What a disastrous night for Trump at the CIC Forum; He vowed to replace the Mlitary generals with his personal appointments

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It's a well established fact that Odumbo has cashiered some 200 admirals and generals, some of whom dared to disagree with his asinine war policies, speedy, and those that remain are Odumbo sycophants or "reduced to rubble" enough to keep their mouths shut to preserve their careers. Trump's associate, General Flynn, has first hand experience of trying to advise Odumbo, et al., and he was cashiered same as Mattis. The people who have replaced them are Odumbo sycophants who swallow the cooked intel reports Odumbo is sowing. So, Trump is 100% correct when he says those Odumbo sycophants regurgitating the pablum Odumbo wants to hear need to go and be replaced, speedy.

Obama was not being interviewed on Wednesday night. Trump and Clinton were. I appreciate your opinion on the U.S. military leaders but it is strictly OPINION with no facts to back it up.

And LT General Hertling disagrees with LT General Flynn on the administration's handling of military matters.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/07/politi...day-isis-plan/

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Obama was not being interviewed on Wednesday night. Trump and Clinton were. I appreciate your opinion on the U.S. military leaders but it is strictly OPINION with no facts to back it up.

And LT General Hertling disagrees with LT General Flynn on the administration's handling of military matters.

You'd be the ignoramus pretending that Trump's suggestion to replace Odumbo's sycophant generals was unprecedented in American history, speedy; so, your ignorant ass needed a reminder as to just what the fuck Odumbo did while he was in office before you hypocritically begin to denigrate Trump for proffering to "repeat history", as they say, speedy.

Regarding Flynn and Hertling, Flynn's spent his final years in command in Afghanistan before he was promoted to head the Defense Intelligence Agency; hence, his experience with what was happening on the ground was both more recent and broader in perspective than Hertling's, speedy. An additional reminder, speedy, Odumbo hasn't "won any wars", the U.S. is still entangled in both Iraq and Afghanistan, but you can rest assured that Odumbo is doing it "his way".

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You'd be the ignoramus pretending that Trump's suggestion to replace Odumbo's sycophant generals was unprecedented in American history, speedy; so, your ignorant ass needed a reminder as to just what the fuck Odumbo did while he was in office before you hypocritically begin to denigrate Trump for proffering to "repeat history", as they say, speedy.

Regarding Flynn and Hertling, Flynn's spent his final years in command in Afghanistan before he was promoted to head the Defense Intelligence Agency; hence, his experience with what was happening on the ground was both more recent and broader in perspective than Hertling's, speedy. An additional reminder, speedy, Odumbo hasn't "won any wars", the U.S. is still entangled in both Iraq and Afghanistan, but you can rest assured that Odumbo is doing it "his way".

Let's remember that it is BUSH that got us into the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The number of troops in both countries has declined dramatically during Obama's time in office. There will never be a winner in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Once U.S. presence in those countries ends, they will return to the way they were, just like Vietnam.

Both Hertling and Flynn attained the rank of 3-star General. To say that one was more "experienced" than the other is splitting hairs and simply opinion on your part.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Maybe Trump will appoint generals who actually want to win, rather than draw out phony conflicts to benefit Wall Street and defense contractors.

A lot of your posts make sense. Some I do not agree with because of perspective--life in mid-America does not look the same as life in DC--but you have gone off the deep end on this one.

Rant all you want about Clinton's stupidity--I am certainly not going to defend her.

Believe in Trump if you want, though I won't go there myself.

But you comments about and senior military who want to draw out wars is ignorant and degrading. There are some posters here I would not be shocked to see that from, but I expected better from you on that point.

Other than the sub-25 y/o who are too filled with testosterone for their own good it is a very, very VERY small number of career military people who long for war, think war is glamorous, or want to prolong it a day more than necessary. They are the ones who die and get maimed. It is the politicians who start and drag out wars because of egos, incompetence to use other tools, listening to advisers like Condelisa Rice, or for other political reasons.

After the military suffered in numerous ways from Vietnam there has been a very consistent set of principles that senior military believe almost without exception:

To go to war several criteria should be present:
--A clear and compelling critical national interest
--Other aspects of national power have been exhausted
--The support of the US people
--The willingness and means to win and disengage as quickly as reasonable

It is not the senior military who repeatedly lose site of these principles. Throughout every administration since VN the military's view has not essentially changed: to be as prepared as possible, to be a deterrent force if possible, but if called upon, to win and get home.

Your comment is directed at the wrong people and is insulting. I do not expect you to apologize, but it would be nice to see you readdress your comment.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Let's remember that it is BUSH that got us into the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The number of troops in both countries has declined dramatically during Obama's time in office. There will never be a winner in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Once U.S. presence in those countries ends, they will return to the way they were, just like Vietnam.

Both Hertling and Flynn attained the rank of 3-star General. To say that one was more "experienced" than the other is splitting hairs and simply opinion on your part.

You continue to be a lib-retard liar, speedy. Saddam Hussein was directly and solely responsible for the war in Iraq, and bin Laden was directly and solely responsible for the war in Afghanistan. The fact that you so willingly continue to distort the truth shows you to be an unmitigated liar, speedy.

The fact that Flynn held a command in Afghanistan longer and more recent than Hertling enjoyed in Iraq is trivially obvious to all but the most benighted of jackasses like you, speedy. Plus, Flynn's last duty assignment afforded him a wider perspective and greater depth of knowledge about events in SW Asia than Hertling ever enjoyed, speedy, which, again, is trivially obvious to all but the most benighted of jackasses like you, speedy.

[Yssup Rider]

Did IBIdiot reply to a point with insults?

How precious!

[i'va biggen]

No, but he did the usual chicken dick thing and blamed someone else for going to war.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Old-T

A lot of your posts make sense. Some I do not agree with because of perspective--life in mid-America does not look the same as life in DC--but you have gone off the deep end on this one.

Rant all you want about Clinton's stupidity--I am certainly not going to defend her.

Believe in Trump if you want, though I won't go there myself.

But you comments about and senior military who want to draw out wars is ignorant and degrading. There are some posters here I would not be shocked to see that from, but I expected better from you on that point.

Other than the sub-25 y/o who are too filled with testosterone for their own good it is a very, very VERY small number of career military people who long for war, think war is glamorous, or want to prolong it a day more than necessary. They are the ones who die and get maimed. It is the politicians who start and drag out wars because of egos, incompetence to use other tools, listening to advisers like Condelisa Rice, or for other political reasons.

After the military suffered in numerous ways from Vietnam there has been a very consistent set of principles that senior military believe almost without exception:

To go to war several criteria should be present:
--A clear and compelling critical national interest
--Other aspects of national power have been exhausted
--The support of the US people
--The willingness and means to win and disengage as quickly as reasonable

It is not the senior military who repeatedly lose site of these principles. Throughout every administration since VN the military's view has not essentially changed: to be as prepared as possible, to be a deterrent force if possible, but if called upon, to win and get home.

Your comment is directed at the wrong people and is insulting. I do not expect you to apologize, but it would be nice to see you readdress your comment.

Maybe we need generals who value principles more than their careers. These wars are stupid, and if they were true to their oath of office, they would tell the truth. The ones remaining want that extra star or a bigger pension. They need to go, and be replaced by generals with courage, and a President who wants to win. If a war is not worth winning, it's not worth fighting. We haven't truly won a war since WWII. I don't count Kuwait as a win.

And yes, life is different out here in flyover country. You can see better without all the DC lies and bullshit flying around.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Did IBIdiot reply to a point with insults?

How precious!

Yu remain a hypocritical POS, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

FTFY, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

[Yssup Rider]

What are you babbling about, Ibitch?

Did your Mummy stop wiping your bottom and telling you everything was OK?

I know the lady time that happened, you flew off into an eight-week snit, closely followed by an abrupt departure in a late-model HUFF.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

What are you babbling about, Ibitch?

Did your Mummy stop wiping your bottom and telling you everything was OK?

I know the lady time that happened, you flew off into an eight-week snit, closely followed by an abrupt departure in a late-model HUFF.

You've obviously missed your Dixie cup full of your evening medication, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

[Yssup Rider]

Pooooo poooooo peeeeee peeeeee.

It's all gonna be OK one day SHITSMEARER!

Sick motherfucker.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Pooooo poooooo peeeeee peeeeee.

It's all gonna be OK one day SHITSMEARER!

Sick motherfucker.

You'd be the only shit smearing sow in this forum, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

[i'va biggen]

Chicken dick hank, showing his talent.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

You're still playing with little balls, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.