Notices
Results 1 to 27 of 27
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox

Thread: How can our military take orders from people who never actually served in the milatary?

  1. #1 How can our military take orders from people who never actually served in the milatary? 
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    I first started thinking about all of this, while I was watching a show about president Kennedy and the Cuban missle crisis. I was (highly) impressed with the way he handled it.

    Later I learned of Kennedys military service. He saw actual war as a officer. He saw his friends die, and he had lots of missles shot at him.

    And then I thought maybe the reason Kennidy handled the missle crisis so well, is because, he has actual experience in war. Maybe this taught him stratagy and how to make choices during war.

    And then later I saw the way G (H) W Bush, did not invade the country of Iraq, (he only got Sadam out the country he invaded). Our first president Bush (fully) realized how many US troops would be killed in the process of overthrowing Sadam, and decided not to do it.

    And our first president Bush, also has been in combat. He knows what its like to be in a plane with 4 of his friends, and see them all die, before he falls in the ocean with a parachute. Maybe he did not fully invade Iraq because he knows first hand what happens in war.

    And then I saw the way G W Bush , Dick Chenny, and Donald Rumsfeld invaded Iraq. There was no thought or worry about how many people would be killed in the process.

    And then I learned Chenny, and Rumsfeld both avoided the Veiatnam war. And that GW Bush also avoided military duty.

    I then realized that our president GW BUSH our "comander in chief" , D. Rumsfeld our secratary of defense, and Cheny (the strongest voice to invade Iraq.) Were all all in comand of the US military.

    All of these men were afraid to serve in the military, and now these same men, that were afraid to fight, are ordering Americas 18 year olds to die, and to kill.

    How in the hell, can 3 men who are like (the go to college) draft dodgers, end up in control of the US military?

    How can a man be our secratary of defense , OR EVEN our comander and chief, when he has no experience in war?

    Common sense says when you pick a person to (lead) our military, that person should have expience in war.


    And tonight I hear presidential candidates talking of war on TV, and what they would do as president in military matters. But the thing is, most of these men are coward, non-moral, idiots. Who would themselves dodge war, and then grow up to send 18 year olds to die, (when they were scared to do the same thing.) F. THAT !!!!!!!!!!

    Having people who have never been in the military, being in control of our military is plain stupid.

    I wish members of Americas military would do something about this. They should have people who have actual experience in war, being their military leaders.

    Having a secratary of defense, or comander in chief, who has never even been to war, is like having a college math teacher who does not understand math.


    There should be a rule that only people with military experience, can be in charge of Americas military.


    Last edited by chad; April 16th, 2012 at 12:22 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    I first started thinking about all of this, while I was watching a show about president Kennedy and the Cuban missle crisis. I was (highly) impressed with the way he handled it.
    He botched it badly. Also the Bay of Pigs.

    I then realized that our president GW BUSH our "comander and chief" , D. Rumsfeld our secratary of defense, and Cheny (the strongest voice to invade Iraq.) Were all all in comand of the US military.

    All of these men were afraid to serve in the military, and now these same men, that were afraid to fight, are ordering Americas 18 year olds to die, and to kill.

    How in the hell, can 3 men who are draft dodgers, end up in control of the US military?
    You forgot to mention Clinton and Obama.



    I wish members of Americas military would do something about this. They should have people who have actual experience in war, being their military leaders.

    Having a secratary of defense, or comander in chief, who has never even been to war, is like having a college math teacher who does not understand math.


    There should be a rule that only people with military experience, can be in charge of Americas military.
    Are you advocating a military coup?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,308
    And then I learned Chenny, and Rumsfeld both avoided the Veiatnam war. And that GW Bush also avoided military duty.
    I have no excused for Chenny. Rumsfeld served 21 years in the military and retired from the Navy reserves as a Captain. GW Bush served six years. If someones serving the reserve we can't fault them if they don't participate in combat--they aren't making those decisions.

    Having a secratary of defense, or comander in chief, who has never even been to war, is like having a college math teacher who does not understand math.
    Actually I'd say its a lot more like having a mathematician who's done nothing but teach and never put his skills to practical applications like engineering, science etc.

    I wish members of Americas military would do something about this. They should have people who have actual experience in war, being their military leaders.
    The military doesn't make those kinds of decisions. And quite honestly we're sworn to make sure the military doesn't because it's not in accord with the Constitution.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    The Holy Land is everywhere Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    response Harold

    On the PBS special I saw, Kennedy and his brother did a fine job on getting those missles out of Cuba.


    Am I advocating a military coup ? Yes I guess I am, I think our military should, (only) take orders from men and women, with the highest levels of morals, (respect), and honor.

    And when idiots like D. Cheny, and G W Bush, command our military to invade countrys like Iraq (for nothing), our military should not listen (just like Mohamid Alli did).

    America attacked Iraq in the name of Sept 11, when they had nothing to do with it. (and the whole world knew this before we invaded Iraq.)

    And still the military of The United States of America attacked Iraq in the name of Sept 11. (not good)
    Last edited by chad; January 8th, 2012 at 04:01 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    chad,

    Ever read the Constitution? Perhaps you should. It's the foundation of our country, and I read it at least twice a year, end to end, and carry a copy with me at all times.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    response Lynx_Fox

    IT APPEARS I MAY HAVE BEEN WRONG ABOUT RUMSFELD. BUT GW BUSH AND CHENY ARE BOTH "CHICKEN HAWKS" AS THEY SAY.

    Still Rumsfeld, Cheny, and GW Bush, know nothing about war.

    War is death. War is a young child with no arms b/c a bomb just blew them off. War is killing people. War is watching your friends die. War is seeing dead children laying in the streets. And war is using your enemys torn off arms to hold your cigarettes.

    You just cant learn the above things in the reserve, without actually seeing it first hand.

    Maybe if GW Bush, Cheny, and Rumsfeld would have seen war first hand, they would not have been so fast, to make all of the above things happen in Iraq.

    And were in the constitution does it state ?

    "If a idiot president, wants to start a war for no reason, and lie to get this war, the military of the United States of America has to follow his orders."


    You speak of the conistution, but who wrote the constitution ?

    I think if GW Bush, Cheny, and Rumsfeld tried to get the people that wrote our constitution, into a war like Iraq. They would have been killed in duels, or killed by other military officers, or told to leave the military.

    Men like George Washington, were respected by the people who wrote our constitution.

    And if Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheny would have tried their war with the founding fathers, some military officers in that group would have killed them, literally. Or military leaders would have kicked them out of the military, for them being cowards, trying to command troops.

    After the first time young Washington was shot at, he wrote a letter to a relative and said it was "charming. Washington liked getting shot at. He dreamed of sword duels. And he wanted inteligent democracy. Americans do not even know who the founding fathers were in spirit.

    The military officers of the founding fathers would (never) listen to men like Bush, Cheny, and Rumsfeld. In reality they would kill each other in duels over matters like these. And they would never allow (non-combat experienced) men like Cheny, Rumsfeld, and Bush give the orders. (the founding fathers would have killed them.)

    Men like Washinton who had honor, respect, and who liked being shot at, gave the orders, not idiots like Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheny.



    If the founding fathers were around today, they would overthrow our government. And write a new constitution.

    A big purpose of the constitution was to take men like Cheny, Rumsfeld, and GW Bush out of power. And to (NOT) listen to crazy idiots when they tell you what to do.
    Last edited by chad; April 16th, 2012 at 12:29 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    response Lynx_Fox

    And were in the constitution does it state ?

    "If a idiot president, wants to start a war for no reason, and lie to get this war, the military of the United States of America has to follow his orders."
    It doesn't. You would know that if you had ever read it.


    You speak of the conistution, but who wrote the constitution ?
    Actually, we spoke of the Constitution. The founders of our country wrote it. And it has lasted nearly 225 years. And we all live by it. If you don't, amend it, or get out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    I think maybe we need a country were, if you dont care about the constitution you need to get out. And if you are not smart enough to understand the constitution, you need to shut up !!


    article 1, section 1 "only congress has the power to make laws" but today in America corporations write our laws (google it, its true.)

    But you dont care that corporations are making our laws, do you ?

    Try Google' ing "corporations writing laws", and learn its true.

    Then comprehend that article I, section 1 itself is being violated.

    But you dont care about article I, section 1, so what part of the constitution do you care about ?

    I personally LOVE article 1, section 1 , I just wish Americans knew what it ment and lived by it.

    I also love the preamble "promote the general welfare" and I wish we lived by that one too (but I dont think we do).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,308
    Lets review early Presidents:

    George Washington, military service: Yes
    John Adams, military service: Yes, combat experience: No
    Thomas Jefferson, military service: No
    James Madison, military service: Yes, combat experience: No
    James Monroe, military service: Yes, combat experience: Yes

    As you can see our founders and its early citizens (and state legislatures) didn't think it was very important for the Commander in Chief to have served in the military.
    As someone with 25 years in uniform (3 reserve/NG + 22 active), and combat experience, I agree with them.

    Heck, if anything, some of them didn't even think training or experience were even related to rank--for example Jefferson, recognized as a Colonel in the Virginia Militia, purely due to his wealth and non-military education.

    You just cant learn the above things in the reserve.
    Many reservist serve in more combat than active duty soldiers. It entirely depends on the type of unit, the type of conflict and the needs of the nation. I'm surprised to even see people that still have your view, because there are now nearly a million reservist who've seen combat and tens of thousands of them missing limbs or some other form of serious injury scattered in nearly every town across America; many times you'll find their part of the town leadership as well.

    --
    Having served in combat doesn't inoculate someone from make stupid decisions.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    The Holy Land is everywhere Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    You just dont (realize) the diferences between the men you listed above, and presidents like GW Bush.


    All of the presidents, you listed above had an honesty, that you dont comprehend (is gone with some current presidents). Our founding fathers (and our military) did not have to worry about dis-honorable men giving them orders. Because men like GW Bush were called "stupid" outloud, by all the men you list above, but you dont know this.


    President GW Bush said "global warming may not be happening" (because Exxon Mobile wanted him too, so Exxon could make more money.)


    He told everyone "Social Security is going bankrupt" so Wall street could charge $750 billion dollars in fees to privitize it.

    He changed laws so coal powerplants could let out more smoke, and caused 1,000's of children to be so sick, they cant even go outside to play. He did this so these powerplants could make $100's of millions more dollars in profits.

    You cant really think thats its o.k. for a man that lies, makes 1,000's of children bedriden sick, gives 100,000's of children asma, and tries to take $750 billion dollars from (your retirement money) You think its o.k. if he orders our military ??

    Our founding fathers did not worry about our presidents having military service, b/c men like G W Bush were not allowed around our politicians, literally, but you dont know this.

    You dont (know) that corporate idiots like G W Bush, were trying to influence our government, before we were even America.


    You speak of Jeferson, but Jeferson said or wrote this,

    "I hope we shall crush in its birth, the aristocracy of our monied corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of
    strenth, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." 1816

    You list Jeferson as a source, and maybe he never served, but read what he said above,
    Do you think Jeferson was gonna let corporate GW Bush give our military orders?


    All of the past presidents you list above, knew and spoke about corporate men like GW Bush (and the men who pay them.) They were on Jefersons mind, and he hated them. It makes no sense that you would list all these men above, in the defense of GW Bush ordering our military, when all the men above, would have dueled GW Bush, joined an officers plot to kill him, publicly call him "stupid", or wrote about him (like Jeferson did.) They did not like men like GW Bush.

    All the men you listed above, dispised corporate men like GW Bush, and maybe you should not use them to defend, GW Bush being ok to give our military orders.


    The corporate TV and radio, that you have always listened to, (decided) not to tell you all these things. (source:fear and favor in the news room.)

    I do not mean, in any way, to put you, or your fellow soldiers in the same catagory as GW Bush or Cheny. You are all the finest of Americans, and you are our law enforcement and defense officers, (thank you) for doing what you all do. And I concede that your whole 2nd paragraph is correct.

    But it is (not) ok, for men like GW Bush and Cheny to order the military of the United States of America, and all of the men above you list as sources, would 1000000000000% agree with me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,308
    Seems like you got more against GW Bush than against people who didn't fight in combat being president.

    Most Soldiers in combat over the past ten years who were voting age cast their ballets for GW (many twice)--myself included.
    USMC1775 likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    The Holy Land is everywhere Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't Colin Powell serve under GW Bush as secetary of state during his first term as president ?
    did it really make such a difference to have an ex-general in politics ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D. stander-j's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    854
    Stepping away from all of this American Political Jargon I know a laughable amount of (ie: Not American). I'd have to side with those saying Military experience is not essential to being Commander-in-Chief. I don't think CICs always follow through verbatim to their initial thoughts. Keep in mind this is why Kings had advisors, and why Prime Ministers/Presidents have cabinets. Generally speaking, nobody is an expert on everything. That's why they have these people there to give them some advise. I'd also recommend you look at it like this: What else, other than military experience allows you to weigh options in regards to conflicts? Logic, Sentiment, Cost (both monetary and physical), and among other this that teach strategy like Chess. Think about it like this: Did Kennedy handle the Cuban Missile Crisis so well because of military experience, or because the world literally depends on him, and Kruschev, making the right decisions? I'm just suggesting it isn't as clear-cut as military experience = a good strategist, I'm thinking almost anyone can perform when a lot is on the line. I'm also thinking that when you aren't thinking as seriously as you should be, you tend to miss a few details in equation.

    Battle of Isandlwana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    ^ an example of how underestimating the circumstances leads to failure.
    "Cultivated leisure is the aim of man."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    I have no excused for Chenny. Rumsfeld served 21 years in the military and retired from the Navy reserves as a Captain. GW Bush served six years.
    GW Bush did not serve six years. He didn't bother to show up, even, after being taken off flight status. But if he had, he would have learned nothing from the experience anyway, based on what he learned from so many years as a corporate executive and professional politician.

    But he was not in charge of the Iraq effort either - and the sheer incompetence of the people who were was more related to their lack of ability and experience at governing than war. The Iraq War was an awesome display of extraordinary military capability, followed by a sort of evil Keystone Kops display of unprepared and utterly foolish administration of the conquered lands - maybe a Keystone Kapos? That was the predicted and obvious consequence of W's Reagan era administration being in charge of anything so demanding of wisdom and competence, and it's unlikely that having a boatload of Generals on board would have made the slightest difference.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15 George W Bush (Draft Dodger) 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3
    If you are going to post about how George W Bush was commander in chief and say he has no say in anything military because he was a "draft dodger" maybe check your history again, he did in fact serve in the military and yes he did not see any combat, he was still trained to. He handled 9/11 like a champ, i would like to see you in office at a time of crisis, he did the best he could do with his training and the way he thought best, have you served in the military? Ask any Marine, or soldier if they were excited to go to war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia, every Marine will answer with "hell yeah, finally get to do my job" and dying in combat is a sacrifice every military man and woman knows it is part of the job, its not a mistake for them to go over there and die, they arent over there to die or to kill they are there to preserve your freedom of speech and every single freedom you take for granted every day, make sure you know your stuff before you post things saying certain people dont have the right to tell other people what to do, when in fact you have no clue or idea.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3
    Yes, every leader has advisors, but if you are able to have your own thoughts and theories then you would be much better as a leader. We as military men and women do not like someone in charge if they always feel "Do as I say, not as I do" do you expect everyone that serves in the military to listen to someone whom has no idea what they are doing when it comes to military strategy, strengths and weeknesess, and discipline.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3
    "If the founding fathers were around today, they would overthrow our government. And write a new constitution."
    K, first of all, the founding fathers wrote our constitution we have had since 1787, why would they write a new one, they wrote what they thought and knew as the best way to keep a country together, and knowing the great nation of America has been around 1776 i feel they have done a pretty damned good job.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by USMC1775 View Post
    If you are going to post about how George W Bush was commander in chief and say he has no say in anything military because he was a "draft dodger" maybe check your history again, he did in fact serve in the military and yes he did not see any combat, he was still trained to.








    Dear (Sir),


    As I said war is death, war is a 8 year old girl, with no arms because a bomb just blew them off, and she is looking in your eyes crying. AND IDIOTS LIKE GW BUSH CAN (NOT) BE TRAINED TO KNOW WHAT THIS IS, THEY MUST SEE IT IN REAL LIFE, FACE TO FACE, TO TRUELY KNOW WHAT THIS IS.



    And logic would state, no person should be able to order, a military (first) strike unless,

    1.) they have been shot at
    2.) they have seen their military friends die
    3.) they have walked past dead woman, children, and inocent men laying dead in the streets, in pools of blood.


    The above 1-3 is part of war, and to 100% know war, you must have actually seen the 1-3 above. And I can not believe, that you all think its ok for miliatry leaders, who do (not) have 100% experience in war to command first strikes.

    Its like letting a commercial pilot, who has only trained in a computer flight simulator , command a commercial airline flight, with no other piliot on board, and the plane is full of passengers. This would be dangerous.


    If you have never seen the above 1-3, you have not seen 100% of war, and you will not have 100% experience in war. And when some one commands a military first strike, I just personall think they should have 100% experience in war.



    This all makes me think of the movie "Dances with wolves" and their war chief. I wish we had a war chief like him, I really liked that guy. But we do have people with the charactor of that man, in this forum, just not in your foolishly respected GW Bush white house.



    And about GW Bush (Sir), do you remember when he told america "global warming may not be happening", at the same time, 97% of climate scientists said "it was happening". GW Bush said that as a favor for Exxon mobile, so Exxon could make more money. Exxons partners gave GW Bush $100s of millions of dollars in campain money, and that lie was something they got for their money. Your GW Bush is an idiot immoral corporate lier.

    And if you are intersted I can tell you many, many more lies this corporate idiot lier told america.


    Before the Iraq war, the whole world said Sadam had nothing to do with sept 11, and in fact sadam was trying to kill Al Qaeda himself personaly, before sept 11 even happened. And again GW Bushs immoral corporate lieing behavior got him to say, "sadam had something to with sept 11." Google 935 lies Iraq, and read about the lies GW Bush and his white house said. Then goto the politics section of this forum, and find my post about documentarys, and watch the documentary about Iraq with the LT. COL. US Air Force in it, it will explain why your crew told these 935 lies to get us into Iraq.



    You foolishly respect GW Bushs White House, when they told 935 lies to get us to Iraq, to killl sadam (in the name of sept 11), when sadam was trying to kill Al Qaeda personaly himself for years before Sept 11. What was the result ?



    1000s of Iraqs children were killed by these actions, just because of corporate immoral idiots and liers in the GW Bush white house.
    And over 100,000 innocent Iraqis were killed, by bombs, and by loosing things like clean water, and medical care. Just because of GW Bushs white house.


    Your GW Bush is a highly paid corporate lier immoral idiot.








    And you actually said "he handled 9/11 like a champ."






    Before the Iraq war, germany had more Al Qaeda cells than Iraq, because sadam was trying to kill Al Qaeda personaly himself, since before sept 11 even happened. And then GW Bush invaded Iraq (in the name of killing Al Qaeda), when sadam husane was trying to kill Al Qaeda personaly before sept 11 even happened.

    Bushs white house lied 935 times, and killed 100,000 inocent Iraqi people for nothing.

    Will you tell me this is the behavior of a champ?

    (thats the stupidest thing, that I have heard in a long time.)






    You said "i would like to see you in office at a time of crisis"





    I am not like GW Bush, and if I was in office, and the whole world told me, sadam had nothing to do with sept 11, and sadam was trying to kill Al qaeda himself, you can bet your life, I would not have been stupid enough to attack Iraq, in the name of killing Al Qaeda.










    Ask any Marine, or soldier if they were excited to go to war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia, every Marine will answer with "hell yeah






    You are in a fantasy world (Sir), watch that documentary I told you about (watch the one bellow it too), there are high ranking US Military Officers in them, these intelegent and (educated) US Military Officers, were not saying hell yeah, they were saying hell no.







    , finally get to do my job" and dying in combat is a sacrifice every military man and woman knows it is part of the job, its not a mistake for them to go over there and die, they arent over there to die or to kill they are there to preserve your freedom of speech and every single freedom you take for granted every day, make sure you know your stuff before you post things saying certain people dont have the right to tell other people what to do, when in fact you have no clue or idea.







    In the ranking of human beings, you are above me (Sir), and I dream of being around men like you. But at this moment you are an uneducated fool.


    Read my post in the politics section, about the republican propaganda group/cult, and then realize that you are in that Sir.


    And then watch that documentary I told you about, but I think you will be unable to do it, because your social bonds with the idiot lier immoral GW Bush are too strong.



    You have no clue and no idea of anything but death, but you seem to be a hell of a man, its just that you are a uneducated one.


    And if we were face to face, I believe I would not be so bold, but we are not face to face.





    It pains me, that men like yourself are locked in a web of lies, and are unable to get out.


    Let me tell you more about GW Bush, he also took $100 million dollars from a group of coal power plants for his campain money, and when he got into office, he did those coal power plants political favors, and he changed laws for them, and passed laws to let them, let out more coal power plant smoke, and this $100 million dollar favor caused 100,000s of American children to get asma, and 1000s of children got so sick, they were unable to breath good enough, to even go outside to play. And this was many years ago, and no one ever changed this favor law, and with the passing of time, GW Bush has made 10,000s of American children so sick, they cant even go outside to play.



    There are crazy things going on in our government. And (you) never hear about it, because of things like the following.

    When GW Bush became president, he gave the tv station owners $100s of billions of dollars in tax cuts. GW Bush gave huge amounts of money to those tv station owners. The tv owners used their tax cut money to buy new tv stations, lear jets and rolls royces. And because of all this tax cut money, and money making favors, these tv station owners do (not) let infomation on the air that could stop their tax cuts, (and GW Bush style political favors.) I learned this from a documentary called "Fear and favor in the news room."

    And these tv station owners are with the same group of people, that give our presidents $100's of millions of dollars in campain money, and when you give some one $100's of millions of dollars, you get some thing for it, and from GW Bush they got corporate lies to the american people, and politcal favors like the ones I have stated here. And I have said only a small amount of the things GW Bush did here, there are many, many, many more.

    Many people in america, talk about how corporate america, has taken over our government, but for many reasons this infomation just does not get into the brain of people like yourself, and I would not know about any of this stuff, if I did not get satalite tv and link and freespeech tv.




    If you would ever like to learn more, about things like these, I am at your service (Sir).



    And at this moment, (you) have no clue, and no idea of whats going on inside the US government.





    have a nice day (Sir).



    You kinda remind me of some one, I respect a great deal. And I do not mess with this guy, and I do not want to mess with you. My intentions were good ones. If I have disrespected you, I am sorry.
    Last edited by chad; April 10th, 2012 at 07:47 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    [QUOTE=USMC1775;318134]"If the founding fathers were around today, they would overthrow our government. And write a new constitution."
    K, first of all, the founding fathers wrote our constitution we have had since 1787, why would they write a new one,


    I was wrong.
    They would (not) write a new constitution.


    This is more accurate,

    If the founding fathers were here, they would overthrow our government, and make all of us follow the constitution.


    But perhaps my admiration of Washington and his piers, could be clouding my judgement.


    Have a nice day Sir.

    I am very sorry, if I was rude before.

    Chad.
    Last edited by chad; April 10th, 2012 at 07:49 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    And were in the constitution does it state ?

    "If a idiot president, wants to start a war for no reason, and lie to get this war, the military of the United States of America has to follow his orders."
    This is the hole in the checks and balance system right here. There should be some issues where, if a president lies to the American public about them he should actually be held liable to criminal charges and serve actual time in prison after he leaves office. It shouldn't be small lies, but lying about a nuclear weapons program is not a small lie. It's actually so big/dangerous a lie that nothing could be more dangerous.

    I'd recommend letting the supreme court weigh such matters. That would add a check to balance the president's abuse of power. (There's no good reason the chief justices can't be privy to all the classified information a president is privy to, so no secrecy issues to hide behind.) Or better yet.... if Congress/Senate votes no confidence on a president's wild claims, then the Supreme Court would judge the truth of his claims, and if they're false he should then be charged with a "high crime or misdemeanor" and impeached on those grounds so he can stand trial for the offense.


    A big purpose of the constitution was to take men like Cheny, Rumsfeld, and GW Bush out of power. And to (NOT) listen to crazy idiots when they tell you what to do.
    Yeah. This. It's been a problem ever since we allowed the government to classify state secrets. If a guy with sources of information not available to us tells us that those sources are telling him a foreign country has a nuclear weapon and intends to use it, the public has little choice but to believe him and act on that information.

    It's coercion plain and simple. The president is in a position to act every bit as much as an autocrat as any king ever did when we trust him with that power, and put no meaningful penalties on him for abusing it.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    kojax,

    You said that you would recommend letting the supreme court weigh such matters. (but 5 of them should be in prison, for crimes they did.) How can you want criminals that should be in jail weighing matters about America?



    In the politics section of this forum, in my post "...free to watch online political documentaries..", there is a link to a documentary called "Orwell Rolls In His Grave"

    In this documentary at (time) 53:35 - 54:35, it explains why intelligent people think, these 5 supreme court members should be in jail.
    Last edited by chad; April 9th, 2012 at 02:24 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Professor jrmonroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,444
    This same argument could be made regarding every member of the president's cabinet: Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health & Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing & Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veteran Affairs. The prez has never been a farmer, businessman, soldier, teacher, engineer, doctor, ... etc. For a presidential candidate to have earned 14 advanced degrees would seriously restrict the choices for president. Besides, even if a candidate was required to earn only four-year degrees (and could do them in three years due to redundant prerequisites), the candidate would need 42 years of schooling, with not much real-life experience, making such candidate eligible at age 60 (18+42=60). Adding 10 to 20 years of actual experience would raise their age of eligibility to 70 to 80, and that's scary.

    Historically, ex-military types have made lousy presidents, I think they'd be too trigger happy, having had a lopsided view of life --- when the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all your problems start to look like nails. The Department of Defense is not the be all to end all. Americans don't want America to be the superpower bully (at least no more than it is already).

    When you look at the three branches of the federal government (executive, legislative and judicial), it's the executive branch that proactively executes the day-to-day administration of the government, which includes the armed forces. We certainly wouldn't want a committee of more than 500 members (Senate+House>500) to try to make day-to-day decisions for our armed forces in a war. The judicial branch is the only reactive branch of the government (the other two being proactive), so it's pretty much useless for commanding our armed forces. The other alternative is to make the military a separate branch of government, and I can't even begin to think how that would work.

    When the people elect a president, they know (or should know) that the candidate will be executing the "intra-national" aspects (agriculture, education, labor, etc) and the international aspects (defense, state, etc) of our federal government. I watched a documentary about our ICBM missile silos in America. A high-ranking general was being interviewed, and he was asked the question of how secure these instillations were, and being technically-minded I expected to hear all about electric fences, CCTV cameras, guards and attack dogs on the prowl, etc. His answer shocked me --- he said that these underground ICBM locations were as secure as the American people want them to be.

    As Thomas Jefferson said, "I know of no safe repository for the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to increase their discretion by education." So, we could take a step back and say that the average citizen (even extraordinary citizens) are incapable of electing the person to lord over the above 14 cabinet positions, unless the citizens themselves have significant education and experience in all 14 areas of government.
    Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    (Thank you for bringing me back, to the original subject of this post.)



    I am basicly just saying this, Americas Secretary of Defense (and positions like that), should be a person with 100% military experience, honor, and respect.


    In Americas past our military commanders have always been people of honor and respect, but recently corporate paid idiot liers are getting command of the US military. And the worst thing is, these corporate idiots, have avoided military service themselves, with the (goto college loophole), or like GW Bush did, not even show up.



    People that were scared to fight themselves, should not be so quickly ordering 18 year old Americans to die, and they sure as hell should not be happy doing it, like GW Bush and people like him are.








    Also, I have no real problem, with a US commander in chief, that does not have military service, as long as they are not a corporate liar.













    Historically, ex-military types have made lousy presidents, I think they'd be too trigger happy, having had a lopsided view of life --- when the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all your problems start to look like nails. The Department of Defense is not the be all to end all. Americans don't want America to be the superpower bully (at least no more than it is already).















    (Let us see if this is correct,)



    1.) President G (H) W Bush, is a military animal, read about his military service, one could call the man "Death".

    2.) President G W Bush, he is a corporate idiot lier, that did not even bother to show up for his military service.



    Now lets look at how a military person "G (H) W Bush", and a (avoid) military service man "G W Bush", both handled the same country of Iraq.




    G (H) W Bush did what he had to do, as an (American), He got Sadam out of the oil country he invaded, but G (H) W Bush did not take Sadam out of power, because he fully realized how many US troops would die.



    Now lets look at the way, GW Bush handled Iraq. The whole world told him that Sadam had nothing to do with Sept 11, or Al Qaeda. And Arab sources said, Sadam had been trying to kill Al Qaeda himself, personally for years. So then GW Bush invaded Iraq in the name of killing Al Qaeda.



    Who was more trigger happy, the military man, or the (avoid) service corporate idiot ????







    Also when the military president G (H) W Bush went on tv before his war, (he was not happy), his speach was short, and basicly all he said was "pray for our troups", and then he walked away sad.



    But when GW Bush, went on tv for his war, he was giving long tv war speaches just like Hitler. He was selling his war on tv any chance he could. And he walked away from his war speaches, happy and glad.










    Can you could list a US president military man, who was trigger happy with the US military?



    So far the only evidence listed says (your) wrong.







    As Thomas Jefferson said, "I know of no safe repository for the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves;











    (But todays american people dont hate the corporate idiots like Jeferson did. They love the corporate idiots, no matter what they do.)





    Last edited by chad; April 10th, 2012 at 07:59 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Hitler served in WW1.
    I understand the temptation to let the military be in charge of war, because they have experience, but I think its missing the big picture problem. I agree its always easier to fight to the last drop of other people's blood, the other issue is that when all you have as a tool is a hammer all problems will look like nails(problem lets bomb them! War on Terror! War on Drugs! War on Suicide! Bomb the poor we're declaring war on poverty).
    Anyway as Smedley Butler said War is a Racket, which requires fooling most people with lies and favored by those who profit from it, so we have to remove the Propaganda/Lies(control of information) and War profiteering(money) from the equation and balance the abuse enabling hierarchy with democratic mechanisms. Unfortunately, money+hierarchy+control-of-information are archaic problems that will be difficult to grow out of.

    (Of course from my perspective the point is to avoid war, not waging more of it but just be more imperialistically efficient at it. )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    kojax,

    You said that you would recommend letting the supreme court weigh such matters. (but 5 of them should be in prison, for crimes they did.) How can you want criminals that should be in jail weighing matters about America?



    In the politics section of this forum, in my post "...free to watch online political documentaries..", there is a link to a documentary called "Orwell Rolls In His Grave"

    In this documentary at (time) 53:35 - 54:35, it explains why intelligent people think, these 5 supreme court members should be in jail.
    Well, the advantage of checks and balances is that, since the three branches of government have an adversarial relationship, spreading power among a larger number of flawed people makes them collectively less flawed. (They'll never be zero flawed, but less is better than more.)

    It's extremely dangerous to put the power of secrecy in the hands of just one man. Spread out among many hands, it is likely to be used less aggressively. It's very hard for a large number of people to agree to keep a secret, especially when most of them would be denied the privilege to actually know the secret.

    So I'm thinking we should do like this:

    1) - Give Congress the power to call "Bull Shit" on the president any time he says something about secret intelligence.

    2) - When Congress calls "Bull Shit", the Judges of the Supreme Court are given absolutely unlimited and unconditional clearance to view any and all intelligence relating to the matter.

    3) - If they rule that it really was "Bull Shit" the president is either chastised or impeached, depending on the severity of the danger he has put the country in with his lies.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    "The crazy in this country runs deep, and no amount of logic or reason will talk someone out of a position at which they arrived using neither..”

    — kojax/iNow
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Ask any Marine, or soldier if they were excited to go to war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia, every Marine will answer with "hell yeah, finally get to do my job"
    eeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkkkkkkkkkk oooooohhhhhh nnoooooooooooooooooo

    ok-I'm a nam vet and the very last thing i would want is to have to go into combat with someone-anyone who actually wanted to do that.
    when i left the army---fuckedup, crazy disilusioned and suicidal
    all i got out of it was the everpresent
    "Never underestimate the power of dumb luck to see you through when planning and intellect fail."
    It never bothered me that, ultimately, we were taking orders from a civilian
    taking orders from idiots, however................................
    excited? hellman, more like terrified
    and we did what was asked of us anyway
    and, still, i wonder
    why?
    what was the good of it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 11th, 2011, 10:14 PM
  2. Military strategists.
    By Corporal William Cremola in forum History
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: August 13th, 2011, 11:57 AM
  3. Military Diplomacy
    By kojax in forum Military Technology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: June 3rd, 2010, 05:22 AM
  4. Military Information
    By korben in forum Links
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 9th, 2010, 07:11 PM
  5. The U.S. Military uses the force...
    By spectre84 in forum Military Technology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 25th, 2008, 10:11 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •