Amateur Hour, Part Deux

#332
#332
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, GSD82, FLVOL_79 and 1 other person
#333
#333
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#335
#335
McDad said:
No worries. You don't stay in public office for almost 50 years if you have moral principles. Crises averted.
Click to expand...
I wonder what "disease" he is going to fake.

Dementia? Donovanosis? Mono from kissing children? Pedophilia?

I'm betting on its a broken hip which begins a deluge of ailments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#342
#342
NorthDallas40 said:
She’s right genius. You have to be separated from service by at least 7 years or you get special dispensation. Only has happened twice before with Mattis being the most recent.
Click to expand...
Trump shouldn't have done it, and neither should Biden. Do you agree?
 
#343
#343
Velo Vol said:
Trump shouldn't have done it, and neither should Biden. Do you agree?
Click to expand...
Not really. I thought Mattis was an excellent choice and still do. The nomination process is two fold. Senate advice and consent is required. And that’s AFTER both chambers have issued a waiver. I don’t see a need for absolutes and think it largely depends on the individual.

I do believe Slotkin’s comments are warranted and they will be addressed during the nomination process. She wasn’t being an amateur she has concerns which will be addressed in the nomination process. Working as intended. I don’t know enough about the current nominee yet to know if her concerns are warranted enough to deny the waiver but he appears to be an outstanding individual with a lengthy resume. No idea where the skeletons are yet tho. Just take her tweets at face value.
 
#344
#344
NorthDallas40 said:
Not really. I thought Mattis was an excellent choice and still do. The nomination process is two fold. Senate advice and consent is required. And that’s AFTER both chambers have issued a waiver. I don’t see a need for absolutes and think it largely depends on the individual.

I do believe Slotkin’s comments are warranted and they will be addressed during the nomination process. She wasn’t being an amateur she has concerns which will be addressed in the nomination process. Working as intended. I don’t know enough about the current nominee yet to know if her concerns are warranted enough to deny the waiver but he appears to be an outstanding individual with a lengthy resume. No idea where the skeletons are yet tho. Just take her tweets at face value.
Click to expand...

Mattis turned out to be a bad pick like this guy will be. Sec Def needs to be someone devoid of contacts within the MIC and without a profit motive for war.
 
#345
#345
hog88 said:
Mattis turned out to be a bad pick like this guy will be. Sec Def needs to be someone devoid of contacts within the MIC and without a profit motive for war.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how that is feasible frankly. I don’t ever want us to have another damn McNamara on how he ran DoD. I like the idea of putting somebody in charge who understands the real cost of war. All (edit: most all ... no absolutes) generals understand that cost it gets down to their tolerance to pay that bill when it comes due. Mattis was qualified. Clearly they were not compatible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#346
#346
hog88 said:
Mattis turned out to be a bad pick like this guy will be. Sec Def needs to be someone devoid of contacts within the MIC and without a profit motive for war.
Click to expand...
Also... the longer somebody is away from active duty that had stars on their collar points the more in bed they get with the MIC. After 10 years I can promise you they are all on somebody’s board or an active executive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#347
#347
NorthDallas40 said:
I don’t see how that is feasible frankly. I don’t ever want us to have another damn McNamara on how he ran DoD. I like the idea of putting somebody in charge who understands the real cost of war. All (edit: most all ... no absolutes) generals understand that cost it gets down to their tolerance to pay that bill when it comes due. Mattis was qualified. Clearly they were not compatible.
Click to expand...

I feel the opposite from that. Yes McNamara was a disaster but there is too much incentive for flag rank guys to line their pockets with young mens blood. It takes being a good politician more so than a good soldier to get that first star.
 
#348
#348
NorthDallas40 said:
Also... the longer somebody is away from active duty that had stars on their collar points the more in bed they get with the MIC. After 10 years I can promise you they are all on somebody’s board or an active executive.
Click to expand...

I think being a retired military officer should be a disqualifier for being Sec Def period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz
#350
#350
hog88 said:
I think being a retired military officer should be a disqualifier for being Sec Def period.
Click to expand...
Understood. And I get where you’re coming from but I’d submit the most qualified pool of applicants is the senior military leadership. The key is culling the chaff that won’t needlessly waste our young peoples blood. I think there are some. I think Mattis was one to a degree.

I think we’re kinda broken right now. Our senior military leadership has only known two decades of war. We need somebody the remembers what peace feels like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top