re: West Point Iced the Prez

quote:

---

I don't understand the problem here.

We don't like the President, nor should anyone expect us to. The majority of us don't respect the man.

However, at the same time, we DO respect the office. We go where we're told and do what we told; for the most part without question.

It's the same thing as the age-old "respect the rank, not the person", and we do it to perfection.

We don't like him, we don't respect him. So we don't stand, applause enthusiastically, or go outside of the normal customs and courtesies we are required to keep. We do respect the office. We do what we have to in order to do so, and we'll continue to do that to the best of our ability. No matter who is President.

---

Well said...

Our military and veterans are facing the reality that our government has failed them in providing an adequate healthcare system. It's an absolute disgrace and I don't see the President firing people and working to fix the problem. I'm not saying it's the Presidents fault but does he not represent the military? I mean, where is the passion and compassion?

Nobody wants to hear about his ridiculous foreign policy as Putin embarrasses him at every turn. He needs to focus on the problems internally that he said he would fix on the campaign trail in 2008. He knew about the back logs and problems but it's not even a priority.

quote:

---

The president of the US should not be "getting messages" from green kids at West Point. He is their boss.

---

While him being the boss is true, there's a reason why he has advisers. It's the same reason why each commander (Platoon/Section, Company, Battalion, Regiment, Division, MEF, HQMC.... For the USMC example) has a senior-enlisted adviser.

Troop welfare. Whether the message the commander (In this case, the Commander-In-Chief) receives comes from an adviser or from an act that isn't disrespectful, it's going to be heard... and he will "get the message".

Troop welfare doesn't just apply to non-NCOs, SNCOs, and officers. It goes all the way up the ranks.

And don't try to say these officers disrespected the President. They didn't. They just didn't respect him as previous classes/generations of military have. These are two completely different things. As I said earlier, respecting the rank (in this case office) rather than the person.

quote:

---

The president of the US should not be "getting messages" from green kids at West Point. He is their boss.

---

But other Presidents are fine to receive messages from green kids. Example being Nixon and Johnson during Vietnam.

quote:

---

t can happen here and right or left we do have to be concerned about that happening. The lack of respect shown President Obama is troubling by our future officers. The rightward title of our officer corps is a worse threat to our freedom than left-wing academics.

---

This is even more stupid than most of the horseshite you usually post.

We need to bring inactive military medical service corps members back to active duty with bonus pay to help with these backlogs. Let's at least get these Vets seen and treated then we can go after the structural problems.

My question is the backlog created because of inefficiencies, effort, lack of coordination or is the VA operating at its highest level and still coming up short?

I've seen the influx of backlogs blamed on looser disability laws by the Obama administration, more veterans out of work and now rely on the VA, and all the Iraq/ Afghan injuries/ mental illness?

Why do you fricking care? You remind me of a screeching school girl.

quote:

---

It can happen here and right or left we do have to be concerned about that happening. The lack of respect shown President Obama is troubling by our future officers. The rightward title of our officer corps is a worse threat to our freedom than left-wing academics.

---

As was already pointed out. The lack of liberals among military officers is NOT a function of what the conservatives are doing. It's a function of what liberals are apparently NOT doing. Perhaps you should talk to your brethren if you find this an issue.

As for them being a threat. Well, ya see. Fortunately, most of these guys are real attached to the idea that if a thing is set up to run a certain way and you don't like it, there are processes that should be followed. I realize that for many liberals, this is a completely foreign idea and that you believe that if you think a thing ought to be done then you should do it at all costs. But, let's just be glad that there isn't a serious LEFT wing tilt to our senior officers. THEN, you'd probably have a point.

Finally, you are wrong. Academics post a MUCH greater risk to our freedom because they are teaching people that freedom isn't even important. They value egalitarianism WAY over freedom and are teaching their subjects the same.

quote:

---

Civilian control over the military is a core constitutional value in this country and the military should and must treat all Presidents with the same reception to show that they do swear by their oath.

---

This is just retarded. If I really like one of my leaders such that whenever I see him, I generally have a very positive upbeat attitude, I somehow have to force my HUMAN self to have the same positive upbeat attitude when some idiot is in charge?

Um. No. I have to maintain the proper courtesies. THAT is all.

quote:

---

Civilian control over the military is a core constitutional value in this country and the military should and must treat all Presidents with the same reception to show that they do swear by their oath.

---

Honestly, this sounds like some kind of N. Korea thinking. "Make sure you throw a party when your dear leader shows up so that he thinks you love him".