The Retired Generals Bash Bush
January 20th, 2007 by Patriot
But, this time they may be on to something.
Posted in Military Perspective"Putting the Iraqis in the lead for the Baghdad surge “makes no sense to me. I don’t understand that,� said retired Gen. Jack Keane, former Army vice chief, who advised both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney on an Iraq strategy that was strikingly similar to the one Bush announced.[emphasis added]
Keane appeared with Barry McCaffrey, a retired Army four-star; Joseph Hoar, a retired Marine four-star and former chief of U.S. Central Command; and William Odom, a retired Army three-star whose last tour of duty was as director of the National Security Agency.
Other than Keane, who despite his concerns still believes the Bush plan will work, the panel of retired generals had little positive to say.
So it isn't just me, I'm in good company. [The rest of this comment was edited by CJ for threatening language to my President. No President deserves to be "fragged".]
Threatening language?
He isn't a soldier, so his "fragging" is going to be a political one. For my part I'd keep him. In the corner with a cone on his head, with a big "D" on it. I said I'm surprised he hasn't been fragged yet, for the record. He would deserve it according to my Ranger buddies. You here, have very little idea what people in their honor are keeping to themselves.
For my part I sold life for money, and that said I consider Bush to be of less worth than a halibut.
Let me remind you that the punishment for treason in a time of war, is death by hanging.
What I find amusing Gunther is that you seem to consider yourself an expert on just about anything and everything that is discussed here. CJ does have a VERY clean understanding what people with honor are and are not saying. In fact CJ IS one of those people of honor, as are Patriot, CplM, SNAFU, Cindy, Haystack and most other folks who visit this blog.
Gunther, perhaps you can tell me what kind of "treason" the President of the United States has committed. While you're at it, tell me how someone like John Kerry HASN'T committed treason. But, I'm really interested in your explanation behind your Bush charge. Standing by.
You can consider Bush less than a halibut all you want. Just remember, he became President…you didn't. Only 43 people out the millions throughout our history have ever accomplished that.
He is a Bald faced LIAR when it comes to the Truth in Iraq. I know his lies to my satisfaction. Deal with it. We Are Going NOWHERE!
I EAT HALIBUT! Success or not! and the fish be amongst, the MOST successful!
Kerry committed TREASON. I will consume him also. And Turd them both OUT!!
GET IT??!!!
YOUR CONSTITUTION…
Hmmmmmmmm, I guess he's not got an explanation for you CJ. Just as I thought, he's definitely not an expert on much of anything…. other than maybe fishing.
That's because when confronted with having to provide read proof, he resorts back to the already disproven "Bush is a liar" line. And we won't get an answer anymore anyway because I deleted his profile. He's the twice-banned (now thrice) Glenn from OU. The gay community over there is flourishing and they're intimidated by our heterosexuality.
Yeah I noticed that. Doesn't really have an explanation for much of anything. I figured he was one of that crowd. The things some "kids" do for a little attention….
CJ,
For a site that professes to not allow personal attacks, your attack against homosexuals is irrelevant and uncalled for.
Ah, but Hawk, it's my site and I can make anything I want relevant. See how that works. If they want to use deception to get through, I can resort to irrelevancy. Unless you're a homosexual, I didn't resort to any "personal" attacks on anyone, except Gunther and his friends at OU. But I didn't think they considered it an "attack" to be called homosexual. Aren't they out of the closet already?
The attack is not calling them homosexual, it is saying they are threatened by your hetorosexuality. And your right it is your site and you can post anything you want. It just makes you a hypocrite.
Yup, to some people I'm a hypocrite. To others, I'm just fed up. To me, I don't care.
Just so I understand the rules here. If I wanted to call conservative Christians a bunch of hypocritical homophobic zealots who have totally missed the message in Christianity, that would be Ok, right?!!! Because, I am not isulting any one person, just an entire group.
Hawk, let me explain the rules. If you come in here and falsely identify youself as the grieving mother of a fallen soldier I can be as hypocritical as I want. When you and your cronies that were banned because of those attitudes and then proceed to bring our innocent family members into it elsewhere, I can do so as well. Gunther's whole purpose is to come here and incite. I'm just giving him what he wants. He'll go away faster that way. He and his friends will have a little more to talk about on their lowly website and when they're out of fodder, they'll come back as another name. How can I be hypocritical towards someone that doesn't exist?
Now, you disagree with me but I'm not calling you a homosexual am I? No, because you tend to have a modicum of decency in your disagreement. Those are the rules. But, if you'd like to call a bunch of conservative Christians a bunch of hypocritical, homophobic zealots have at it. Just makes sure it's on topic or on your own site. I appreciate your point of view but if you don't like the fact that there is a small group of people I have prejudice towards, I'm not forcing you to be here. I'm not hypocritical or homophobic towards anyone else but them.
Those generals also happen to the ones not listening to the soldiers on the ground just like noone else is here in this country. Then you have people coming in here telling us that the military are the only ones making sacrifices when they forget the families who stay quiet and should be the ones talking. Of course the military is the ones taking the most hurt when a comrade dies, but they aren't sent there just sit and wait to die, they are chosen to be sent there(Africa, Middle East, or anywhere) because out of all of us in the United States they have the most likely chance of getting the job done in the most efficient manner possible. For the most part that is proven to be true since most of the panicking about this war is happening in the homefront and not the warfront. These generals are for sure not in the warfront, because they are here at the homefront promoting their political agendas. While the men who are in the warfront are reenlisting in record numbers and are asking to go even if they don't go with the same unit. So those of you talking about how you aren't alone and that these generals are good company. Well guess what? Nobody is alone. The minority is still a group and is considerably powerful enough to determine the outcome of votes. Since there are 435 seats in the house and the Democrats only hold 233 of them, and that all votes don't just rely on the majority's opinion since they require a 2/3rds vote in favor of for any act or strategy of war, bill, or change to the constitution to be put into movement. So in fact you are in just as much opposition as you are in good company given that minority rights are as protected as majority rights, even though your idea of good company isn't always exactly good for a group of people who care about this country just as much as you do.
Absolutely amazing! Incredulous!