No. Bureaucrats.
Stop trolling please.
1 Like
Right. He is a gaffe machine. Everyone knows it.
So was the previous president.
He listens (somewhat) to his handlers.
Allan
No unforced errors is a good plan. Look at how much time the Trump press team spent defending stupid stuff he said because he couldn’t be handled. If that is all you are doing, you don’t have time to get the message out.
Yes, the CIA claims to have near-prefect intel about upcoming terrorist attacks but it was supposedly clueless about collapse of the Afghan army. Neither claim makes sense.
President Eisenhower warned about the danger of military-industrial complex in 1961. Until World War II the US had no standing army or armaments industry, and the potential for massive corruption of the political process was already apparent to Eisenhower.
See video, starting at 8:00:
Senator Church warned about the potential for tyranny from surveillance technology in 1975. This statement came after revelations of massive abuses of power by the CIA and FBI during the Vietnam War.
The issues are not new, but the technology has vastly improved and size of the security state is vastly larger than it was decades ago.
Well, Biden took questions last week and I think once things start settling down (there is a lot on his plate right now) he might do more pressers. When he comes out he has a sheet detailing the order of who gets to ask questions probably based on some queue that has been set up before the presser. So, promises were made that this order would be honored.
And since he doesn’t know everyone in the press like Psaki does, he even has a picture of the said person in the queue to ensure they get their question in.
Which is probably where the “trouble” might lie, in not honoring whatever order was established and letting others jump the line.
At least, that is how I see that.
As far as the former so and so letters go, I take those with a heavy grain of salt. You can generate a list on either side pretty easily, so it really doesn’t mean much. Former Presidents uniting bipartisan is another matter, that seems to carry a bit more weight.
Moving goal posts?
Shouldn’t citizen’s concerns be heard and addressed?
No. I don’t use the term. It’s just bureaucrats bureaucrating. Nothing new.
Is “Former Generals” just citizens or is extra legitimacy being claimed and conferred?
Perhaps. But it is who they are.
Citizens? Sure.
A special class because of “former”?
Biden being mentally competent was fake news. Most dems will fall for anything CNN says… Just put the guy in some shades and hey they buy it. They can’t learn their media lies to them. No matter how many times it happens.
Or they like to be lied too. Or feel like part of the lie machine to save society form whatever… = Brainwashed.
1 Like
I don’t think listing your occupation makes you a special class.
You’re completely missing the point. Is it intentional?
1 Like
It called “context”.
I know that on this forum, context and nuance are fluid concepts, often ignored, especially when politically expedient.
However, in the real world, they are still useful: “67 dudes don’t like a thing” is not particularly helpful.
“67 former generals don’t like…” is much more informative.
It impresses you? Much more performative perhaps. I have seen a group of retired generals exert enough power to amend a constitution.
Who do you think put Chavez in power?
Might want to think about that.
The opinion of an armor branch officer on A-stan is worth exactly what?
What is called “context”? It is “nuanced” as well?
Don’t be dramatic. In this country, we are talking about op-eds and open letters.
Ibid
Worth is relative, but a general is going to be more informed and familiar with the subject then a non-general. I mean that is simply self evident.
Invoking American exceptionalism? They count on people like you.
Ibid
Case in point.
What in the world are you talking about?! I am not invoking exceptionalism, I am staring observable fact: America is not a South East Asian or Latin American banana republic. Generals don’t appoint presidents in this country, and your implication otherwise is just silly.
What is going on here? A general has dedicated their life to a profession, and risen to the top of that profession.
I am not saying generals are infallible, but surely we can weight their opinion on military matters more than the opinions of a grocery manager.
