• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affairs!:)

Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

I didn't like General Shinseki because he made it more difficult to build political support for invading Iraq.

Yes. Loosely translated: He didn't support the bullshit and therefore, since you're a sheep you didn't like him.
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

By telling the truth?

In a democracy, it is virtually a necessity to lie in order to drum up and maintain support for needed combat operations.

World War II is widely considered one of the most necessary and noblest of conflicts that the U.S. has been involved in.

Yet the Roosevelt Admin. repeatedly violated the law and lied to the American people about their actions leading up to the war.

The fact that the U.S.S. Reuben James sunk with all hands by a German submarine was in fact engaging in combat operations against the German sub BEFORE being attacked to cite but one example.

What the hell? Are you talking about Lend lease? Aren't you a teacher?
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

Not necessarily.

It is quite possible that using a bigger force in Iraq would've cost the lives of even more U.S. soldiers.

More soldiers mean more targets for insurgents and more soldiers dying in accidents that are inevitable in a war zone.

Seriously? The Iraq war has been almost universally acknowledged as being initiated without sufficient planning and with unrealistic assumptions on the size of forces that would be necessary. Gen. Shinseki, who actually had experience in low-intensity ops in the Balkans, cited a troop number that he believed would be necessary to maintain security in a "post-war" occupation. Secretary Rumsfeld, who is widely considered one of the worst defense secretaries ever and was later fired, scoffed at the general's numbers and marginalized him until the end of his term.

With more soldiers to maintain order in disputed areas, the insurgency would probably not have gotten as out of control as it did. Other Bush decisions, like disbanding the army, didn't help of course.

President Bush himself admitted that not enough troops were used in his "mistakes were made" speech in January 2007. Then came the Surge, and what was that? More troops!

Yet the Roosevelt Admin. repeatedly violated the law and lied to the American people about their actions leading up to the war.

The fact that the U.S.S. Reuben James sunk with all hands by a German submarine was in fact engaging in combat operations against the German sub BEFORE being attacked to cite but one example.

Reuben James was sunk on October 31. FDR had already announced to the country that US Navy vessels would take offensive action against u-boats (the "shoot on sight" policy) after USS Greer was attacked on the Iceland supply route. (US forces occupied Iceland in July 1941, which was also announced publicly.)


"But let this warning be clear. From now on, if German or Italian vessels of war enter the waters, the protection of which is necessary for American defense, they do so at their own peril.

The orders which I have given as Commander in Chief of the United States Army and Navy are to carry out that policy -- at once."

Franklin D. Roosevelt
Fireside Chat
Sept. 11, 1941​

There were some things that had to be kept secret for military security, but the major steps along the way to war (the draft, the declaration of Unlimited National Emergency, Lend-Lease, the Atlantic Charter) were all announced openly.

--Justin
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

FDR had no authority to order U.S. warships into combat zones.

Never in world history has their been a "right of neutrals" to send ships much less warships into declared combat zones without expecting attack.

As for the rest, President Bush was simply doing the politically viable thing and bowing to the clamor for more troops.

Never take a top military officer at face value when they declare they need "more troops" for an operation.

The top brass always asks for vastly more troops than they require.

General Colin Powell did not need 500,000 U.S. troops in the 1991 Gulf War. But he opposed the war and was trying to force President Bush to back down on liberating Kuwait. But Bush called his bluff after the 1990 midterm elections.

A common joke in the Defense Dept. was that the top brass had a saying

"The answer is 500,000 troops. Now, what is your question?"
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

FDR had no authority to order U.S. warships into combat zones.
FDR and California governor Earl Warren had no right to inter 110,000 Japanese Americans during World War II under Executive Order 9066 in 1942.

"Executive Order 9066" - http://www.cetel.org/1942_9066.html

Whether his action was right or not, President Roosevelt did have the authority to issue such an order. The government rested its authority in the case on the war power granted to the Congress and President in Article 1, Section 8, Article 1, Section 9, and Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. Importantly, Article 1, Section 9, Habeas Corpus may be suspended by the Congress in cases of rebellion or invasion when the public Safety may require it. Congress delegated these powers to the President in 1942, and he was within his rights in exercising them.

As the Supreme Court also noted, there was no technical internment, only an order for certain persons to depart from a military exclusion area by the following process: "(1) depart from the area; (2) report to and temporarily remain in an assembly center; (3) go under military control to a relocation center there to remain for an indeterminate period until released conditionally or unconditionally by the military authorities."


I, too, am fond of General Shinseki, though I dislike his impractical decisions regarding Army uniform headgear.
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

FDR had no authority to order U.S. warships into combat zones.

According to what law or decision? The president can order US warships anywhere, his authority as commander-in-chief in that regard has been well established for over 200 years. The entire Atlantic was a "combat zone," was the US Atlantic Fleet supposed to sit in port until Britain and Germany resolved their differences?

Anyway, that doesn't support your claim about the Roosevelt administration and USS Reuben James.

As for the rest, President Bush was simply doing the politically viable thing and bowing to the clamor for more troops.

Never take a top military officer at face value when they declare they need "more troops" for an operation.

So the civilian leadership is never wrong? Your position is that Rumsfeld was right, and the 2003-2006 deployments were sufficient to control the situation in post-Saddam Iraq? I would say that position has been pretty thoroughly discredited. Suggested reading: Cobra II by Gordon and Trainor or Fiasco by Thomas Ricks.

The top brass always asks for vastly more troops than they require.

Not always, see the difference between McClellan and Grant, for instance. Nevertheless, Shinseki's numbers have proven to have been more realistic than Rumsfeld's.

--Justin
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

FDR had no authority to order U.S. warships into combat zones.

The President has total authority to do whatever he wants as C-in-C.

Anywho, I love the poetic justice of an African American picking an Asian America of Japanese decent on Pearl Harbor Day to oversee the retirement of the victims of that attack.

Wait, is that irony or poetic justice? In any case I like it.
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

FDR had no authority to order U.S. warships into combat zones.

The President has total authority to do whatever he wants as C-in-C.

Anywho, I love the poetic justice of an African American picking an Asian America of Japanese decent on Pearl Harbor Day to oversee the retirement of the victims of that attack.

Wait, is that irony or poetic justice? In any case I like it.

I would call it progress.



The other day, I saw a mention of the importance and solidity of the Japanese-American alliance, and was briefly amused by our tendency to . . . well, to assimilate our former adversaries. In the end, everybody ends up American.
 
Re: My hero General Eric Shinseki is appointed Sec. of Veterans Affair

Rubbish. That itself is a lie. Anyone who says this, and believes it, is an arrogant fool, puffed up with unwarranted pride in their own good judgment, and with equally unwarranted contempt for other people's good judgment.

It is true to a point. In a democracy, it is a virtually necessity to lie in order to drum up and maintain support for unneeded combat operations.

Yes. But that's true of any regime. Nobody is more sensitive to public opinion than a dictator.

The Big Lie in his post lay in its claim that lack of support for "necessary" wars is a peculiar failing of democracies.

I agree with the 2nd part, but dictators pay a much lower audience cost in war time since the populace is cowed into not thinking war is any different from the other kinds of drudgery imposed by dictators.

Of course, I am just being argumentative for its own sake and mincing words. :p
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top