It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Retired General says Obama paralyzed with fear...

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Taiyed
 


Yeah and lots of people are going to star the idiotic point of this post because Taiyed on the internet said so. You have not got a clue about the military or the tried and true reasons for military protocol. Sadly neither does our current CIC and his cabal...


Hey, Taiyed on the internet holds a lot of sway.

But let me get this straight, no one understands military protocol except you, right?


Excuse me if I think knowing what you are going into is more important than being Team America (F* Yeah).




posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Taiyed
 


Clearly you don't.

That goes for both of your assertions.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by projectvxn
 



Sure does.

But I guess it makes it all good for you.
Perfectly fine to leave people high and dry.
Because its a State Dept. matter.


The General questioned the President's military leadership, when the decision to be made was diplomatic. The United States is not occupying Libya, it is wooing it. It's a shame that American lives were lost, but if their deaths helped galvanize Libyan good will, it was as noble a sacrifice as a soldier dying in combat for the good of their country.


They are not "wooing it", they are infiltrating it like a bad disease! Notice how the government was forced to talk about the heavy CIA presence in Libya because of this scandal? Panetta's comment's about lack of intel is the smoking gun that this is a false flag! We know that asset's on the ground were painting the enemy with lasers, we know there was an assortment of aircraft available, so what's the problem?



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Taiyed
 


Clearly you don't.

That goes for both of your assertions.


Then educate me.

Educate us all on your knowledge of Military strategy.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   
I think to claim that Obama is “paralysed by fear” when it comes to matters of national security is somewhat unfair. Obama took the decision to take out Bin Laden in a extremely risky operation that presidents gone by may not have taken, indeed Clinton once passed up on the chance to take out Bin Laden. Then we also have the massive escalation of the so called “drone war’s”, in addition to this there has been significant operations involving clandestine unites in side Pakistan.

Out with Pakistan Obama supported the so called “troop surge”, he acted with military might against Libya and personally authorized the use of force in the rescue of Captain Phillips in the Maersk Alabama hijacking.

One might not agree with many of the actions that Obama has taken, yet one cannot say he is indecisive or “paralysed by fear”.

Seems like this General is still suck in Vietnam era politics.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Growing up, I had lots of opportunity to see the different between the academic and the doer. When a tree is leaning and threatening a house and is in a precarious position, the academic will stand and look at it for 30 minutes and then go into his house to grab a calculator and a notebook & pen. He'll return for another 60 minutes to do some math and figure out what his chances are of getting killed if he cuts it down himself. 6 hours later, aided by his complex calculations and googling, he makes up his mind and determines that he'll call a guy and have him do it because he figures that it'd be too dangerous to do it himself. Unfortunately, since there're lots of trees that have come down, it'll be at least 4 days before the contractor can do it. For those 4 days, the academic will have anxiety. The other man, the doer, goes outside and sees the leaning tree and says "Geez, I don't like this." He stares at it for a good 30 minutes, eyeing it and figuring how he'll cut it down. Then he goes nextdoor and asks for the neighbor; they're good friends. He fastens the tree to a rope and has this tied to the truck and has his neighbor gently pull the tree to counterbalance it so when it falls it won't hit the house. He then uses his chainsaw to bring the tree down. Fortunatley, everything works out.

Academics are good people and can have useful information, but they're terrible at making choices on the fly when IT MATTERS. They much prefer strictly controlled environments. They're good in science labs, but not good in the real world where things can change without any warning and there's little time to respond. The thing about doers is they have storms and hellfire in them. This makes them respond quickly and not require strict controls to make a choice. They're naturals in the real world.

If academics could stay out of the way and let the doers do, it works out better since the real world often will change quickly and with little time to respond. But academics are needed for things that don't change too quickly and give you lots of time to respond. See, where doers are good in storms and hellfire, academics are good at classifying things and finding explicit explanations for them.
edit on 5-11-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 





Academics are good people and can have useful information, but they're terrible at making choices on the fly when it MATTERS



Most medical Doctors are academic’s in their own right and they get pretty good at making decisions in emergencies. Same goes with the military, many of these people are very intelligent and in their own way very academic, they too are very good at making decisions.

I think you have overgeneralised academics and I really don’t understand what this analogy has to do with the topic of the OP

edit on 5-11-2012 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

There're people inbetween, I just didn't name them. But they can't have their cake and eat it too. You know, nature is about give and take. Nobody can have it all in this world. People who mix it up and diversify will have some of each. The most talented and capable will do better. But not even the best doctor or emergency worker could compare to the best theoretical physicists in terms of absorbing information and analyzing. Doctors, remember, take in a lot of information, but they don't explore as much as someone who does theory. Doctors have to put into action a history of medical and surgical knowledge. Notice the word ACTION. Acting is very important to doctors.

It applies because I think Obama is more academic than doer in his approach.

This may also apply to others in positions of power.

I don't like to stereotype, but I've seen doers and academics too much to ignore it. Academics take in information and analyze more than they "do". Doers "do" more than they absorb and analyze. In the real world, it often changes too quckly for strict analyses. Doers are needed in those cases. But sometimes things don't change quickly and don't require rapid responses and this allows academics to absorb and analyze and do what they naturally are drawn to do while not being an obstacle to doers.

The job could create the doer or the academic as much as the person creates it. I don't know where it begins or ends, exactly. I just see common behavior across different people.

What I say here is just an opinion. It could very easily be torn apart by anybody. But I'll keep these sets of ideas until i can personally tear them apart and see how they don't work.
edit on 5-11-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Taiyed
 


I'll listen to the General, thank you. He knows worlds more than Taiyed on the internet. Consider the source and all you know...



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Taiyed
 


I'll listen to the General, thank you. He knows worlds more than Taiyed on the internet. Consider the source and all you know...


Sounds like a FOX "entertainment" watcher.

Believe what you want to hear.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Confirmation Bias seems to be a rampant disease around here.

I don't think there is a cure either.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Taiyed
 

Except he's a real general and earned his opinion


Real general > Oh he just has confirmation bias.

I've seen in real life how too much desire for "more information" ends up costing more money and time than it's worth. Real life isn't a university laboratory. It's LIVE and doesn't wait. This is one reason I add more weight to the comments critical of Obama (and his treating of the Benghazi affair).
edit on 5-11-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Military people are sad, pathetic followers.

If this General had applauded the administration for not endangering more American lives, all you pro-military folks would be on his side. It's all about being part of a team with you folks, regardless of right or wrong. That disgusts me to the nth degree.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taiyed
reply to post by Annee
 


Confirmation Bias seems to be a rampant disease around here.

I don't think there is a cure either.


Yeah. If I really cared I'd do research and investigate this General - - his history etc.

Like I did the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. And the book: "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" - - written by John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi.

Which BTW - - - turned out to be complete lies.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Custer anyone??

I understand what you mean, but this is not the best example.

Custer had adequate intelligence from his scouts of the size of the Sioux encampment that he foolishly decided to attack. He disregarded the reports and attacked anyway.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 





I'll listen to the General, thank you. He knows worlds more than Taiyed on the internet. Consider the source and all you know...

Really please,

I have just been talking about this on another thread,

Why can you not critically analyse your sources.

This “general” is commenting on a source we know to be strongly bias against Obama, if you have the ability to be critical of your “sources” then surly you can start to question the motivations of this Generals comments. Could it be that he is a republican, commenting against a Democratic president and using his former rank to give himself some credibility.

This General has been out of the game for almost 20 years, that is all he is a former General that does not make his opinion fact.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Could it be that he is a military general with years of experience? Could it be that his real experience makes him speak out against the Obama and Panetta doctrine? Stop politicizing this. He disagrees with the doctrine, as do many other military who are speaking out.

Stop trying to distract from the point.
edit on 5-11-2012 by MsAphrodite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Taiyed
 


I'll listen to the General, thank you. He knows worlds more than Taiyed on the internet. Consider the source and all you know...


Me too. As a soldier who could potentially be on a similar rescue mission I am well versed on the training and doctrine required to pull this off.

Dont listen to the armchair generals here that think they can second guess an experienced military officer.
edit on 5-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by Taiyed
 

Except he's a real general and earned his opinion


Real general > Oh he just has confirmation bias.

I've seen in real life how too much desire for "more information" ends up costing more money and time than it's worth. Real life isn't a university laboratory. It's LIVE and doesn't wait. This is one reason I add more weight to the comments critical of Obama (and his treating of the Benghazi affair).
edit on 5-11-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)


He is a retired General that is no longer in the loop.

But you go ahead and cling to it if you wish, it's a non-story in 1-2 weeks.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
One of the 500. So many generals, so little time.



Retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks has a simple answer about why he's backing Republican Mitt Romney for president. "We only got two choices," Franks said Saturday during a telephone interview from Green Bay, where he addressed the Big 10 VFW Conference. "We can stay with what we've got or we can make a change. . . . When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." Franks is among more than 300 retired officers who constitute Romney's "military advisory council." Franks led U.S. Central Command and oversaw the U.S. response in Afghanistan and Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."I'm a pretty serious independent," Franks said, noting that Bill Clinton gave him his promotion to generaland that he served under George W. Bush. In explaining why he is seeking a change in the White House, Franks said, "I think our troopers and military and veterans deserve to have the best equipment in the world, best manpower, best training in the world. They deserve respect and love at home and they deserve to be feared abroad. It seems to me that is what military leadership is all about. It seems to me leadership comes from the front, not the back."



Two birds with one stone, please note: This general is not a Republican AND he is speaking out about military doctrine.

link
edit on 5-11-2012 by MsAphrodite because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join