Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Gen Milley: Traitor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
    Which still doesn't give him the authority to do this, if the report is accurate.
    He didn't have the authority to talk to his Chinese counterpart?

    I got the impression that that wasn't so unusual.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Stoic View Post
      He didn't have the authority to talk to his Chinese counterpart?

      I got the impression that that wasn't so unusual.
      wow

      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Stoic View Post

        He didn't have the authority to talk to his Chinese counterpart?

        I got the impression that that wasn't so unusual.
        Seriously? The only time adversary military counterparts should be communicating is at the direction of the president, to sign a surrender, or to subvert authority. Only one applies here.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Stoic View Post

          He didn't have the authority to talk to his Chinese counterpart?

          I got the impression that that wasn't so unusual.
          What? To tell a potential enemy that we are about to attack?
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by seer View Post

            What? To tell a potential enemy that we are about to attack?
            Yeah, doesn't that fall under going behind the President's back and "giving aid and comfort to the enemy?" or in other words, Treason?


            Article III, Section 3, Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Stoic View Post

              He didn't have the authority to talk to his Chinese counterpart?

              I got the impression that that wasn't so unusual.
              Talking is one thing. Promising to give a heads up in advance of any military actions we might take is a whole nudder thing.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                Seriously? The only time adversary military counterparts should be communicating is at the direction of the president, to sign a surrender, or to subvert authority. Only one applies here.
                Is that written down somewhere? Or is it just understood?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by seer View Post

                  What? To tell a potential enemy that we are about to attack?
                  As I understand it, he didn't tell a potential enemy that we are about to attack.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                    As I understand it, he didn't tell a potential enemy that we are about to attack.
                    No, he only promised to do so if we ever were to attack.


                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                      No, he only promised to do so if we ever were to attack.
                      And put into context with his other alleged actions with NATO, Pelosi and Schumer, IIRC, the FBI and CIA, not to mention trying to insert himself into the chain-of-command involving nuclear weapons (telling nuclear control officers that they were to check with him first, no matter what orders they received from the president), there is absolutely no reason to doubt that he would have done exactly that.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                        No, he only promised to do so if we ever were to attack.
                        It's kinda like a baseball coach telling the other team's coach which pitches to expect.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                          It's kinda like a baseball coach telling the other team's coach which pitches to expect.
                          Or the State Department giving the Taliban a list of name of American Citizens and friendly Afghans.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                            Or the State Department giving the Taliban a list of name of American Citizens and friendly Afghans.
                            Well, yeah, but in my baseball analogy, nobody dies a horrible death.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                              Is that written down somewhere? Or is it just understood?
                              It is written down in the book of common sense. The last people that should be communicating with each other between adversaries are active generals. That is where all the biggest secrets are kept; knowledge of latest weapons, troop deployment, the names of spies, contingency plans of engagement, codes, just everything you don't want your enemies to know. The only time I can think of where active US generals met with adversaries was at the end of a war, like Eisenhower in Europe meeting with Russian counterparts (although they were "allies" at the time) or MacArthur in Tokyo.

                              Maybe I'm the one confused, but the idea of adversarial generals communicating outside of executive orders seems other-worldly to me.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I can imagine a US president and Xi meeting and they might bring along their generals to make sure they don't misspeak about something, like how many naval vessels are in a specific sea (something like that).

                                What I can't imagine is generals from both sides getting together on their own for ... anything.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by tabibito, Yesterday, 04:28 PM
                                3 responses
                                71 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Sparko, Yesterday, 08:10 AM
                                4 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post NorrinRadd  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 09-19-2021, 07:03 PM
                                5 responses
                                56 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Gondwanaland, 09-19-2021, 12:34 PM
                                19 responses
                                157 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by Gondwanaland, 09-19-2021, 10:21 AM
                                6 responses
                                99 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X