Why not thank superkarate monkeydeathcar? He posted your answer about 15 posts ago. I'd say ask your third grade teacher, but obviously he/she didn't do a very good job.
Yeah, and everybody remembers all that they learned in third, fourth fifth, sixth, seventh, eigth and so on grade...Right?
If someone is commenting on math, I would expect them to remember what they learned in grammar school (reading 3 or 4 digit numbers). If someone is commenting on the US government, I expect that they also remember what they learned in grammar school (what a sec of defense is). A mathmatitician (hell, anyone with two digits in their age) that can't read a three digit number would be considered a joke, just like a political commentator (casual or otherwise) who doesn't know what the sec of defense is.
So you say that knowing about hamburgers is more important that knowing about your government? That's perfectly fine and I have no objection. You can make informed comments about hamburgers, and I'll make informed comments about government and policy.
If someone is commenting on math, I would expect them to remember what they learned in grammar school (reading 3 or 4 digit numbers). If someone is commenting on the US government, I expect that they also remember what they learned in grammar school (what a sec of defense is). A mathmatitician (hell, anyone with two digits in their age) that can't read a three digit number would be considered a joke, just like a political commentator (casual or otherwise) who doesn't know what the sec of defense is.
So you say that knowing about hamburgers is more important that knowing about your government? That's perfectly fine and I have no objection. You can make informed comments about hamburgers, and I'll make informed comments about government and policy.
Just like you to completely miss the point. Yeah, I think knowing about hamburgers is more important than knowing about the government. That is exactly what I said.
I really don't feel like arging it with you anymore. You are just looking for a fight, and for someone to call stupid. Not my idea of a good conversation actually.
How bout Rummy reducing the number of troops on six separate occasions? This guy is deservedly pretty contemptuous. Even Kissinger doesn't like him. (college issues- rummy's unrefined princeton persona)
Just like you to completely miss the point. Yeah, I think knowing about hamburgers is more important than knowing about the government. That is exactly what I said.
I really don't feel like arging it with you anymore. You are just looking for a fight, and for someone to call stupid. Not my idea of a good conversation actually.
I didn't miss your point. You said pretty clearly that knowing military chain of command is not as important to you as knowing where to get a hamburger. That's perfectly OK, so long as you don't claim to know anything about what our military should or should not do.
Hell, the craziest part is that you guys don't even know what Rumsfeld does even though he is on your TV damn near 24 hours a day.
All I'm pointing out is that you guys are verifying my suspicion: that hawk wannabes are that way because they don't bother to inform themselves.
I didn't miss your point. You said pretty clearly that knowing military chain of command is not as important to you as knowing where to get a hamburger. That's perfectly OK, so long as you don't claim to know anything about what our military should or should not do.
Hell, the craziest part is that you guys don't even know what Rumsfeld does even though he is on your TV damn near 24 hours a day.
All I'm pointing out is that you guys are verifying my suspicion: that hawk wannabes are that way because they don't bother to inform themselves.
I don't watch TV. So he is not on my set ever.
I get my news from Google news, and the BBC website. CNN if I feel like a change and once in a while from Fox News. My complete understanding of the chain of military command is not necessary to see how the war is going, or what other news is happening in the world around me. But if it makes you feel smarter then so be it. You smart, me dumb.
I get my news from Google news, and the BBC website. CNN if I feel like a change and once in a while from Fox News. My complete understanding of the chain of military command is not necessary to see how the war is going, or what other news is happening in the world around me.
This whole thing here is basically my point. While some pay attention to 'news,' others of us are actually reading in-depth policy papers. You probably are going to flame on me for this, but here goes: where do I get my info? I get policy and strategic info from the neo-cons themselves at the NAC site or any of the many study papers available online. Iraq war info and analysis? www.stratfor.info (stratfor.com for sign-up) and their www.us-iraqwar.com site. They also do global and regional analysis with global situation reports that are vitally important to the world politics but rarely make it into the mainstream until that region is the center of focus. Their employees are primarily former CIA and they do 95% of what the CIA does. Put simply, what the CIA knows, they know. I'll also go to CCR since their outlines are great and packed with many news stories I would otherwise pass up. I read the New Yorker every week (Hersh has been on a roll, and the New Yorker has tremendous in-depth articles) and the Atlantic every month (you can't really go wrong with the atlantic). For further research I work at a major library that has a gov depository, so I regularly run around work and fact-check when I can't find the info elsewhere, such as profile info for more obsure admin officials and advisors. Furthermore, I've read every one of the inspection reports since they began in the early 90s and many independent analysies of the Iraq WMD program.
As far as the TV and internet news, I do have it on in the background at home when I am working on the computer and I check the front page of CNN and BBC every day. It allows me to see what is being given to the masses. It's very interesting seeing how watered-down or just plain wrong mainstream media is. But that's where the majority of Americans get their info and it allows me to see why we are being driven towards war.
I don't read left-wing media. I feel that it tends to be just as much propaganda as that on the right. The reason I read the right is to see what they are trying to do, since they are the ones in power. However, if I do read something on commondreams or in the Nation, I do fact check everything before accepting it. That is the only valid way to consume war information.
My point? Not that I am smarter at all. You do tend to post some very interesting and intelligent things. But I've noticed that there is a strong correlation between the degree a person is informed about all of the various aspects of this war and their negative view of it. In other words, the more you learn about it, the less you like it. I find it interesting that here at a major university there are very, very few people that support the war. I seriously don't know anyone that supports it. People here (meaning at my work and in my social circles) mention that there are folks they 'suspect are pro-war,' but non knows anyone that supports it. We are always wondering who these people are that support the war. None of us are hippies. None of us have matted hair. I don't even know a single person that fits the pro-peace stereotype depicted here at AI. Yet I don't know anyone that supports the war, and that seems to be because my social group pays attention to what the admins policies are and what the realities of the government are. I don't discount information when it 'undermines' my 'position.' Hell, I would love to be able to support this war. I would love to believe that all the good things the neo-cons predict actually could happen. But sadly, they are wrong. So wrong, in fact, that they have had to lie their way into this war. There is no two ways about it. The list is long. If you look at these folks backgrounds it is not at all surprising. All I can say is thank god for people like Hersh bringing their mistakes (and conflicts of interest, to put it lightly) into the mainstream.
I think it's pretty clear that many of the pro-war folks here on AI don't know anything about the position they support. The so-called liberals are the ones that have posted neo-con policy papers, and the pro-war folks discount them. Now we see that not only do the pro-war folks ignore info about this particular war, they also have no knowledge of the basic operations of our government. Uninformed advocacy of war is as dangerous a position as can be, especially when we are talking about the world's superpower.
As for Rumsfeld being an idiot, is this really news? Sure, part of the strategy has been for him to overact and play bad cop, but I think it's pretty clear that he is irresponsible and not a good military leader. We live in a democracy, and there is nothing wrong with (and nothing anti-war) about recommending he be controlled and power given to the actual military planners. This is far too serious of an issue to be left to one loose cannon like him.
Thank you for your long and reasoned reply. It is good to know that you can give a good answer when prodded.
I think that it is silly to believe that your news sites have all the information that the CIA has, but since I do not read them, I do read the occasional Janes articles, I will not comment further on them.
Comments
Originally posted by curiousuburb
IIRC, all cabinet level officials have an "equivalent rank" which the military observes for ceremonial purposes
I think the only cabinet member the military is concerned with is sec of defence, as opposed to the sec of labor or agriculture.
But maybe there is some emergency hierarchy that I don't know about.
Originally posted by giant
Why not thank superkarate monkeydeathcar? He posted your answer about 15 posts ago. I'd say ask your third grade teacher, but obviously he/she didn't do a very good job.
Actually, I did. About two posts or so later.
Originally posted by NoahJ
Yeah, and everybody remembers all that they learned in third, fourth fifth, sixth, seventh, eigth and so on grade...Right?
If someone is commenting on math, I would expect them to remember what they learned in grammar school (reading 3 or 4 digit numbers). If someone is commenting on the US government, I expect that they also remember what they learned in grammar school (what a sec of defense is). A mathmatitician (hell, anyone with two digits in their age) that can't read a three digit number would be considered a joke, just like a political commentator (casual or otherwise) who doesn't know what the sec of defense is.
So you say that knowing about hamburgers is more important that knowing about your government? That's perfectly fine and I have no objection. You can make informed comments about hamburgers, and I'll make informed comments about government and policy.
Originally posted by NoahJ
Actually, I did. About two posts or so later.
Actually, I was talking to groverat. (you can tell by his quote in my post)
Originally posted by giant
If someone is commenting on math, I would expect them to remember what they learned in grammar school (reading 3 or 4 digit numbers). If someone is commenting on the US government, I expect that they also remember what they learned in grammar school (what a sec of defense is). A mathmatitician (hell, anyone with two digits in their age) that can't read a three digit number would be considered a joke, just like a political commentator (casual or otherwise) who doesn't know what the sec of defense is.
So you say that knowing about hamburgers is more important that knowing about your government? That's perfectly fine and I have no objection. You can make informed comments about hamburgers, and I'll make informed comments about government and policy.
Just like you to completely miss the point. Yeah, I think knowing about hamburgers is more important than knowing about the government. That is exactly what I said.
I really don't feel like arging it with you anymore. You are just looking for a fight, and for someone to call stupid. Not my idea of a good conversation actually.
Groverat!
Noah!
How bout Rummy reducing the number of troops on six separate occasions? This guy is deservedly pretty contemptuous. Even Kissinger doesn't like him. (college issues- rummy's unrefined princeton persona)
Originally posted by NoahJ
Just like you to completely miss the point. Yeah, I think knowing about hamburgers is more important than knowing about the government. That is exactly what I said.
I really don't feel like arging it with you anymore. You are just looking for a fight, and for someone to call stupid. Not my idea of a good conversation actually.
I didn't miss your point. You said pretty clearly that knowing military chain of command is not as important to you as knowing where to get a hamburger. That's perfectly OK, so long as you don't claim to know anything about what our military should or should not do.
Hell, the craziest part is that you guys don't even know what Rumsfeld does even though he is on your TV damn near 24 hours a day.
All I'm pointing out is that you guys are verifying my suspicion: that hawk wannabes are that way because they don't bother to inform themselves.
Originally posted by giant
I didn't miss your point. You said pretty clearly that knowing military chain of command is not as important to you as knowing where to get a hamburger. That's perfectly OK, so long as you don't claim to know anything about what our military should or should not do.
Hell, the craziest part is that you guys don't even know what Rumsfeld does even though he is on your TV damn near 24 hours a day.
All I'm pointing out is that you guys are verifying my suspicion: that hawk wannabes are that way because they don't bother to inform themselves.
I don't watch TV. So he is not on my set ever.
I get my news from Google news, and the BBC website. CNN if I feel like a change and once in a while from Fox News. My complete understanding of the chain of military command is not necessary to see how the war is going, or what other news is happening in the world around me. But if it makes you feel smarter then so be it. You smart, me dumb.
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
How bout Rummy reducing the number of troops on six separate occasions?
I don't know, I guess that sucks.
I'm no military planner but it seems to me that if you want to win a war you overwhelm the bastards with all the firepower you can shove up their ass.
Originally posted by NoahJ
I get my news from Google news, and the BBC website. CNN if I feel like a change and once in a while from Fox News. My complete understanding of the chain of military command is not necessary to see how the war is going, or what other news is happening in the world around me.
This whole thing here is basically my point. While some pay attention to 'news,' others of us are actually reading in-depth policy papers. You probably are going to flame on me for this, but here goes: where do I get my info? I get policy and strategic info from the neo-cons themselves at the NAC site or any of the many study papers available online. Iraq war info and analysis? www.stratfor.info (stratfor.com for sign-up) and their www.us-iraqwar.com site. They also do global and regional analysis with global situation reports that are vitally important to the world politics but rarely make it into the mainstream until that region is the center of focus. Their employees are primarily former CIA and they do 95% of what the CIA does. Put simply, what the CIA knows, they know. I'll also go to CCR since their outlines are great and packed with many news stories I would otherwise pass up. I read the New Yorker every week (Hersh has been on a roll, and the New Yorker has tremendous in-depth articles) and the Atlantic every month (you can't really go wrong with the atlantic). For further research I work at a major library that has a gov depository, so I regularly run around work and fact-check when I can't find the info elsewhere, such as profile info for more obsure admin officials and advisors. Furthermore, I've read every one of the inspection reports since they began in the early 90s and many independent analysies of the Iraq WMD program.
As far as the TV and internet news, I do have it on in the background at home when I am working on the computer and I check the front page of CNN and BBC every day. It allows me to see what is being given to the masses. It's very interesting seeing how watered-down or just plain wrong mainstream media is. But that's where the majority of Americans get their info and it allows me to see why we are being driven towards war.
I don't read left-wing media. I feel that it tends to be just as much propaganda as that on the right. The reason I read the right is to see what they are trying to do, since they are the ones in power. However, if I do read something on commondreams or in the Nation, I do fact check everything before accepting it. That is the only valid way to consume war information.
My point? Not that I am smarter at all. You do tend to post some very interesting and intelligent things. But I've noticed that there is a strong correlation between the degree a person is informed about all of the various aspects of this war and their negative view of it. In other words, the more you learn about it, the less you like it. I find it interesting that here at a major university there are very, very few people that support the war. I seriously don't know anyone that supports it. People here (meaning at my work and in my social circles) mention that there are folks they 'suspect are pro-war,' but non knows anyone that supports it. We are always wondering who these people are that support the war. None of us are hippies. None of us have matted hair. I don't even know a single person that fits the pro-peace stereotype depicted here at AI. Yet I don't know anyone that supports the war, and that seems to be because my social group pays attention to what the admins policies are and what the realities of the government are. I don't discount information when it 'undermines' my 'position.' Hell, I would love to be able to support this war. I would love to believe that all the good things the neo-cons predict actually could happen. But sadly, they are wrong. So wrong, in fact, that they have had to lie their way into this war. There is no two ways about it. The list is long. If you look at these folks backgrounds it is not at all surprising. All I can say is thank god for people like Hersh bringing their mistakes (and conflicts of interest, to put it lightly) into the mainstream.
I think it's pretty clear that many of the pro-war folks here on AI don't know anything about the position they support. The so-called liberals are the ones that have posted neo-con policy papers, and the pro-war folks discount them. Now we see that not only do the pro-war folks ignore info about this particular war, they also have no knowledge of the basic operations of our government. Uninformed advocacy of war is as dangerous a position as can be, especially when we are talking about the world's superpower.
As for Rumsfeld being an idiot, is this really news? Sure, part of the strategy has been for him to overact and play bad cop, but I think it's pretty clear that he is irresponsible and not a good military leader. We live in a democracy, and there is nothing wrong with (and nothing anti-war) about recommending he be controlled and power given to the actual military planners. This is far too serious of an issue to be left to one loose cannon like him.
Originally posted by groverat
I don't know, I guess that sucks.
I'm no military planner but it seems to me that if you want to win a war you overwhelm the bastards with all the firepower you can shove up their ass.
What Powell said
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Mar31.html
Thank you for your long and reasoned reply. It is good to know that you can give a good answer when prodded.
I think that it is silly to believe that your news sites have all the information that the CIA has, but since I do not read them, I do read the occasional Janes articles, I will not comment further on them.