US Military Seeks To Silence Officers Who Speak out about Illegal Wars

[Tribesman]

I thought they support the people who are carrying out the mission, just not the plan that those same people came up with.

Wow you mean they actually had a plan .
and there was me thinking they just decided to go off on some half baked idea and hope for the best .

[Xiahou]

Wow you mean they actually had a plan .
and there was me thinking they just decided to go off on some half baked idea and hope for the best .

No idea what we're talking about, huh?

[Tribesman]

No idea what we're talking about, huh?

Don't be silly Xiahou , they can support the troops yet not support the plan , and anyone the supports the new halfarsed plan is even more stupid than anyone who supported the original plan .
Now if someone really supported the troops then they wouldn't send them off on an idiotic mission in the first place .
So Xiahou , since you support this madness in Iraq it does raise the question , why do you hate the troops so much ?

[Xiahou]

Don't be silly Xiahou , they can support the troops yet not support the plan , and anyone the supports the new halfarsed plan is even more stupid than anyone who supported the original plan .
Now if someone really supported the troops then they wouldn't send them off on an idiotic mission in the first place .
So Xiahou , since you support this madness in Iraq it does raise the question , why do you hate the troops so much ?

Another swing and a miss.
Want a clue, or would you like to flail away some more?

[Tribesman]

EDIT: Removed personal attack. BG

[Banquo's Ghost]

Let's try and see if we can disagree without insulting each other, shall we?

[ajaxfetish]

Tribesman, they're not talking about 'the troops.' Unless I'm mistaken, they're discussing the military leadership, and the issue at hand is not the quality of the plan, but the unwillingness of congress to commit itself. If they assign generals to accomplish a task and then block those generals' plans, they show either that they are determined to fail or that they don't trust their own appointees, either of which is discouraging.

Ajax

[Tribesman]

Tribesman, they're not talking about 'the troops.' Unless I'm mistaken, they're discussing the military leadership, and the issue at hand is not the quality of the plan, but the unwillingness of congress to commit itself. If they assign generals to accomplish a task and then block those generals' plans, they show either that they are determined to fail or that they don't trust their own appointees, either of which is discouraging.

But the issue is the quality of the plan isn't it , the administration was offered several plans , it chose a crap one (again) . Why should the senate or congress commit to it without thourough debate . A major issue in the mid-terms was sorting the mess out in Iraq , the plan does nothing of the sort and there is cross party support saying this ,though not in sufficent numbers from either side to resolve it yet .

But I must say the change in attitudes towards Casey is quite funny .

[Xiahou]

Tribesman, they're not talking about 'the troops.' Unless I'm mistaken, they're discussing the military leadership, and the issue at hand is not the quality of the plan, but the unwillingness of congress to commit itself. If they assign generals to accomplish a task and then block those generals' plans, they show either that they are determined to fail or that they don't trust their own appointees, either of which is discouraging.

Ajax

Yup, he's got it.
General Petraeus was confirmed unanimously by the Senate with the many of them going out of their way to gush and heap praise on him. However, they oppose the plan to secure Baghdad that was written in a large part by and certainly supported by Petraeus. It's mind boggling cognitive dissonance and smacks of political pandering.