Amateur Hour, Part Deux

#351
#351
NorthDallas40 said:
Understood. And I get where you’re coming from but I’d submit the most qualified pool of applicants is the senior military leadership. The key is culling the chaff that won’t needlessly waste our young peoples blood. I think there are some. I think Mattis was one to a degree.

I think we’re kinda broken right now. Our senior military leadership has only known two decades of war. We need somebody the remembers what peace feels like.
Click to expand...

We need someone smart, that will listen and can distinguish between ******** and good advice. We also need someone that understands that our military is her for a simple purpose, kill people and break things. All weapon systems and personnel decisions should start with that thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#352
#352
hog88 said:
We need someone smart, that will listen and can distinguish between ******** and good advice. We also need someone that understands that our military is her for a simple purpose, kill people and break things. All weapon systems and personnel decisions should start with that thought.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with all of those attributes
 
#353
#353
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Rickyvol77
#361
#361
Grand Vol said:
Former Generals and Admirals are good for conducting wars. Not so good at ending them.
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier the whole time theyve gotten their stars we’ve been at war. It’s almost like we’ve lost the “ok do we really want to start this” thought process. I still think back to Trump calling off the Iran strike when they downed our MQ-4. It was the right call. They shot down an unmanned aircraft and no CSAR helos had to launch. Killing 200 civilians, even Persian civilians, would be a needless escalation.

And it pissed off all the warhawks, with Bolton being the primary butthurt individual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Orangeburst
#362
#362
hog88 said:
Agreed. They're also not good at purchasing or weapon development.
Click to expand...
Oh their fine on weapon development they or their underlings are great at describing what the new toy needs to do. They just suck at program execution and cost control.

Trust me you run a weapon PRODUCTION program very different from how you run a weapon DEVELOPMENT program. Or you do if you want the best outcomes for both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#363
#363
@Velo Vol you actually triggered this pretty damn decent discussion but you are not participating. You entered saying you thought Trump and Biden were both wrong. If you’ve read the last couple of pages do you have any thoughts to add.
 
#365
#365
VolStrom said:
I'm sick of war mongers. We've been waging war for nearly 20 years in a place we have no business being in. If Joe Biden gets us in another war I'll be the first to get arrested protesting his ass.
Click to expand...
You need a SECDEF who knows how to wage war but tries like hell to keep the peace. SECDEF and SOS really need to be BFF’s 😎
 
#367
#367
VolStrom said:
I'm sick of war mongers. We've been waging war for nearly 20 years in a place we have no business being in. If Joe Biden gets us in another war I'll be the first to get arrested protesting his ass.
Click to expand...
Biden picked Austin over Michèle Flournoy because Flournoy still to this day thought the intervention into Libya (which she pushed for and Biden strongly opposed) was a good idea.
 
#368
#368
NorthDallas40 said:
@Velo Vol you actually triggered this pretty damn decent discussion but you are not participating. You entered saying you thought Trump and Biden were both wrong. If you’ve read the last couple of pages do you have any thoughts to add.
Click to expand...
I'm really not up on the Pentagon culture, but the general principle of civilian leadership seems sound.

But as far as the warmongering part goes, (1) a civilian could be just as into the military/industrial complex as a general, and (2) I don't know that a general would be more prone to start a new war, but he might be more likely to prolong bad ones.
 
#369
#369
carlos86 said:
Biden picked Austin over Michèle Flournoy because Flournoy still to this day thought the intervention into Libya (which she pushed for and Biden strongly opposed) was a good idea.
Click to expand...
The fact that he's black didn't hurt him. Just sayin'
 
#370
#370
Velo Vol said:
The fact that he's black didn't hurt him. Just sayin'
Click to expand...
Yea I always thought it was down to Jeh Johnson and General Austin. Michèle Flournoy’s policy track record isn’t that good. She was part of that tit for tat Biden and former SECDEF Gates had going on and Biden came out on the better end of the Libya and Syria issue.
 
#371
#371
Velo Vol said:
I'm really not up on the Pentagon culture, but the general principle of civilian leadership seems sound.

But as far as the warmongering part goes, (1) a civilian could be just as into the military/industrial complex as a general, and (2) I don't know that a general would be more prone to start a new war, but he might be more likely to prolong bad ones.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Senior military leadership and the Military Industrial Complex are inbred. Retired generals almost always wind up working for contractors. Hell Colonels too. They are near inseparable I’d submit.

With regards to whether they are more prone or less prone to start a war I think it depends on the individual frankly. And in my opinion like I’ve stated earlier weve almost lost generational knowledge of how to disengage.

Look at what MacArthur did in Japan. We were more successful there than even Germany I think. But I seriously doubt we replicate that magic again in my lifetime anyway. We simply don’t seem to know how to stop fighting. And like hogg has said frankly many don’t want to stop. I can’t argue the point but we can’t afford it from the money or people cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#372
#372
carlos86 said:
Biden picked Austin over Michèle Flournoy because Flournoy still to this day thought the intervention into Libya (which she pushed for and Biden strongly opposed) was a good idea.
Click to expand...
Austin made some silly comments about ISIS not being a serious threat but that honestly doesn’t seem to be a disqualifier. It doesn’t look as fatal as Flournoy’s. It could have been predicated on a course of action he thought we were going to take I don’t know I haven’t read up on the details of his specific comments. I do know several military leaders wanted us to hit them harder and more decisively at the start before they snagged so much territory.
 
#374
#374
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#375
#375
hog88 said:
Love the idea of having a guy on the BODs of Raytheon advising the POTUS about going to war or not.
Click to expand...
I honestly don’t see how you avoid somebody inbred with the MIC not being in that role. You’re just jaded (probably for good reason)

And I’m sure he will divest all interests or they will be placed in trust that meets the ethics requirements
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top