Navy SEALS slam Obama.

#26
#26
volfanbill said:
You're missing the point. The potus makes his decision based on what his expert(s) tell him. McRaven knew he had UBL dead to rights and told the Pres to let his men go get him. the potus is my commander in chief, but he's basically authorizing whatever the 4 stars tell him. Also, if you are really going to call this invading Pakistan, we've invaded every country in central and south America, and at least most in Africa.
Click to expand...

Not missing the point. I realize the POTUS relies on the advice of his senior military, but military action also has political consequences. The Admiral does not have to weigh those considerations, but the President does. If the mission had failed, the Admiral may have been pressured behind the scenes to step down, but the President would have been crucified publicly. Other world leaders, the Republicans, and the media would have shredded him. People can say he would have tried to deflect the blame, but fortunately, we'll never know. In any case, no amount of deflection would have taken this off him. Public perception would be he failed.

At the time of the mission, the U.S. and Pakistan were considered allies in this fight. As such, their is a reasonable expectation of sharing actionable intel, especially for an operation on Pakistani soil. I'm glad we didn't share the intel because I don't trust the Pakistani leadership, but it doesn't change the fact we were publicly allies. When we entered their country without permission, that is technically an invasion. Because the mission succeeded, very little noise was made except for by the Pakistani themselves. If the mission had failed, other powers would have taken the chance to exploit that.

How would you feel if Canadian or Mexican forces carried out an operation on U.S. soil without giving us forewarning? I would be outraged. I can understand how Pakistan feels. Do I care? Not really because a despicable piece of filth was dealt with and that makes me happy, but I can still see their point.

I'm not an Obama fan, but I was a fan of this decision. My point was that win or lose, the reponsibility ultimately fell on the President. If we had failed, he would have been blamed. Since we succeeded, he deserves to take credit for making the call. You can say the Admiral made the call, but the truth is, he did so with the President's permission. At any point, Obama could have told him to stand down, yet he did not. I have the greatest respect for our military leadership, but they are still human and have been wrong before. There was always the possibility this mission failed no matter what the Admiral knew.

The true heroes in all of this are the SEALs who carried out the mission. Because of the nature of their work, they will never get the true public recognition they deserve. I know they don't do it for the recognition, but they deserve it.
 
#27
#27
Weezer said:
Not missing the point. I realize the POTUS relies on the advice of his senior military, but military action also has political consequences. The Admiral does not have to weigh those considerations, but the President does. If the mission had failed, the Admiral may have been pressured behind the scenes to step down, but the President would have been crucified publicly. Other world leaders, the Republicans, and the media would have shredded him. People can say he would have tried to deflect the blame, but fortunately, we'll never know. In any case, no amount of deflection would have taken this off him. Public perception would be he failed.

At the time of the mission, the U.S. and Pakistan were considered allies in this fight. As such, their is a reasonable expectation of sharing actionable intel, especially for an operation on Pakistani soil. I'm glad we didn't share the intel because I don't trust the Pakistani leadership, but it doesn't change the fact we were publicly allies. When we entered their country without permission, that is technically an invasion. Because the mission succeeded, very little noise was made except for by the Pakistani themselves. If the mission had failed, other powers would have taken the chance to exploit that.

How would you feel if Canadian or Mexican forces carried out an operation on U.S. soil without giving us forewarning? I would be outraged. I can understand how Pakistan feels. Do I care? Not really because a despicable piece of filth was dealt with and that makes me happy, but I can still see their point.

I'm not an Obama fan, but I was a fan of this decision. My point was that win or lose, the reponsibility ultimately fell on the President. If we had failed, he would have been blamed. Since we succeeded, he deserves to take credit for making the call. You can say the Admiral made the call, but the truth is, he did so with the President's permission. At any point, Obama could have told him to stand down, yet he did not. I have the greatest respect for our military leadership, but they are still human and have been wrong before. There was always the possibility this mission failed no matter what the Admiral knew.

The true heroes in all of this are the SEALs who carried out the mission. Because of the nature of their work, they will never get the true public recognition they deserve. I know they don't do it for the recognition, but they deserve it.
Click to expand...

anyone with any real knowledge knows that at no point were we actually allies with the Pakistanis and I realize that the responsibility falls on the President, but the only reason he would have ever said no was if McRaven told him this could be wrong or that could be wrong. McRaven knew he had UBL dead to rights and he knew his Seals were capable of going to get him. That's why Obama said yes.0
 
#28
#28
This whole story reminds me of how a qb gets all the credit or blame whether it's deserved or not.

Only difference is qb's typically don't make commercials about their greatness.
 
#29
#29
If this is true, it kinda shatters the whole "gutsy call" story.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey told Sean Hannity tonight that the Obama Administration drafted a memo to protect the president from blame if the mission to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden would have failed. That way Obama could blame the general instead of taking the blame himself. Mukasey wrote about it this week in The Wall Street Journal.
Click to expand...

Former AG Michael Mukasey: Obama Officials Drafted Memo to Blame Military If OBL Mission Failed (Video) | The Gateway Pundit
 
#30
#30
dreVol said:
If this is true, it kinda shatters the whole "gutsy call" story.



Former AG Michael Mukasey: Obama Officials Drafted Memo to Blame Military If OBL Mission Failed (Video) | The Gateway Pundit
Click to expand...

Consider the events surrounding the operation. A recently disclosed memorandum from then-CIA Director Leon Panetta shows that the president's celebrated derring-do in authorizing the operation included a responsibility-escape clause: "The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven's hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out."

Which is to say, if the mission went wrong, the fault would be Adm. McRaven's, not the president's.

Michael Mukasey: Obama and the bin Laden Bragging Rights - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

I fail to see the problem. Obama approves of the overall mission; he then allows the military to make the operational and tactical decisions; and, he says that any additional risks of those tactical decisions that have not been presented nor signed off on by the POTUS, must be brought to his attention. Every operation the military plans is accompanied by a risk assessment matrix that a higher level commander must sign off on; if the risks increase pre-operation, but post commander sign-off, then the modified risk assessment is resubmitted to the higher level commander.
 
#32
#32
therealUT said:
I fail to see the problem. Obama approves of the overall mission; he then allows the military to make the operational and tactical decisions; and, he says that any additional risks of those tactical decisions that have not been presented nor signed off on by the POTUS, must be brought to his attention. Every operation the military plans is accompanied by a risk assessment matrix that a higher level commander must sign off on; if the risks increase pre-operation, but post commander sign-off, then the modified risk assessment is resubmitted to the higher level commander.
Click to expand...

Dwight Eisenhower is famous for having penned a statement to be issued in anticipation of the failure of the Normandy invasion that reads in relevant part: “My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”

A week later, when the success of the invasion was apparent, Eisenhower saluted the Allied Expeditionary Forces: “One week ago this morning there was established through your coordinated efforts our first foothold in northwestern Europe. High as was my preinvasion confidence in your courage, skill and effectiveness . . . your accomplishments . . . have exceeded my brightest hopes.

Eisenhower did mention himself at the end: “I truly congratulate you upon a brilliantly successful beginning. . . . Liberty loving people everywhere would today like to join me in saying to you, ‘I am proud of you.’”
Click to expand...

I think preparing to absolve the administration of blame had the operation not succeeded is not leadership. For a POTUS who is using the success of the mission as an example of his leadership, that he prepared to place the blame of potential failure on a military commander is beyond hypocritical.

In a different context didn't BHO famously quip that the "buck stops" with him?
 
#33
#33
dreVol said:
I think preparing to absolve the administration of blame had the operation not succeeded is not leadership. For a POTUS who is using the success of the mission as an example of his leadership, that he prepared to place the blame of potential failure on a military commander is beyond hypocritical.

In a different context didn't BHO famously quip that the "buck stops" with him?
Click to expand...

I agree that preparing to absolve the administration of blame is a failure of leadership; however, solely upon the evidence that Mukasey has provided I do not come to the conclusion that the administration was preparing to absolve itself of leadership.
 
#34
#34
therealUT said:
I agree that preparing to absolve the administration of blame is a failure of leadership; however, solely upon the evidence that Mukasey has provided I do not come to the conclusion that the administration was preparing to absolve itself of leadership.
Click to expand...

Fair point. I found (and find) the football spiking distasteful, so I view Mukasey's comments as another reason to question the administration's chest beating about BHO's "gutsy call."
 
#35
#35
dreVol said:
Fair point. I found (and find) the football spiking distasteful, so I view Mukasey's comments as another reason to question the administration's chest beating about BHO's "gutsy call."
Click to expand...

What.....you don't believe Bill Clinton......he would never lie to the American public.......oh wait.......never mind
 
#36
#36
dreVol said:
Fair point. I found (and find) the football spiking distasteful, so I view Mukasey's comments as another reason to question the administration's chest beating about BHO's "gutsy call."
Click to expand...

I guess I find all the rhetoric from politicians distasteful and I find this no more or less distasteful than everything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#37
#37
volfanbill said:
anyone with any real knowledge knows that at no point were we actually allies with the Pakistanis and I realize that the responsibility falls on the President, but the only reason he would have ever said no was if McRaven told him this could be wrong or that could be wrong. McRaven knew he had UBL dead to rights and he knew his Seals were capable of going to get him. That's why Obama said yes.0
Click to expand...

I agree with this. That said, I do find BO using this as a campaign issue disturbing. Does he deserve the credit for the decision? Yes. Should he be using it to campaign on? No. The reality is men put their lives on the line to accomplish a mission. It shouldn't be used to win at politics. It cheapens what they accomplished.

On the same note though, if the mission had failed, I would find it distasteful for the Republicans to use it as a campaign point against him. And I have no doubt they would have. I don't like political games.
 
#38
#38
Weezer said:
I agree with this. That said, I do find BO using this as a campaign issue disturbing. Does he deserve the credit for the decision? Yes. Should he be using it to campaign on? No. The reality is men put their lives on the line to accomplish a mission. It shouldn't be used to win at politics. It cheapens what they accomplished.

On the same note though, if the mission had failed, I would find it distasteful for the Republicans to use it as a campaign point against him. And I have no doubt they would have. I don't like political games.
Click to expand...

any President alive, especially one seeking re-election would use this as a pat on back for himself whether they were Republican, Democrat, Moderate, Libertarian or straight up Indie. Any opposing party running against a President that failed this mission would use it against him. It's the nature of the beast. Frankly, I'm not sure why anyone is making a big deal of Obama using it as something good he's done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#39
#39
volfanbill said:
any President alive, especially one seeking re-election would use this as a pat on back for himself whether they were Republican, Democrat, Moderate, Libertarian or straight up Indie. Any opposing party running against a President that failed this mission would use it against him. It's the nature of the beast. Frankly, I'm not sure why anyone is making a big deal of Obama using it as something good he's done.
Click to expand...

I agree they would, but don't think that they should. I hate the beast we now call politics. The games they play in Washington are no longer politics. Party lines are contributing to the decline of the nation as what's best for the country is pushed aside for what's best for the party.
 
#40
#40
I'm fairly certain Reagan would have used the killing of UBL had this event happened 28 years ago to help get him re-elected. I know both Bushes would have. I'm not certain Clinton would have had us in position to pull this off
 
#41
#41
are conservatives gonna sing the same tune about economic negative news?

i have a feeling he'll get full blame,the right's obama delusions are amazing.
 
#42
#42
westsidefan said:
are conservatives gonna sing the same tune about economic negative news?

i have a feeling he'll get full blame,the right's obama delusions are amazing.
Click to expand...

The GOP gave Bush 2 credit for " keeping us safe" with no attacks on USA soil after 9-11.
I am sure they will give Obama credit for"keeping us safe"with no attacks on USA soil under his watch.
 
#43
#43
People are too quick to forget, IMO, that a key was going in to Pakistan, without their okay, and knowing of the terrible fallout if there had been a lot of civilian casualties? If the Pakis had confronted the helicopters, or the men on the ground ?

The refusal to give Obama A LOT of credit for the decision to go, despite those risks, shows an appalling lack of understanding the stakes, or pure continued disgruntlement that he is POTUS.
 
#44
#44
I am curious as to whom it is that Obama feels he is scoring political points, that will matter in November: the two bases are absolutely rock solid and the moderates, the key to any election, seem as though they are only going to give a damn about the economy this fall.
 
#45
#45
lawgator1 said:
People are too quick to forget, IMO, that a key was going in to Pakistan, without their okay, and knowing of the terrible fallout if there had been a lot of civilian casualties? If the Pakis had confronted the helicopters, or the men on the ground ?

The refusal to give Obama A LOT of credit for the decision to go, despite those risks, shows an appalling lack of understanding the stakes, or pure continued disgruntlement that he is POTUS.
Click to expand...

hollywood script material right there folks
 
#46
#46
therealUT said:
I am curious as to whom it is that Obama feels he is scoring political points, that will matter in November: the two bases are absolutely rock solid and the moderates, the key to any election, seem as though they are only going to give a damn about the economy this fall.
Click to expand...

You are very much correct. The one wild card I think is Romney just getting smoked in the debates. Obama is much more charismatic, and Romney is very defensive. And he sounds really disingenuous when doing so.
 
#47
#47
lawgator1 said:
People are too quick to forget, IMO, that a key was going in to Pakistan, without their okay, and knowing of the terrible fallout if there had been a lot of civilian casualties? If the Pakis had confronted the helicopters, or the men on the ground ?

The refusal to give Obama A LOT of credit for the decision to go, despite those risks, shows an appalling lack of understanding the stakes, or pure continued disgruntlement that he is POTUS.
Click to expand...

lol.... what exactly are the Pakis going to do about the helicopters? That's hilarious.
 
#49
#49
therealUT said:
I am curious as to whom it is that Obama feels he is scoring political points, that will matter in November: the two bases are absolutely rock solid and the moderates, the key to any election, seem as though they are only going to give a damn about the economy this fall.
Click to expand...

You are very much correct. The one wild card I think is Romney just getting smoked in the debates. Obama is much more charismatic, and Romney is very defensive. And he sounds really disingenuous when doing so.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top