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

Now, before you go labeling me, I'm chastising both sides of the aisle, as an INDEPENDENT. (not to mention that come next Sep/Nov, it'll be my vote you're after)

Legislation being pushed in Congress has historical precendence in costing the lives of tens of thousands: civilian and military. In the interest of proving they are "doing something," these politicians are going to get people killed. Regardless of your party, take a look at the historical results and demand that your party set aside partisan politics and vote for the national interests, national security and protection of civilians and troops.

War on Terror Blog©2007, http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-DfkctJU7dK5B7LcNROoyVQ--?cq=1

2007-09-19 05:33:06 · 9 answers · asked by John T 6 in Politics & Government Politics

SoP: What polls? I don't see any polls quoted here.

The role of politicians in war is to determine a national threat, a national interest and the political goals to be achieved by placing our men in harm's way.

It is the role of Generals to figure out what tools and units they need to achieve the goals laid out by those politicians.

Oversight? Yes, they then have the responsibility to determine if the General is succeeding or failing and whether that is because of political interference (refusing to provide the tools needed or tying the hands of the military) or incompetence.

It is not in the interest of "oversight" that politicians tell Generals that the enemy can not be engaged until Soldiers or Civilians have been killed.

If the General says he needs more troops to do the job, then it is the politicians job to determine whether or not that means increasing the authorized size of the military.

Equipment should be bought based on needs not constituency.

2007-09-19 06:01:08 · update #1

9 answers

Lyndon Baines Johnson played General in Viet Nam.
No fly zones,no bomb zones,orders not to shoot back until authorized,orders not to pursue fleeing enemy and really stupid rules of engagement.
The cost,thousands of American lives.

If you are going to fight,fight with all you have.

2007-09-19 05:47:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

We get stuck in a war that we can’t win, with the country split on whether we should be there or not. The politicians have neutered the military, given them an unfair playing field, and causing thousands of deaths.
Of course, this is the same congress that wants to pull out of the war, so by doing this, they show that the war isn’t going well, and all they have to sacrifice is the lives of thousands of American soldiers.

2007-09-19 15:15:52 · answer #2 · answered by rayb1214 7 · 0 0

The same thing that happens when politicians play like they're expert at ANYthing: they screw it all up. It was a disgrace to hear politicians dump on General Patreus. They would do well to shut the hell up. He obviously knows what he's talking about.

2007-09-19 12:53:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Generals do not control wars, they control battles.
It is not their decision to determine the need for war or the effectiveness of a war.

2007-09-19 12:39:42 · answer #4 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 2 1

Alexander Hamilton was right in one of the Federalist Papers.

Keep those dopes in congress OUT of the defense of this country.

2007-09-19 12:38:49 · answer #5 · answered by Private Deek 2 · 3 1

When George Bush plays war, we all lose. To the tune of a trillion dollars and counting.

2007-09-19 12:37:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

i see repubs are quoting polls again even though they said they don't believe in them. flip flop.

2007-09-19 12:40:44 · answer #7 · answered by soperson 4 · 0 2

when you say play general, do you mean exercise their oversight role?

2007-09-19 12:42:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

To answer your question, people die.

2007-09-19 12:41:15 · answer #9 · answered by Lisa M 5 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers