[quote]Bismark wrote:
I’m not being deceptive. [/quote]
Keep yourself convinced of that. You’ll need it.
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
I should add something re: Obama v. Bush:
This is one of the issues that vets (and it appears posters here) are very much split over. But I think the divide is much smaller than people believe. If Bush had done this, the outcry wouldn’t be so severe. This isn’t a party issue or the fact that Obama is black. Seriously, no one gives a shit about that.
There are many in the military who questioned Bush and did not like his policies. But they liked Bush. That’s because they felt like Bush liked THEM. We felt that Bush took his job as CiC seriously, and genuinely cared about the troops. Had Bush made this trade, there wouldn’t be mommy and daddy on the White House lawn. Condi Rice wouldn’t be talking about his honorable service. We all would know that there WOULD be an investigation and justice would be meted out.
People don’t feel that Barry cares about the troops. Indeed, the feeling is that he actively dislikes them. This is due in part to the press making a big deal out of small things, mistakes that are frustrating for military guys, but could also be honest mistakes. But in larger part it’s also due to the fact that he genuinely doesn’t give a shit about the troops. At the very minimum, not even the biggest Barry apologist is going to suggest that he has the same rapport with the military that Bush did.
So we’re mad. We’re mad because good men died because of him. We’re mad because he betrayed us. And we’re mad because it appears that he was returned like a rescued hero, and used for political points. We want his blood (after a fair trial). Unless you’ve been to combat (or at least drank that delicious kool-aid you’re issued in my Corps) you cannot understand the depth of this betrayal. And all of our concerns have been realized with Obama. He was returned like a hero. He was returned via capitulation, not with us slaying bodies to get him. Young men who served alongside him who knew him were not able to get their voices out. It took forever for them to decide to charge him, his high ranking officers saying that there was pressure against it. And finally, when they DO decide to charge him, they say death is off the table IMMEDIATELY. Jesus, at least let the little peckerwood squirm a little. [/quote]
Mikeyali:
First of all; thank you for you service, your sacrifice, and for your insights.
I agree with you only about 80% (or less) on this one. Some thoughts.
-
Our amazing Military men and women are human.
-
Our Military institutions AND it’s members “tend” or “lean” toward being “conservative”. This does not mean that everyone in the military is conservative; or even upholds all conservative ideals; but as a whole they operate within a “conservative” environment.
I mention this to say that they are as susceptible to any narrative about the President as those out of the military; and that narrative is of a President who (for whatever reason) doesn’t “like” or doesn’t “support” them.
It is my contention that this is a blatantly false perception, that is merely part and parcel to an overall negative conservative narrative when it comes to the President.
In terms of the “Homecoming” given to Bergdahl on the White House Lawn.
Politicians, ESPECIALLY Presidents; appear to always be looking for some “silver lining” in what appears to me to be a dismal, depressing and disheartening job. I have no idea why anyone would pursue, of even want the job; but as someone mentioned earlier, I’m glad that there are people who step up to the plate.
It’s pretty obvious that they often “get ahead of themselves”. The “Bergdahl” homecoming has proven to be as premature (and ill-advised) as the President Bush “Mission Accomplished” celebration and carrier landing after which 4,000 plus American died and thousands more were maimed and injured.
Presidents appear to more often than not find themselves in an isolated environment in which they receive very poor information and advice.
Mufasa
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Why are you comparing the U.S. to Israel Bismark?[/quote]
It’s an interesting comparison in that Israeli counter-terrorism policy is often held to be the ideal. To be clear, I’m vehemently opposed to the deal that the administration made.[/quote]
You did make an interesting point. I’m a bit fuzzy on your rationale for being opposed to the deal because I don’t remember what you said. Give a quick recap on your reasons?
I think we were along similar lines but I do not recall.
[/quote]
First, engaging in prisoner swaps with terrorists (which the Afghan Taliban are, regardless of their removal from State’s foreign terrorist organization list) increases the incentives for rebel groups to engage in terrorism. Counterterrorism strategies should aim to deprive terrorism of its political utility.
Second, the costs to benefit ratio of trading five high level commanders for an NCO does not justify the prisoner exchange.
Lastly, there are the circumstances of Bergdahl’s capture. He naively deserted his post and likely aided and abetted the enemy. Good men are dead because of him.
[/quote]
Wow.
We actually agree!
[/quote]
A cost benefit analysis is not something that should be done when American lives are at stake, imo. [/quote]
That sounds good in principle, but doesn’t wash in reality.
Would the US government pay the same ransom for a US senator as they would an unknown private who deserted? No, nor should they.
In reality there has to be some calculation of worth, unless we’re just going to pay whatever the terrorists ask for.
[/quote]
I believe it’s a terrible idea to give the government the power to decide worth. A Senator should not be worth more than some unknown private. He / she isn’t unknown to everyone and I’d argue that private is giving more to this country than some Senator collecting a pay check and voting along party line.
If we aren’t a country of Principle than what are we? [/quote]
A country of principle up to the point where it collides with reality.
Again I ask, if there is no calculation of worth, how do we decide how much is acceptable to pay?
[/quote]
There shouldn’t be a calculation imo. We should either pay the same for anyone or not pay at all.
[/quote]
So if the terrorists want more than the last time, we just don’t pay?
That would make “Leave no one behind” all but impossible, and nearly meaningless.
You have to decide if your going to attempt to bring people back, or refuse to calculate worth. Can’t have it both ways.[/quote]
What I am saying is that the policy should be we either bring everyone home by any means we can regardless of whether they are a Senator or the guy working the drive through window at McDonald’s or we never negotiate to bring anyone. Amounts, prisoner exchange, etc… are just the details specific to each event. The overriding principle, imo, is we should go for everyone. No one left behind.
I am mot for the government calculatong worth in most cases.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
What I am saying is that the policy should be we either bring everyone home by any means we can regardless of whether they are a Senator or the guy working the drive through window at McDonald’s or we never negotiate to bring anyone. Amounts, prisoner exchange, etc… are just the details specific to each event. The overriding principle, imo, is we should go for everyone. No one left behind.
I am mot for the government calculatong worth in most cases.[/quote]
This was brought up but I’m too lazy to see if it fit within this context, but do you think the efforts to get people back should change based on whether they put themselves in that situation or not? Like say a reporter vs a vet?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
What I am saying is that the policy should be we either bring everyone home by any means we can regardless of whether they are a Senator or the guy working the drive through window at McDonald’s or we never negotiate to bring anyone. Amounts, prisoner exchange, etc… are just the details specific to each event. The overriding principle, imo, is we should go for everyone. No one left behind.
I am mot for the government calculatong worth in most cases.[/quote]
This was brought up but I’m too lazy to see if it fit within this context, but do you think the efforts to get people back should change based on whether they put themselves in that situation or not? Like say a reporter vs a vet?[/quote]
My thinking is in line with yours Beans. I don’t see the urgency to chase after someone who willingly left. People keep thinking he was caught on the battlefield, he wasn’t.
And on the lighter side…
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
[quote]Aggv wrote:
The one where you keep going on about “obamao” and continue to ignore the question related to your comparison about Israel and USA swapping soldiers.
[/quote]
Some people pick out some minor fact you may or may not have gotten totally correct and ride that minor mistake for page after page all the while ignoring the important points you have made & attacking you because you got a single fact wrong, or used the wrong punctuation or bad grammar.[/quote]
So true, and so frustrating. It’s really not worth engaging with people like that.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
I’m not being deceptive. [/quote]
Keep yourself convinced of that. You’ll need it. [/quote]
I’d rather be deliberately deceptive in pursuit of an end (which you alone accuse me of) than led on a witch hunt by phantasms. When USMC agrees with me and disagrees with you, you know you’re in the wrong.
When was the last time obamaOOOOOOOO landed on a aircraft carrier? or done anything other than read a teleprompter in front of the troops?
If i was commander and chief of the largest military the world as ever seen, i’d be spending my free time taking advantage of that cool shit, visiting troops and raising moral. But this is coming from someone who respects and appreciates the military.
Hawaii is not exactly somewhere with a strong sense of American patriotism, just sayin.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
…The “Bergdahl” homecoming has proven to be as premature (and ill-advised) as the President Bush “Mission Accomplished” celebration and carrier landing…
[/quote]
Not even close to being a valid comparison.
[/quote]
I’m listening, Push…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
…The “Bergdahl” homecoming has proven to be as premature (and ill-advised) as the President Bush “Mission Accomplished” celebration and carrier landing…
[/quote]
Not even close to being a valid comparison.
[/quote]
I’m listening, Push…
Mufasa
[/quote]
The differences are not glaringly obvious??
[quote]Aggv wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
…The “Bergdahl” homecoming has proven to be as premature (and ill-advised) as the President Bush “Mission Accomplished” celebration and carrier landing…
[/quote]
Not even close to being a valid comparison.
[/quote]
I’m listening, Push…
Mufasa
[/quote]
The differences are not glaringly obvious??
[/quote]
After being on PWI for some time now; I will assure you that the “answer” will be a glaring “missing the point” one, in an attempt to bolster ones bias and narrative.
We all do it.
So…I’m still listening.
Mufasa
You need someone to draw you picture as to why there is a huge difference between falsely celebrating one solider vs celebrating an entire war?
[quote]Aggv wrote:
You need someone to draw you picture as to why there is a huge difference between falsely celebrating one solider vs celebrating an entire war?
[/quote]
That’s what I thought.
I’ll stand by my original points to Mikeyali.
Some will choose to understand those points…some will not.
Mufasa
Sorry to break it to you, but there is no bias in stating the fact that those 2 situations are completely different. Just like comparing the prisoner swaps Israel has done with bergdahl, you simply can not compare the situations as they are completely different.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
And on the lighter side…
[/quote]
I absolutely love duffelblog. I follow their satire most all the time lol