Would you say that if it was Bush. Remember what was said about Bush at a school during 911?
Allot of things were said about Bush after 9/11, so what? This has nothing to do with being responsible vs being at fault. Only the idiots and cool aid drinking partisan fools trued to blame Bush. What does this tell you?
Being responsible does not automatically make you at fault. To try and infer otherwise using Bush, and 9/11 as an example is nothing more than partisan hackery.
It is showing the hypocrisy and how there is 2 standards. The GOP is condemned while the dems get a pass.
Horse **** his behavior was most radical when he killed the 13 people at Ft Hood.........
How you and your daddy Obama can not say the words that it was a terrorist attack just to appease some muslims in the Mid East is beyond me........
It was nice to see General Petraeus on Meet the Press today not coming out in full support of dropping DADT and also Governor Pawletty say if it ain't broke don't fix it............
Please respond to the counter arguments.
You should being placing blame on his military chain of command that knew this officer was crazy years ago and chose to do nothing about it, primarily because of the PC climate of the Army that has always existed...it just didn't start when Obama was elected. That's something I would know and you would not.
Oh, and by the way, consider before accusing me of "not saying the word terrorist and appeasing muslims" that unlike you, I have actually fought terrorists in combat. You never have and never will.
Who's the terror appeaser now, buddy?
Pawlenty is going to toe the party line, so that's no shocker.
Petraeus, on the other hand gave me a different impression. He has to walk a fine line and since DADT hasn't been overturned yet, he won't call for it. However, it very much seemed to me like he's open to the study that is being conducted.
Don't assume Patraeus is a right wing guy. He is not. He's gone on the record saying the invasion of Iraq was a mistake, among other things.
If it was a military problem then Obama is still responsible as commander in chief
The point is it will take years to over turn it and it is not sure that will happen.
Obama may not be president when this makes it to the senate
The point is it will take years to over turn it and it is not sure that will happen.
Obama may not be president when this makes it to the senate
Yeah, I saw your last post. MAJ Hassan's most radical behavior was exhibited several years ago while he was stationed at Walter Reed, while GWB was president. My whole point (as I've mentioned several times) is that you should hold folks accountable for their inaction, which in this case would be the cowardly chain of command. I doubt Bush nor Obama had ever heard of MAJ Hassan before. I don't see how it's their fault. Policy issues? Blame the President. Individual behavior? No.
I would imagine if this happened on Bush's watch, you'd be singing a different tune.
It might. But Petreaus is being groomed to take Mullen's job as CJCS someday. If the policy is overtuned before or while he is in that job, he won't be on the record opposing it. He's a pretty smart guy, he'll play his hand right.
So the commander in chief is not responsible for failures in the Military?
It is not up to the military. Congress has to over turn it.
Policy/Strategic failures, yes. Individual failure? No.
Did anyone blame Bush when SGT Akbar threw grenades into my Brigade's command tent in Kuwait just prior to the invasion of Iraq?
No, of course not that would be silly. Even though his chain of command didn't want to deploy him because of major behavior concerns. The buck doesn't always stop with the President. That is a very amateur viewpoint.
Please hold people responsible for their actions. I thought you were a conservative? Because you sound like a big govt. liberal right now.
Yeah, no ****. I didn't say any different. Are you that dense or just trying to be annoying on purpose?
Depends if Obama does anything to prevent this from happening agaim.
Notice the tent grenades did not happen again after that.
I understand the ladder of command but Obama must make sure those under him take steps and set up policies to prevent this type of thing from happening again.
The left keeps promoting certain General's views. They can not change it.
Fort Hood has already taken these measures. It's an Army issue, not a Presidential issue. The Army needs to fix this.
Actually it did. There were several more high-profile "fragging" cases after Akbar in 2003. So there you go. But I don't blame Bush, unlike you.
Again, very amateurish to make this an issue at the highest levels. These are Army problems that must be mitigated by the Army, which trust me, is already happening. We don't take threats to the chain of command or other soldiers lightly.
Well, I don't spend my days worrying about what particular hacks are saying about anything. I did not say that Generals or the President could overturn the policy; I am acutely aware that is not the case. Not sure who specifically "the left" is in this instance. I think anyone with a clue who is tuned into the issue knows full well it will take congress to overturn.
So Obama as Commander in chief is not responsible to make sure his generals fix this?
You brought up Patreus.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?