2008 Military Times poll: Wary about Obama

These guys are responding the way they have been conditioned to respond. The technique is to instill a purpose even if that purpose is unclear or vague.

Admitting there was no real "holy" objective or real reason to go to war would mean the purpose pushed by the leadership was false, and therefore it is only natural to defend what one must believe ...That there was a "valid" patriotic reason and purpose that our soldiers are fighting & dieing, and anyone who would threaten this belief is to be shunned and derided.

Of course, I suspect the real reason we are there is much too sensitive from a national security perspective to let the general public know, and therefore history will eventually show the reason our troops were really there was worth it.

Originally posted by Dusty Pouch
On the above basis alone and considering all the slavish MSM hype and worship that led to his election, I would think any right-minded independant thinking person (and I'm no Dem or Rep) would have every reason to be concerned for the future of his presidency and the implications for the Western world as a whole.

Your name is Dusty Pouch.

Hi Ben Her

Because I am interested in enigmas of all kinds and if you spell out the names, it is a straight swap.

oSama Bin Laden

oBama Sin Laden

Ok, far-fetched I know, but a bit creepy all the same. Also, it is an amazing coincidence...and a lot of people will tell you there are no coincidences...just a thought.

Originally posted by spellbound
Ok, far-fetched I know, but a bit creepy all the same.

And super duper HILARIOUS.

Did you think of that all by yourself?

reply to post by Jadette


Hi Jadette,

So, why is superstition any more suspect than what we have going on in the world now?

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
reply to post by Article11

 

Ahhhh, the sheep come bleating in.

Mirth is right.

About everything.

The military hates Obama.

I'm a sheep.

Gosh I hope this is finally on topic.

Originally posted by dominicus
No offense to people who have been or are in the military.

But when I was in high school, "they" kept trying to recruit me and my friends, even going so far as getting out home phone numbers from scholl records and calling weekly.

I stood up to the recruiters and told them the military is Government slavery, making you a pawn t be on the front lines of any war possible.

I always viewed joining the military as something done by the extremely desperate (no money no family) or the extremely stupid, or people who like to be ordered around like some pawns.

So in my perspective, the U.S. military is mostly made up of a bunch of half-waitted pawns. Not stereo-typing, see I just said most of the military. SO when 6 out of 10 say they dont believe in Obama ...that proves that 60% are a bunch of inbred fools.

These pawns would rather have a Country gun toting, inbred shoot-em-up president who wants war with everybody instead of a diplomatic strategist,

There were 10 million pet rocks sold in the U.S. so you do the math. Surrounded by idiots!!!!!

Or you could look on the armed forces as institutions where boys and girls become men and women, and the people that join as brave individuals who wish to serve their country and feel it is an honor and/or a duty or privilege to uphold our Constitution. Remember, these men and women uphold American ideals so that people like you can harbor your own opinions and speak ill of the military all you want without fear of repercussion to yourself or your family.

Remember that the next time you feel the need to open your big mouth and diss an organization of brave souls. And just an FYI - I'd call any of those "half-wits" a friend before I would I even acknowledge that I knew someone like you.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by sos37]

[edit on 6-1-2009 by sos37]

Amidst the partisanship members have missed the two excellent pearls of wisdom that appear below .


From the Source Article

“Overall, the prospect of having someone who isn’t necessarily tied to old strategies is a good thing,” said Air Force Master Sgt. David Ortegon, who said he voted for McCain. “Sometimes you need a fresh perspective to be able to handle our military readiness and the needs of the nation.”

Indeed hopefully some fresh ideas will continue to flow and improve strategy being deployed in Afghanistan.

Navy Gunner’s Mate 2nd Class William Rioseco, an instructor at Center for Security Forces, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, said mandatory post-deployment screening across all services would help to reduce stigma associated with mental health disorders.

The above quote speaks for itself . No rational sensible or rational person would think otherwise .

So beyond Rumsfeld and Clinton cut backs to the US military how did things get to where they are today ?

Let me explain from the perceptive(SP?) from my backyard . Please forgive me if I go off topic . Post Vietnam Australia and New Zealand moved to a all professional / volunteer armed forces . * In the 70s and pretty much up until 2000 a sort of policy Vacuum existed . The concept of a forward defence against Communism was no more and no threat existed to the South of either country .

So aside from Australia and New Zealand contributing to various Peace Keeping operations that leads us to the Gulf War . Both countries made minimalist contributions to that conflict . Never the less the Gulf War represents an arbitration that crucially skewed US and perhaps even British military thinking . What makes the Gulf War an arbitration is the following . The conflict was a convental war that was won with massive amounts of fire power over a short space of time .

A lot of the countries in the region were relatively friendly towards the presence of US troops in there backyard . None of the difficulties of co coordinating the efforts of so many of the worlds armed forces appeared as they have now in Afghanistan . Returning to this part of the world for moment things changed in 2000 with the deployment of Peace Keepers to East Timor .

Further more the Gulf War combined with the refusal of some to admit that the US lost the Vietnam War may have prevented US military leaders from picking up the counter insurgency manual so well written by British and Anzac forces in places like Malaysia. But since British military leaders and or there civilian counterparts forgot those lessons its probably a mute point anyway .

Fast forward to the present Obama has inherited a very unfriendly strategic situation despite the improved security situation in Iraq . US troops that are desperately needed in Afghanistan are being tied to down fighting the war in Iraq . As the Germans discovered in WW2 if you stretch your forces to thin you cant achieve or hang on to military gains anywhere . So aside from Obama being the new guy on the block it is only natural that US military personal would be uncertain as to how Obama intends to unravel the strategic train wreck that his predecessors created .

* Australian units in Vietnam were made up of something like a 50/50 mix of National Servicemen and Volunteers. New Zealand had compulsory military training but the men who served overseas were Volunteers .

[edit on 6-1-2009 by xpert11]

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Ahhhh, the sheep come bleating in. The graphic break down does indeed tell the story. The "Messiah" (or Barack Hussein Obama, take your pick) hasn't fooled our military, 25% are pessimistic, and 35% are unsure... What do they know that the lemmings in the civilian population don't?

Ahhh, you have the majority of American voters there Super Moderator Mirthful Me. Those lemming sheep (is that even genetically possible?) just don't get it like us guys that repost publications that admit they don't do scientific polling on a website like AboveTopSecret that demands Civility & Decorum.

Ah, ha, ha, ha. Wow, I bet those libs feel feel so stupid now. Now, let's go get a beer, pick up broads, and write in Bush for 2012.


[edit on 2-2-2009 by IGOSH]