English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I trust the four star general than a congress man any day for Hilary to call him a liar when he knows more than her is pretty stupid on her part is you can't trust a general than can you trust the army Hilary.

2007-09-17 23:58:11 · 10 answers · asked by Jeremy P 2 in Politics & Government Politics

there is either a lot of Moveon.org people or they just agree with that ad man even leftist dont trust the army to do there job guess he didn't say what you wanted him to say.

2007-09-18 00:11:08 · update #1

Millitary wise do you think she can win a war what has she done to proof of that watch the media do a three sixty if she wins you see.

2007-09-18 00:13:11 · update #2

is that you Gorge Soros

2007-09-18 00:25:39 · update #3

10 answers

You are comparing apples and oranges. In our system of government, the military is subordinate to the civilian government. Always. At the end of World War I, the German generals wanted to continue fighting the Western Allies, and the conservatives in Germany did not sign off on the Armistice. They complained that liberal and socialist elements had "stabbed them in the back," and Hitler later used this argument during his rise to power in the 1930s. But General Erich von Ludendorff, the top German commander, misunderstood his role in the policy-making process, and he also misunderstood the brilliant strategist Karl von Clausewitz, who had written 100 years earlier that the people exert a huge influence on both the government and the military during wartime. Ignore them at your peril!

2007-09-18 00:59:14 · answer #1 · answered by Who Else? 7 · 0 0

Too much is being made over this.
Petraus is being asked to give the military assesment, which he has. But it is the political assesment that is important if the US ever wants to leave Iraq, and that doesn`t look very good right now. The military can only do a mission that it is asked to do.
Building coalitions and diplomatic work is the job of the civilian leadership and that is going nowhere.
And I trust neither one.
There`s a saying in the military, "everyone has a boss", including a four star general. You always have to back the commander in chief, always. And Clinton I trust as much as I trust any politician.

2007-09-18 07:24:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

They have both 'betrayed' the trust of the American people.

Dems in Congress and Senate gave 'Betrayus' an opportunity to show that he was acting in the best interests of the American Military and he showed that he was no more than a lapdog.....

The Dems should not make the same mistake in giving the candidacy to Clinton H.

2007-09-18 07:19:29 · answer #3 · answered by Dream Realized 2 · 1 0

General Petraeus is known as a bright man, and he wrote the book (literally) on counterinsurgency operations. But in the little biographies I've seen on line, I can't find anything that shows he had special expertise or experience to do so. Also, he's a military man. He takes his orders and figures out to the best of his ability how to carry them out. Operationally, he's the guy. But on a scale of policy and grand strategy, as a military man, he's not in a position to decide proper policy. That's the way our system works. I happen to think we need to give him a chance, but let's not forget who's who.

2007-09-18 07:47:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Just because he is a general doesn't make him any more trustworthy than a politician or anyone else. If you don't think he had to be good at politics to become a 4 star, then you don't know much about the military.

As far as Gen. Patraeus is concerned, he's been a Bush parrot for many years so his credibility is less than stellar in my book.

2007-09-18 07:04:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Most enlisted men will say anything to make the commander in chief happy." He knows more than her" she our next president is a Rhode Scholar. Even Greenspan knows she is one smart cookie. And to think some people got into Harvard with a C average. and now sits in a white house and proves every day he is below average in thinking.

2007-09-18 07:10:51 · answer #6 · answered by joyce s 4 · 2 1

Well for one I KNOW hillary is a psychopath. So thats reason enough to trust anyone else. I wish the general would run for president, at least if he gets us into a war he will do it competently.

2007-09-18 07:06:47 · answer #7 · answered by - 3 · 0 1

That's like asking do I trust the Wicked Witch of the West or Dorothy.

2007-09-18 07:05:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I have not had much dealings with D, Patraeus, but I have had years and years of listing to big mouth. I would not trust her if she said the sun will rise tomorrow.

2007-09-18 08:07:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Hillary.

I didn't believe Westmoreland either?

Show me where she called him a liar, though he is! That was proved 3 days after his testimony when the WHITE HOUSE released their report which was worse than the GAO's. Iraq has met but one benchmark according to the White House report. Now you tell me who is lying, and who has an interest to lie?

2007-09-18 07:06:26 · answer #10 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers