The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

General butts head publicly with the White House

If he was a regular citizen,sure, he could say whatever he wants about the President.But he's not.There's no freedom of speech in the military to badmouth your commander in chief.He set a very bad example and he should be immediately removed from command.

You can't have that type of thing going on.It screws things up if there is no professionalism.The General wasn't acting like a professional soldier in this case.A professional soldier displays respect for his chain of command.He doesn't have to like them.He must respect them though.He didn't do that,and that's why he has to go.

It's been a while since I been in the service,but if I badmouthed my Captain in print or to his face,I'd be in a lot of trouble,and rightfully so.Personally,I couldn't stand my last Captain.I thought he was a punk.But I made sure to watch what I said about him and who I said it to.The General should have done the same,and there is no excuse at all for his remarks.
 
This just in..Obama relieved him of his command..He had no choice.

good... Obama still has my support as president.

civilian authority over the military must be 100 percent unquestioned.

now I want to see the court marshall and disciplinary process. If nothing is done, Gates needs to be questioned as to why.
 
Sadly, this was his third case of insubordination. Of course it couldn't go without grievous consequence.
 
I really feel bad for Patraeus as a person. I am sure he was not looking forward to heading to Afghanistan after already leading the efforts in Iraq.

Well some of us have Nick on ignore so there's that.

I have him on ignore so I missed it too.


I am curious how many people have him on Ignore? I guess I make #3 in this thread.
 
I guess the answer to the whole did you read the article arguement is just this....

It should never have happened. it was conduct unbecoming an officer and I am not interested in hearing it. I won't give his actions and interests validity or attention due to the way he conducted himself.

He gave the military leadership a black eye. I don't want to reward the behavior.


And that's how we end up with elected officials like Obama who pass a worthless stimulus bill that we'll pay for for decades, bank bailouts with no financial industry reform, health care by and for Pharma and Big Insurance, no leadership on the massive energy overhaul needed, no DADT or DOMA repeal, no ENDA, an amped up war we can't win and an oil gusher into the Gulf of Mexico for two months and counting. And we're just beginning.

A top General and others fall on their swords to let us know our President and Commander in Chief is an empty suit and some respond, "I am not interested in hearing it."

Just as now, information was available about Obama during the Primaries and the general campaign. But some people actually take pride in their ignorance.
 
The whole issue surrounding the resignation of McChrystal is much more important, than a general bad mouthing his president and hangers on. That matter is one of a military campaign that is failing to create an Afghanistan at peace with itself. After nine years of hard campaigning there would appear to be no end in sight that would signal a victory for the Coalition forces.

We need to look beyond the narrowness of McChrystal's undiplomatic opinions that Rolling Stone so lovingly presented for our entertainment.

A nine year military campaign in Afghanistan has not produced the results that would signal a good reason for continuing with the current strategy. A more pragmatic approach to the war lords might conceivable produce a better result than continuing to kill more and more of the enemy's foot soldiers. As one dies, so another replaces him.

Clearly something was irking McChrystal badly enough for him to feel sufficiently frustrated to speak so contemptuously of the president, vice-president and other White House poodles.
 
I encourage Nick Cole to continue offering us his sober assessments of President Obama's administration.

I do not always share Nick Cole's conclusions, but learn much from his willingness to provide us with opinions that are calculated to question my own support for President Obama.
 
I thought the war was quick,
kill the terrorists and get out of there. Why didn't they do what they said they would do.
Kill the people responsible and get out.

You can't turn a culture into a western culture unless they wanted it like a cultural revolution or something.
 
Because every time we smash up a place it comes back to haunt us ten times worse than before.
 
Because every time we smash up a place it comes back to haunt us ten times worse than before.

actually, it is a religious war.
Those 19 hi-jackers were apart of an extremist cult called "extreme islam ".
They were/are very educated people and rich like bin laden.
 
Telstra; said:
actually, it is a religious war.
Those 19 hi-jackers were apart of an extremist cult called "extreme islam ".

Which country do you believe that puts us at war with?
 
The whole issue surrounding the resignation of McChrystal is much more important, than a general bad mouthing his president and hangers on. That matter is one of a military campaign that is failing to create an Afghanistan at peace with itself. After nine years of hard campaigning there would appear to be no end in sight that would signal a victory for the Coalition forces.

We need to look beyond the narrowness of McChrystal's undiplomatic opinions that Rolling Stone so lovingly presented for our entertainment.

A nine year military campaign in Afghanistan has not produced the results that would signal a good reason for continuing with the current strategy. A more pragmatic approach to the war lords might conceivable produce a better result than continuing to kill more and more of the enemy's foot soldiers. As one dies, so another replaces him.

Clearly something was irking McChrystal badly enough for him to feel sufficiently frustrated to speak so contemptuously of the president, vice-president and other White House poodles.


I think you're right.

And McChrystal isn't the only one who's frustrated. A little over a week ago I opened a thread with this Bob Herbert column:

The Courage to Leave

There is no good news coming out of the depressing and endless war in Afghanistan. There once was merit to our incursion there, but that was long ago. Now we’re just going through the tragic motions, flailing at this and that, with no real strategy or decent end in sight. ...

Seven American soldiers were killed in Afghanistan on Monday but hardly anyone noticed. ...

Our government leaders keep mouthing platitudes about objectives that are not achievable, which is a form of deception that should be unacceptable in a free society.

In announcing, during a speech at West Point in December, that 30,000 additional troops would be sent to Afghanistan, President Obama said: “As your commander in chief, I owe you a mission that is clearly defined and worthy of your service.”

That clearly defined mission never materialized.

Ultimately, the public is at fault for this catastrophe in Afghanistan, where more than 1,000 G.I.’s have now lost their lives. ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/opinion/12herbert.html


When a man like McChrystal, diciplined, experienced, informed as few are, does something as radical as he's just done to his own detriment, it's foolish to not listen to what he's saying.
 
Which country do you believe that puts us at war with?

Saudi Arabia is the sauce of religious virus and they keep spreading un-challenged.
the world should tackle the source of the problem ... that is extreme religion(s).
 
When a man like McChrystal, diciplined, experienced, informed as few are, does something as radical as he's just done to his own detriment, it's foolish to not listen to what he's saying.

Except he didn't question the strategy, he just badmouthed people. Based on his comments, I have no better idea of any supposed weaknesses of the military strategy for Afghanistan.

If he felt that his advice for a better strategy (does he even have any?) was being ignored by leadership that was either inept or uncaring, then rather than letting slip a bunch of invective in an entertainment magazine, he would have called a press conference a month ago, resigned, and stated his reasons for doing so in detail. OH! And he might not have reiterated his support for the strategy today.

This doesn't seem smart enough or orchestrated enough to be "doing something radical." It seems like buffoonery. At best it was the private frustration of someone just venting, and a General should obviously know you don't vent about things you don't seriously believe in front of a reporter.
 
I think he felt invincible. He had shot his mouth off before with no large consequences.

I also feel that the strategy which Patreaus wrote the book on and McChrystal advanced his career is exactly what has been put into place in the last year and it is bearing fruit. However COIN strategy is a longterm slow process.

I think he feels real frustration at being given a job and then while doing his job he gets lukewarm political answers from folks like the VP, the NSA and the Ambassador.

Regardless, his time is up. Hell I bet he is glad more than anything else.
 
He showed exceptionally poor judgment. Someone like that should not be in charge of the prosecution of a war.

The few excerpts I read did not seem to indicate any substantive disagreements. It read more like gossipy people carping about their co-workers and bosses.
 
Saudi Arabia is the sauce of religious virus and they keep spreading un-challenged.
the world should tackle the source of the problem ... that is extreme religion(s).

That's not what I asked you.

If you think this is a religious war, which nation do you believe this puts us at war with?
 
Back
Top