FerrelGeek
Diamond Member
- Jan 22, 2009
- 4,669
- 266
- 126
Exactly this. Obama believes his own press, which makes this a potentially disastrous situation. More that once, he's referred to the military as 'his military'. He's also so bloody arrogant that he thinks he knows more about the art of war than those who've studied it their whole adult lives. Cap that off with a lout like Kerry having a big hand in this and this should give anyone that's not a sold out Obama fellatier cause for concern. I'm not surprised at all that people would try to twist the words of a disgruntled general into alluding to a coup. This mania of 'thou shalt not criticize Obama is really getting old.
And again, for the record, I criticized Bush when he was in office on a political board that I belonged to at the time, so this is not out of partisanship, as I have no use for the Rs either.
And again, for the record, I criticized Bush when he was in office on a political board that I belonged to at the time, so this is not out of partisanship, as I have no use for the Rs either.
You say that as if there couldn't possibly be any legitimate criticism in how Obama has handled this Syria thing.
Assuming Scales is accurate in his descriptions, what I mostly see is frustration in the military with how Obama is handling Syria. That makes sense if reports are correct that the WH has looked at more than 50 attack plans regarding Syria. More than 50 plans? Yeah, I'm guessing the Pentagon is pretty damn frustrated.
And I think that being tasked with drawing up an attack plan when no clear objective is known would drive people up a wall. The normal course is to identify the objective first then let the military experts draw up a plan getting you there. This is a "we don't know where we're going with this, but we want you to draw up a plan getting us there". WTH?
Fern
