David Petraeus

#28
#28
bam15 said:
Don't have a problem with CEOs. Higher up military officers always gives the impression of a military-industrial complex connection, although we haven't had one with that ranking since Ike, and he was the very one that made the thought famous.
Click to expand...

The options

Military
Governors
Senators
CEOs
?

Why stereotype one of these groups? Don't each have a mindset - a favored constituency?
 
#29
#29
volinbham said:
The options

Military
Governors
Senators
CEOs
?

Why stereotype one of these groups? Don't each have a mindset - a favored constituency?
Click to expand...

Well, not attempting to stereotype, it's just a common idea. Albeit Presidential power is to a point, imperial nowadays, I've always been keen to distinguish between the military and the Oval Office in terms of decision making. The two work in concert but should not uniformly. Perhaps the thought makes me reminisce upon military dictatorships and juntas.

Your point is well taken though. They all have their own constituents.
 
#30
#30
bam15 said:
Well, not attempting to stereotype, it's just a common idea. Albeit Presidential power is to a point, imperial nowadays, I've always been keen to distinguish between the military and the Oval Office in terms of decision making. The two work in concert but should not uniformly. Perhaps the thought makes me reminisce upon military dictatorships and juntas.

Your point is well taken though. They all have their own constituents.
Click to expand...

Not ragging on you but your example was Eisenhower - that's one guy from six decades ago. Do we really have a track record of ex-military POTUS's and the industrial military complex?
 
#31
#31
volinbham said:
Not ragging on you but your example was Eisenhower - that's one guy from six decades ago. Do we really have a track record of ex-military POTUS's and the industrial military complex?
Click to expand...

No, not really.

But as I said, we haven't really had a high-ranking officer since Ike. Clark was a candidate and Petraeus may be one, although I doubt it.
 
#32
#32
bam15 said:
No, not really.

But as I said, we haven't really had a high-ranking officer since Ike. Clark was a candidate and Petraeus may be one, although I doubt it.
Click to expand...


I think Clark wouldn't have been an MIC guy.

Obviously I'm biased but I think we are seeing why somebody with executive experience is important. BO is all about words and ideas but when it comes to details, plans and action he's really weak.

Even his signature achievement ObamaCare was all detailed by Congress.
 
#33
#33
volinbham said:
I think Clark wouldn't have been an MIC guy.

Obviously I'm biased but I think we are seeing why somebody with executive experience is important. BO is all about words and ideas but when it comes to details, plans and action he's really weak.

Even his signature achievement ObamaCare was all detailed by Congress.
Click to expand...

That's a really good observation. He has been exceedingly light on some of the routine functioning of a proper White House. Not having someone speak with / return phone calls to official letters and meetings with primary constituencies, is just basic political disorganization.
 
#34
#34
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Can't be any worse then the College professor we got now
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Sure it could. Obama's not nearly as bad as some on the right say and not nearly as good as some on the left say. That being said, I agree the General would probably be about as effective as Obama
 
#35
#35
therealUT said:
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
William Henry Harrison
John Tyler
James K. Polk
Zachary Taylor
Millard Fillmore
Franklin Pierce
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Johnson
U.S. Grant
Rutherford B. Hayes
James Garfield
Chester A. Arthur
Benjamin Harrison
William McKinley
Teddy
Harry S. Truman
Ike
JFK
Lyndon B. Johnson
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
George H.W. Bush
George W. Bush

You must not really like the idea of Presidents...
Click to expand...

Most presidents suck in my opinion. I bolded the few I think are decent.
 
#38
#38
therealUT said:
Jimmy Carter?
Click to expand...

Do nothing presidents are good IMO, and Jimmy didn't do a whole lot. I disagree with him a lot in principle. Jefferson is my idol as far as political principle goes, but Jimmy was probably a better president in furthering (or not diminishing, rather) peace, prosperity, liberty, and rule of law.
 
#39
#39
JTrainDavis said:
The Grant administration was the most corrupt we've ever had.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Scandals are overrated. I'll take a scandalous do-nothing president over somebody who is hellbent on growing their power and the national government. For example: I love Warren Harding. Maybe his Ohio gang was guilty of fraud and such, but Harding did little to **** the country in the long run.
 
#40
#40
nbakerld said:
Do nothing presidents are good IMO, and Jimmy didn't do a whole lot. I disagree with him a lot in principle. Jefferson is my idol as far as political principle goes, but Jimmy was probably a better president in furthering (or not diminishing, rather) peace, prosperity, liberty, and rule of law.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine that too many individuals in America were happy with Carter's "nothing" as they watched their real wealth crumble beneath them.
 
#43
#43
therealUT said:
I can't imagine that too many individuals in America were happy with Carter's "nothing" as they watched their real wealth crumble beneath them.
Click to expand...

And why was it Carter's fault? He inherited a ****storm and dealt with it rather well I think. He appointed Volcker to chairman of the Fed who eventually got inflation under control.

Lew Rockwell: “Jimmy deregulated trucking and air travel, ended temperature fascism, abolished two federal agencies, and was opposed by the evil Teddy Kennedy for renomination for not being socialist enough."
 
#45
#45
nbakerld said:
And why was it Carter's fault? He inherited a ****storm and dealt with it rather well I think. He appointed Volcker to chairman of the Fed who eventually got inflation under control.

Lew Rockwell: “Jimmy deregulated trucking and air travel, ended temperature fascism, abolished two federal agencies, and was opposed by the evil Teddy Kennedy for renomination for not being socialist enough."
Click to expand...

then i'm failing to see why you aren't an obama supporter?
 
#47
#47
DinkinFlicka said:
I don't like the idea of a military officer being in the oval office anymore than I do a CEO being in there.
Click to expand...

Eisenhower was one of the best presidents America ever had.

(Of course Grant was one of the worst.)

I'd rather see Patraeus in the Oval office than any democrat or republican on the horizon with the possible exception of Palin, certainly an improvement on Obama, which isn't saying much for Patraeus, you could go through any telephone directory and the vast majority would be an improvement on Obama.

Funny Patraeus is now a democrat hero but under Bush he was 'general Betrayus.'

thuobamastickeranswer.jpg
 
#48
#48
droski said:
i'd say letting the shaw of iran fall was the worst middle east mistake any US president in history has made.
Click to expand...

Probably not worth our time to debate this topic. I don't support any of our military actions in the ME. I think binging the Shah to power was a horrible idea in the first place.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top