"The Military Times will call for the firing of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld in a couragous act that demonstrates the failure of the policy and the urgent need for change.
The Army Times, Marine Corps Times, Navy Times and Air Force Times are the most informed sources of information and truth about what our commanders and troops believe, in fact."
They say: "We should demand full accounting of what force structures and budgets our military will need and work on a bipartisan basis to meet those needs of the Army, Marine Corps, Guard and Reserves with no further abuses of rotations and recalls."
Do these positions deserve support?
2006-11-05 15:38:41 · 8 answers · asked by Reba K 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Don't attack the messenger of a legitimate question regarding the published article.
2006-11-05 17:31:18 · update #1
Kudos to them for have the huevos to stand up to their boss.
2006-11-05 15:41:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Editor-In-Chief of the Military Times publications (Robert Hodierne) is a man who was accused of treason during the Viet Nam War.
I wouldn't believe a word he prints when it comes to ideology.
And the others who mentioned it are correct, the Military Times newspapers are owned by Gannett, the same corporation that owns USA Today. They have no affiliation with the military, other than the focus of their articles.
2006-11-06 01:35:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First off, the [insert service] Times are *NOT* produced by the armed services. They are publications of Gannett, a publisher with known bias towards the Democrat party and liberal views in general. The editorial being published is a very obvious attempt to put words in the mouths of our armed services to influence the election by misleading gullible people such as yourself. It was written, edited, and published by civilians without the input or approval of military personnel. You don't really believe the timing of the publication is coincidental, do you?
2006-11-05 23:47:56 · answer #3 · answered by dukefenton 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. Civilians with a tenth of his experience and intelligence, are easily swayed by a liberal press that sells whatever it tells the people because people are so gullible nowadays. You think the next man in his shoes is going to know more or less than he does? Or have more or less influencing powers in the larger scheme of things? Absolutely not. You would have to change the ideaology of an entire country and rewind history to the beginning of the first war where we entangled ourselves on another continent to even begin to have a change!
2006-11-06 00:17:08 · answer #4 · answered by dluvshistory 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, because although the newspaper is geared toward the military, it isn't a military publication. Not only that, they broke the basic military rule of complaining which makes you wonder how "military" these reporters are. The basic rule is, provide the solution and not the problem. Are these reporters backing anybody? No, because they never thought about that part, because they are not that good of reporters.
2006-11-06 01:04:33 · answer #5 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No
The chain of command does not start at the bottom.
2006-11-05 23:45:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes,, if we don't support our military,, what's the point,,, Bush has to fire Rummy,, if not,, he doesn't support the troops,, what he is always accusing Democrats of,,, back in your face Mr President
2006-11-05 23:43:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
yes yes yes
2006-11-06 00:48:05 · answer #8 · answered by r j 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋