
First, half of them are O3 through O5--not senior at all. That's 197 officers scattered over the DoD out of a total of 225,000...not much of a "purge."
Second, according to other stories, the nine flag officers released have been over Obama's entire administration, not just in the last year. That's nine flag officers out of nearly a thousand flag officers overall, not much of a "purge."
These numbers are not very unusual, especially during a drawdown. Compare this to the years right after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
There is absolutely nothing connecting any of them, absolutely random. No pattern suggestive of a hidden agenda from the top. Just numbers.
If he DOES write a book, he will have to submit it to DOD for their clearance to ensure he doesn't reveal any "classified" information. Of course, they can conveniently "classify" anything they want contained in the book.
No, "they" can't conveniently classify anything they want. And if a general does publish a book without authorization, they'll have to take him to court where even more will be revealed. These are, of course, career military men...we expect them to have some guts.
"They gave me numerous examples of how the ROEs by which they must abide not only make their jobs harder, but put their lives at increased and unnecessary risk:
During the Bush administration, we were able to engage terrorists planting IEDs with greater ease. Now, if we see two guys on the side of the road and it looks like they're planting an IED, we are told to wait -- because they might be farmers. It's like our goal is to kill them with kindness. We're going to win Afghans over with money, clinics, roads, etc., instead of winning their confidence by killing the Taliban or the Hezb-i-Islami Gulbuddin (HIG).
I asked for a couple of examples of the worst of the worst regarding current ROEs, and here's what I was told:
We have certain counter-insurgency (COIN) techniques that support the Afghan population by removing the terrorists from their midst. COIN involves clearing the enemy out, keeping the enemy out, and helping the people get on their feet once the threat is removed (clear, hold, develop). However, under the current ROEs, while we hold the area we've cleared, redlines are set beyond which we can't venture. This creates a perimeter beyond which the enemy remains untouchable. The enemy literally sits outside those lines and waits for us leave so they can move back in. Another problem is that once we've cleared a place, we only hold it for a short time before we move on to the next place in order to show "progress." The bad news is that this "progress" might look good on paper, but it doesn't involve the aggressive killing of the enemy which is necessary if COIN is to be carried out the way it was designed.
The members of the Calvary Scout Platoon provided one other breath-taking example of how the current ROEs literally put our troops at the mercy of the enemy:
In country, we have Escalation of Force Kits. These keep people away in a non-lethal manner. To do that, they used to contain "KEEP BACK" signs we'd put on our trucks during a convoy and the kits also had small flares we could fire. These things were taken away and instead we were told to drive with the same courtesy we would use if driving in the U.S. That means if cars get backed up behind us, we are to pull over and let them pass. This takes our buffer -- our zone of safety -- completely away. Because once we pull over, the cars get to pass right up against us and that opens the door for suicide bombers, suicide bombs, and gun fire. We allow people to get so close to our vehicles that we have no time to react should they try to do something.
"They gave me numerous examples of how the ROEs by which they must abide not only make their jobs harder, but put their lives at increased and unnecessary risk:
During the Bush administration, we were able to engage terrorists planting IEDs with greater ease. Now, if we see two guys on the side of the road and it looks like they're planting an IED, we are told to wait -- because they might be farmers. It's like our goal is to kill them with kindness. We're going to win Afghans over with money, clinics, roads, etc., instead of winning their confidence by killing the Taliban or the Hezb-i-Islami Gulbuddin (HIG).
I asked for a couple of examples of the worst of the worst regarding current ROEs, and here's what I was told:
We have certain counter-insurgency (COIN) techniques that support the Afghan population by removing the terrorists from their midst. COIN involves clearing the enemy out, keeping the enemy out, and helping the people get on their feet once the threat is removed (clear, hold, develop). However, under the current ROEs, while we hold the area we've cleared, redlines are set beyond which we can't venture. This creates a perimeter beyond which the enemy remains untouchable. The enemy literally sits outside those lines and waits for us leave so they can move back in. Another problem is that once we've cleared a place, we only hold it for a short time before we move on to the next place in order to show "progress." The bad news is that this "progress" might look good on paper, but it doesn't involve the aggressive killing of the enemy which is necessary if COIN is to be carried out the way it was designed.
The members of the Calvary Scout Platoon provided one other breath-taking example of how the current ROEs literally put our troops at the mercy of the enemy:
In country, we have Escalation of Force Kits. These keep people away in a non-lethal manner. To do that, they used to contain "KEEP BACK" signs we'd put on our trucks during a convoy and the kits also had small flares we could fire. These things were taken away and instead we were told to drive with the same courtesy we would use if driving in the U.S. That means if cars get backed up behind us, we are to pull over and let them pass. This takes our buffer -- our zone of safety -- completely away. Because once we pull over, the cars get to pass right up against us and that opens the door for suicide bombers, suicide bombs, and gun fire. We allow people to get so close to our vehicles that we have no time to react should they try to do something.
Or are you saying that Obama ordered Petraeus to raise the casualty rate and Petraeus merely saluted?
Of course, we don't really know one way or another, but I doubt the whole of the officers in the DoD are keeping it all that secret just to protect Obama.
I think I was pretty clear in what I said. There is no "OR". When Obama gives an order, you don't question it. You just do what you are told to do which more than likely is to find a solution to what Obama wants to achieve. Of course Petraeus might have other thoughts and gave his opinion and advice and presented more than one solution, but he certainly wasn't going to tell Obama that he was wrong and suggest another way. Who ordered Petraeus to change the ROE? And I'm sure that Obama is informed of the solution(s) and signs off on it or the one that he prefers. Nevertheless, Obama gets the last say.
Like you said, we don't know what Obama ordered or what was behind the order. But it's interesting how Obama had so many inept Generals that were incapable of doing their job. 9 Generals were dismissed in 2013. You really believe that the whole of the officers in the DoD are privy to everything?? It's amazing that we failed in Vietnam, failed in Iraq, and failed in Afghanistan, as to how many inept Generals we have had.
Wasn't he informed once or twice the location of OBL and he froze? It took a lot of convincing for him to give the order for OBL's capture. Obama was very, very concerned that if it failed it could impact his legacy/presidency, as did Clinton when he had the chance to get OBL.
They be protecting their pension, their benefits and themselves - not Obama. If you want your pension which combined with savings is the only thing an officer has to live on after retiring or want to continue to work as a civilian, you keep you mouth shut or retire/resign. Unless, of course, they have a couple of million bucks in their savings account and don't need their pension.
I think I was pretty clear in what I said. There is no "OR". When Obama gives an order, you don't question it. You just do what you are told to do which more than likely is to find a solution to what Obama wants to achieve. Of course Petraeus might have other thoughts and gave his opinion and advice and presented more than one solution, but he certainly wasn't going to tell Obama that he was wrong and suggest another way. Who ordered Petraeus to change the ROE? And I'm sure that Obama is informed of the solution(s) and signs off on it or the one that he prefers. Nevertheless, Obama gets the last say.
Like you said, we don't know what Obama ordered or what was behind the order. But it's interesting how Obama had so many inept Generals that were incapable of doing their job. 9 Generals were dismissed in 2013. You really believe that the whole of the officers in the DoD are privy to everything?? It's amazing that we failed in Vietnam, failed in Iraq, and failed in Afghanistan, as to how many inept Generals we have had.
Wasn't he informed once or twice the location of OBL and he froze? It took a lot of convincing for him to give the order for OBL's capture. Obama was very, very concerned that if it failed it could impact his legacy/presidency, as did Clinton when he had the chance to get OBL.
They be protecting their pension, their benefits and themselves - not Obama. If you want your pension which combined with savings is the only thing an officer has to live on after retiring or want to continue to work as a civilian, you keep you mouth shut or retire/resign. Unless, of course, they have a couple of million bucks in their savings account and don't need their pension.
The only way Petraeus could possibly lose his pension as a 4 star flag officer is by committing a crime that unimaginably heinous. Taking a pension away from a flag officer is nearly impossible otherwise, even if they're relieved of duty.
Moreover, you're underestimating how many incompetent men we've promoted into the flag officer ranks over our history. Read Fiasco...the account of our war in Iraq. Several generals were exposed to be incompetent.
The Peter Principle pops up pretty damn often in the military, and if you do even a short stint, you'll see it in action multiple times...even in the field grade and flag officer ranks. In fact, you see it MORESO there in my experience.
Where are you getting your information from regarding the 95% of casualties occurred under Bush?
99% of casualties in IRAQ occurred under Bush, but it is for the obvious reason, that 99% of the fighting took place under him.
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.
