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.
"Over nearly two hours in the situation room, according to the officials, Trump complained about NATO allies, inquired about the United States getting a piece of Afghan’s mineral wealth and repeatedly said the top U.S. general there should be fired. He also startled the room with a story that seemed to compare their advice to that of a paid consultant who cost a tony New York restaurateur profits by offering bad advice."
For cause. If memory serves, one was for sexual assault, another for some sort of misconduct.
This is not the same thing. At all. Even insubordinate statements, as in Truman/MacArthur, is not in play.
edit to add: It appears that Trump's gripe is that the Generals are "offering bad advice".
That seems - random - to say the least.
Obama was terrified of his generals and would never cross them.
Trump on the other hand expects results and will fire under performing military top brass.
Eat another biscuit, dear, and knit another pussyhat. Ain't gonna happen. Come up with a better candidate next time.
That won't be a problem. Any viable candidate in November and your jackass is not in charge. Next time will be totally different, assuming your boy even makes it that long.
He, like all the presidents before him, has the legal and constitutional right to relieve of command (fire) any general he wants. He is the Commander-in-Chief, after all. Whether it is wise or not is another matter.
He might want to understand what is going on first. He has the right, sure, but the reason "because we haven't won yet" is not a logical reason. This is not the Apprentice, and he needs to retire his "you're fired" mantra.
As have been the decisions of the last 16 years. Did you think Trump would do better?
Nope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking
I am irked by the point that the first American soldier who got in a firefight over there with a Taliban, if that soldier and Taliban had a son, now their sons are in a firefight with each other. 2 generations at war there so far.
I use to support A-stan , to eliminate the Taliban to the point they are no longer a viable threat but now I believe the motives for continuing the war is more about financial gain then security . Both political parties are ****
Eliminate the Taliban for what? They've never been a threat to us.
After 9/11, everyone keeps forgetting that they asked the Bush Administration for evidence that Osama Bin Laden was responsible, and if that evidence held up, they'd turn him over. The administration refused. Why? Because they wanted a war instead, and didn't see the Taliban as lofty enough to talk to.
So once again, hundreds of men are dead for nothing.
So he is meeting expectations. I expected Obama to get us out.
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.
Trump Wants to Fire General in Charge of Afghan War
