Recently Senator John McCain (R) AZ has questioned General George Casey and challenging the general on what is happening in Iraq. Does McCain have the audacity to think he knows more about battlefield tactics and about the details of the Iraq quagmire to be in a position to criticize a general who was there and who needed to make decisions. Senator McCain may not approve of the handling of affairs in Iraq and certainly has the right to question General Casey but to make statements that seem to discredit the general and his decisions when McCain wasn't there at the time with the general when decisions were being made.
2007-02-01 06:39:41 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
He questioned his bosses during the war in Vietnam. The mission he was shot down over Hanoi resulted in him being tortured for many years as a POW, he has a right to question military commanders. The command structure deserves some tough questions about lack of success in Iraq, starting with the commander in chief. It's been a flop.
2007-02-01 06:43:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Okay, I'll be the first one to admit that I don't know squat about that McCain-Casey thing. I don't follow US politics at all, considering I've got enough of a nightmare with the ones up here in the first place.
Being a general officer doesn't mean that one knows much about tactics. Since I've joined, I have a lot of general/flag officers with only one decoration: their CD, which is awarded for time in the service. They are accountants, physicians, chaplains, all sort of specialties and they have never had a single operational tour in their whole careers.
While, on the other hand I have seen civilians with a grasp of military strategy that would make Sun Tzu jealous.
Please do not generalize in such cases.
2007-02-01 08:29:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see where you are coming from, but you are missing a really important piece of information: Senator McCain did not make this accusation in a vacuum. He has advisors. There are lots of other generals who disagree with Casey, some of whom work directly with the General. There are lots of other strategists and authorities on the subject, too, considering economic and cultural factors that Casey would not know any more about than McCain knows about military strategy. You are oversimplifying the situation. McCain knows more about this than you let on here.
2007-02-01 06:49:47 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. Taco 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hopefully the torturers, the officers who allowed it and the representatives who condoned it would be charged and punished. Hopefully both candidates would work to make it so. However we both know that would never happen. McCain would likely try to hush it by declaring it top secret and sealing it forever just like his war records. Obama would likely sweep it under a congressional hearings committee for 10 years and forget about it. You know nobody carrying out torture of prisoners is ever going to be convicted or even charged with a crime in USA. Since Bush is still in power I would expect a bill rushed through the govt making the torturers immune to prosecution or for Bush to declare a blanket pardon for them. The DemoRepublican congress has already passed similar bills giving immunity from prosecution, one more should be fine for them. ----------- Hey Me, what of there is no truth there to get? Wouldn't it just be a waste of pain on McCain? For any who might misunderstand Complex Brotha's posting; USA was using waterboarding and there was no way for McCain not to have known.
2016-05-24 02:32:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that for a great military to be better the civilians must put in their ideas and input. A military unchecked becomes a threat to those who are there to protect. I am not saying that the US Military is anywhere near that point. What I say is that is right and proper for Sen. McCain to voice his opinions of himself and those that advise him. Lastly no one says that a General is always right. The sign of a good leader is one that is willing to make changes in the plan in order to make the plan work. IMHO
2007-02-01 06:56:33 · answer #5 · answered by DietrichVonQuint 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you listen to Senator McCain closely, you will hear another war monger speaking.. His major dream is to become president so he can "get even" for the pain and suffering he went through in Nam. It doesn't matter the enemy, just so he can inflict pain. That's why he agrees with Bush on the buildup of troops in Iraq. The reason he put down the General is because he is saying,"Just give ME a chance, I'lll show you how!"
2007-02-01 06:57:30 · answer #6 · answered by billy brite 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
we must remember that there are 100 people in the Senate who think they should be President..and every one thinks they know more about military matters than any mere General or Admiral
2007-02-01 06:44:57 · answer #7 · answered by kapute2 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
McCain is simply positioning himself for a presidential run.
He has to play the game.
You cannot win if you do not play.
2007-02-02 01:56:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
of course, he did have cockroaches to deploy and spy for him while under pow status...i would imagine he used them to school himself in the intricacies of warfare..."all right, you commie roaches..try and take cambodia, over there by the slop bucket...while you freedom roaches try and stop them".....nahhhhh...i dont think that equals a generals war college and military experience status..
2007-02-01 06:45:42 · answer #9 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
McCain is grandstanding for publicity.
2007-02-01 07:24:31 · answer #10 · answered by WC 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋