i definitely see your point, without discipline the military is lessened.
but i don't know man, they thought they were fighting the good fight......
they get the news over there you know.
if the viet nam war would have been fought under this kind of world wide scrutiny, internet access, satellite television, it would have ended in johnson's term.
Gah. When you voluntarily join the armed forces, it is a given that you may be KIA. It is a given that you are leaving the joys and privileges of citizenship behind. It is a given that you now have to follow orders, because the military isn't f'ing Anywhere, USA, where you get a slap on the wrist for breaking the law. It is a given that you may be taken from your friends and loved ones and thrust into the duty you have brought upon yourself. If you don't like it, don't join, don't serve. You don't join the military to pussyfoot around and acquire bragging rights.
Just had to let that out. Flame away, I'm not coming back to this thread. The concept is retarded.
jeez i don't see any flaming, this one's been pretty quiet. i was just trying to empathize with what a soldier's frustrations might be.
american military was really set back by viet nam, a lot of respect was lost, and took about two decades building it back up to a thing of pride.
and now maybe, just maybe they're starting to think they're doing the job because secretary rumsfeld and vice president cheney want to settle up old business, and convoluted information to get the job done.
their's is not to question why........
but do you think it's true, do you think they're automatons?
jeez i don't see any flaming, this one's been pretty quiet. i was just trying to empathize with what a soldier's frustrations might be.
american military was really set back by viet nam, a lot of respect was lost, and took about two decades building it back up to a thing of pride.
and now maybe, just maybe they're starting to think they're doing the job because secretary rumsfeld and vice president cheney want to settle up old business, and convoluted information to get the job done.
their's is not to question why........
but do you think it's true, do you think they're automatons?
Lets read the last part of that Article posted earlier.
The Rare Criticism President Bush Has Faced From the Military
As befits a Commander-in-Chief in more or less perpetual wartime, the current President Bush generally enjoys enthusiastic support from the nation's officer corps. But there are exceptions.
In May 2002, Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler sent a letter to the editor of the Monterrey County Herald, alleging that President Bush knew about the impending 9/11 attacks, but "did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism." Col. Butler offered the following theory about the Bush presidency:
"His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed into the Oval Office by the conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.... This guy is a joke. What is sleazy and contemptible is the president of the United States not telling the American people what he knows for political gain."
After the letter was published, Col. Butler was suspended from his position as vice-chancellor of the Defense Languages Institute.
In contrast to the Clinton-era Article 88 cases, however, there has been no hint that Col. Butler is riding the tip of some submerged iceberg of anti-Bush animus in the nation's officer corps. Nor do enlisted men and women in Iraq seem to bear widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home.
If they are allowed to, the tempest may well remain confined to its teapot. But if the occupation drags on, and many of the hundreds of thousands of foot soldiers serving in Iraq begin to feel as Private O'Dell does, that could spell trouble for President Bush in next year's election.
There's no telling whether the rumbling among the rank and file represents a ripple or a gathering wave. But at least one thing is clear: the law won't do much to stop it.
Seems that there is nothing to be seen here. A couple of privates were upset and got airtime on the news. It was apparantly quite biased as there is no " widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home." All of this is to be expected. Sheesh. Tempest in a Teapot indeed.
Lets read the last part of that Article posted earlier.
The Rare Criticism President Bush Has Faced From the Military
As befits a Commander-in-Chief in more or less perpetual wartime, the current President Bush generally enjoys enthusiastic support from the nation's officer corps. But there are exceptions.
In May 2002, Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler sent a letter to the editor of the Monterrey County Herald, alleging that President Bush knew about the impending 9/11 attacks, but "did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism." Col. Butler offered the following theory about the Bush presidency:
"His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed into the Oval Office by the conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.... This guy is a joke. What is sleazy and contemptible is the president of the United States not telling the American people what he knows for political gain."
After the letter was published, Col. Butler was suspended from his position as vice-chancellor of the Defense Languages Institute.
In contrast to the Clinton-era Article 88 cases, however, there has been no hint that Col. Butler is riding the tip of some submerged iceberg of anti-Bush animus in the nation's officer corps. Nor do enlisted men and women in Iraq seem to bear widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home.
If they are allowed to, the tempest may well remain confined to its teapot. But if the occupation drags on, and many of the hundreds of thousands of foot soldiers serving in Iraq begin to feel as Private O'Dell does, that could spell trouble for President Bush in next year's election.
There's no telling whether the rumbling among the rank and file represents a ripple or a gathering wave. But at least one thing is clear: the law won't do much to stop it.
Seems that there is nothing to be seen here. A couple of privates were upset and got airtime on the news. It was apparantly quite biased as there is no " widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home." All of this is to be expected. Sheesh. Tempest in a Teapot indeed.
I have a feeling this could be indicative of a much larger problem for Bush.
These guys were 100% out-of-line. So was ABC for airing such a piece of alarmist garbage. It is nothing more...NOTHING MORE than a thinly veiled attempt to discredit the President.
Those of you who are trying to blow this up into "Bush has lost or is losing the support of the military" have absolutely got to be kidding me. Really. 80-90% of the armed forces will vote for Bush in the next election. I'll bet someone cash money on that. I really will. Let me know. You might as well just transfer the money into my PayPal account right now.
You want an example of the liberal press? Bingo. Here it is. They take 3 guys out of 200,000, plaster their cry baby complaints all over the airwaves. In doing so, the implication of ABC is clear: the administration is losing support...even from the military. Some of you have actually bought this. Amazing.
These guys should be CM'd for criticizing the war effort publicly. They're not civilians.
These guys were 100% out-of-line. So was ABC for airing such a piece of alarmist garbage. It is nothing more...NOTHING MORE than a thinly veiled attempt to discredit the President.
yes abc should only air pieces of alarmist garbage approved by the administration. here, here!
yes abc should only air pieces of alarmist garbage approved by the administration. here, here!
It was a tasteless and shameful story that could have NO other motive than discrediting the administration. My my, we've come a long way from the WWII reels at the theatres, haven't we?
its great to hear liberals make fake press about how when moral is low its because they question their orders. Don't you just love it when the PR firms of the national lobbyists do this a year out or so from election time? ahh politics... it never ends.
Theirs is not to ask why, theirs is to do and die.
Charge of the Light Brigade
Still hits me when I read that poem. I'm a military brat, even I know going to a media outlet like that is a no no. If as a soldier you have a problem, don't bitch to the media, bitch to your mate in the foxhole, in the chowline, in the belly of a tank etc... Going to the media like that is against military code and conduct. The kind of discipline and restraint from blabbing my mouth is what kept me from signing up, I wanted to be Combat Camera, If I had I'd probably be in the brig, just as these guys deserve.
Still hits me when I read that poem. I'm a military brat, even I know going to a media outlet like that is a no no. If as a soldier you have a problem, don't bitch to the media, bitch to your mate in the foxhole, in the chowline, in the belly of a tank etc... Going to the media like that is against military code and conduct. The kind of discipline and restraint from blabbing my mouth is what kept me from signing up, I wanted to be Combat Camera, If I had I'd probably be in the brig, just as these guys deserve.
It is also notable that the Battle of Balaclava (which the COTLB is about) was a horrific military blunder. It was covered pretty thoroughly in the British papers at the time--so much so that the Poet Laureate got tapped to write a poem picking up English morale.
Maybe the soldiers knew what they were doing and figured that being court martialed and potentially sent to military prison was better than serving one more day in Iraq. Kinda like the soldiers in the trenches during WWI that would stick their legs in the air in hopes of getting shot and sent home.
nah, they probably did it b/c of the same reason they signed up, they did not think the consequences through. How many soldiers do we have signed up for college money, never thinking that they'd go to war. Well these guys should know better, but still blabbed their mouth, cuz they did not think. Despite what many think, thinking is needed in the military, that's where the NCOs and the officers come from, those that don't think either stay privates or die on the field.
nah, they probably did it b/c of the same reason they signed up, they did not think the consequences through. How many soldiers do we have signed up for college money, never thinking that they'd go to war. Well these guys should know better, but still blabbed their mouth, cuz they did not think......
Well, then they do deserve to die, or least spend some time in jail to mull over their poor decision making skills.
its great to hear liberals make fake press about how when moral is low its because they question their orders.
Fake reports? Like lied about the moral?
So when they find someone who are actually expressing low moral and who are actually questioning their orders the journalists are lying while when the administration is saying that at these specific locations WoMDs is produced and is shows to be false they were not lying?
Logic says yo have it backwards. Unless you say journalists has a moral obligation to have researced their stories thoroughly before they print them while presidents don´t need that before they sstart a war.
Anders, its a typical PR stategy, and in 'faking' I do not mean outright lying I mean, just as the case of WOMD's you could say that data was 'interpreted' to mean something else. I still believe we should have gone to war even without WOMD's alone. They did it in Bosnia why not iraq? hehe.
Its called getting viewership, media outlets especially in USA stab at conservative america, to get people riled up, to stay tuned in, so they can keep them hooked while feeding them slowly conservative headlines, just a theory from local program directors I know. Which is why Foxnews swiped cable news out from under the feet of CNN, and MSNBC. Case in point pro war rallies numbered possibly more than anti war rallies across the world, but who got the press? oh thats right the negative people... Just some reporter hungry to be noticed wanting to give bush a blemish and be talked about. SDW is right the polls especially for mil 21-32 are staggering right now, pretty much around 80%. As for the rest of the country still close to 65, but it sways a lot lately which is cute.. heh
Comments
but i don't know man, they thought they were fighting the good fight......
they get the news over there you know.
if the viet nam war would have been fought under this kind of world wide scrutiny, internet access, satellite television, it would have ended in johnson's term.
Just had to let that out. Flame away, I'm not coming back to this thread. The concept is retarded.
american military was really set back by viet nam, a lot of respect was lost, and took about two decades building it back up to a thing of pride.
and now maybe, just maybe they're starting to think they're doing the job because secretary rumsfeld and vice president cheney want to settle up old business, and convoluted information to get the job done.
their's is not to question why........
but do you think it's true, do you think they're automatons?
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
jeez i don't see any flaming, this one's been pretty quiet. i was just trying to empathize with what a soldier's frustrations might be.
american military was really set back by viet nam, a lot of respect was lost, and took about two decades building it back up to a thing of pride.
and now maybe, just maybe they're starting to think they're doing the job because secretary rumsfeld and vice president cheney want to settle up old business, and convoluted information to get the job done.
their's is not to question why........
but do you think it's true, do you think they're automatons?
Lets read the last part of that Article posted earlier.
The Rare Criticism President Bush Has Faced From the Military
As befits a Commander-in-Chief in more or less perpetual wartime, the current President Bush generally enjoys enthusiastic support from the nation's officer corps. But there are exceptions.
In May 2002, Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler sent a letter to the editor of the Monterrey County Herald, alleging that President Bush knew about the impending 9/11 attacks, but "did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism." Col. Butler offered the following theory about the Bush presidency:
"His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed into the Oval Office by the conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.... This guy is a joke. What is sleazy and contemptible is the president of the United States not telling the American people what he knows for political gain."
After the letter was published, Col. Butler was suspended from his position as vice-chancellor of the Defense Languages Institute.
In contrast to the Clinton-era Article 88 cases, however, there has been no hint that Col. Butler is riding the tip of some submerged iceberg of anti-Bush animus in the nation's officer corps. Nor do enlisted men and women in Iraq seem to bear widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home.
If they are allowed to, the tempest may well remain confined to its teapot. But if the occupation drags on, and many of the hundreds of thousands of foot soldiers serving in Iraq begin to feel as Private O'Dell does, that could spell trouble for President Bush in next year's election.
There's no telling whether the rumbling among the rank and file represents a ripple or a gathering wave. But at least one thing is clear: the law won't do much to stop it.
Seems that there is nothing to be seen here. A couple of privates were upset and got airtime on the news. It was apparantly quite biased as there is no " widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home." All of this is to be expected. Sheesh. Tempest in a Teapot indeed.
Originally posted by NoahJ
Lets read the last part of that Article posted earlier.
The Rare Criticism President Bush Has Faced From the Military
As befits a Commander-in-Chief in more or less perpetual wartime, the current President Bush generally enjoys enthusiastic support from the nation's officer corps. But there are exceptions.
In May 2002, Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler sent a letter to the editor of the Monterrey County Herald, alleging that President Bush knew about the impending 9/11 attacks, but "did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism." Col. Butler offered the following theory about the Bush presidency:
"His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed into the Oval Office by the conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.... This guy is a joke. What is sleazy and contemptible is the president of the United States not telling the American people what he knows for political gain."
After the letter was published, Col. Butler was suspended from his position as vice-chancellor of the Defense Languages Institute.
In contrast to the Clinton-era Article 88 cases, however, there has been no hint that Col. Butler is riding the tip of some submerged iceberg of anti-Bush animus in the nation's officer corps. Nor do enlisted men and women in Iraq seem to bear widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home.
If they are allowed to, the tempest may well remain confined to its teapot. But if the occupation drags on, and many of the hundreds of thousands of foot soldiers serving in Iraq begin to feel as Private O'Dell does, that could spell trouble for President Bush in next year's election.
There's no telling whether the rumbling among the rank and file represents a ripple or a gathering wave. But at least one thing is clear: the law won't do much to stop it.
Seems that there is nothing to be seen here. A couple of privates were upset and got airtime on the news. It was apparantly quite biased as there is no " widespread hostility towards the President. Many express confidence in their mission; of the rest, most seem simply to want to go home." All of this is to be expected. Sheesh. Tempest in a Teapot indeed.
I have a feeling this could be indicative of a much larger problem for Bush.
These guys were 100% out-of-line. So was ABC for airing such a piece of alarmist garbage. It is nothing more...NOTHING MORE than a thinly veiled attempt to discredit the President.
Those of you who are trying to blow this up into "Bush has lost or is losing the support of the military" have absolutely got to be kidding me. Really. 80-90% of the armed forces will vote for Bush in the next election. I'll bet someone cash money on that. I really will. Let me know. You might as well just transfer the money into my PayPal account right now.
You want an example of the liberal press? Bingo. Here it is. They take 3 guys out of 200,000, plaster their cry baby complaints all over the airwaves. In doing so, the implication of ABC is clear: the administration is losing support...even from the military. Some of you have actually bought this. Amazing.
These guys should be CM'd for criticizing the war effort publicly. They're not civilians.
Originally posted by SDW2001
It never stops with you guys. Never.
These guys were 100% out-of-line. So was ABC for airing such a piece of alarmist garbage. It is nothing more...NOTHING MORE than a thinly veiled attempt to discredit the President.
yes abc should only air pieces of alarmist garbage approved by the administration. here, here!
Originally posted by segovius
80 - 90% ? Have you got inside info on the results those new voting machines will come up with then ?
I believe the figure WAS about 80% in the last one. I don't know exactly. I'm serious, though.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
yes abc should only air pieces of alarmist garbage approved by the administration. here, here!
It was a tasteless and shameful story that could have NO other motive than discrediting the administration. My my, we've come a long way from the WWII reels at the theatres, haven't we?
Originally posted by SDW2001
My my, we've come a long way from the WWII reels at the theatres, haven't we?
Are you saying that's a bad thing?
Theirs is not to ask why, theirs is to do and die.
Charge of the Light Brigade
Still hits me when I read that poem. I'm a military brat, even I know going to a media outlet like that is a no no. If as a soldier you have a problem, don't bitch to the media, bitch to your mate in the foxhole, in the chowline, in the belly of a tank etc... Going to the media like that is against military code and conduct. The kind of discipline and restraint from blabbing my mouth is what kept me from signing up, I wanted to be Combat Camera, If I had I'd probably be in the brig, just as these guys deserve.
Originally posted by LiquidR
Charge of the Light Brigade
Still hits me when I read that poem. I'm a military brat, even I know going to a media outlet like that is a no no. If as a soldier you have a problem, don't bitch to the media, bitch to your mate in the foxhole, in the chowline, in the belly of a tank etc... Going to the media like that is against military code and conduct. The kind of discipline and restraint from blabbing my mouth is what kept me from signing up, I wanted to be Combat Camera, If I had I'd probably be in the brig, just as these guys deserve.
It is also notable that the Battle of Balaclava (which the COTLB is about) was a horrific military blunder. It was covered pretty thoroughly in the British papers at the time--so much so that the Poet Laureate got tapped to write a poem picking up English morale.
Cheers
Scott
Originally posted by LiquidR
nah, they probably did it b/c of the same reason they signed up, they did not think the consequences through. How many soldiers do we have signed up for college money, never thinking that they'd go to war. Well these guys should know better, but still blabbed their mouth, cuz they did not think......
Well, then they do deserve to die, or least spend some time in jail to mull over their poor decision making skills.
Originally posted by InactionMan
Well, then they do deserve to die, or least spend some time in jail to mull over their poor decision making skills.
There's a pretty big difference between those two options.
Originally posted by SDW2001
I believe the figure WAS about 80% [% of military votes for Bush] in the last one. I don't know exactly. I'm serious, though.
I believe you. And that is why they insured that some "extra" military votes were counted in Florida.
Originally posted by kraig911
its great to hear liberals make fake press about how when moral is low its because they question their orders.
Fake reports? Like lied about the moral?
So when they find someone who are actually expressing low moral and who are actually questioning their orders the journalists are lying while when the administration is saying that at these specific locations WoMDs is produced and is shows to be false they were not lying?
Logic says yo have it backwards. Unless you say journalists has a moral obligation to have researced their stories thoroughly before they print them while presidents don´t need that before they sstart a war.
Its called getting viewership, media outlets especially in USA stab at conservative america, to get people riled up, to stay tuned in, so they can keep them hooked while feeding them slowly conservative headlines, just a theory from local program directors I know. Which is why Foxnews swiped cable news out from under the feet of CNN, and MSNBC. Case in point pro war rallies numbered possibly more than anti war rallies across the world, but who got the press? oh thats right the negative people... Just some reporter hungry to be noticed wanting to give bush a blemish and be talked about. SDW is right the polls especially for mil 21-32 are staggering right now, pretty much around 80%. As for the rest of the country still close to 65, but it sways a lot lately which is cute.. heh