Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (25851)	1/23/2004 10:44:25 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793896

That is why when generals run for office i cringe. They are trained to believe these things and we are better as citizens for this as long as the commander in chief is a civilian. But you know what he meant by silver lining. Its like saying it was a wake up call. And as far as oomph, a military that just trains but doesnt fight in combat doesnt really know its capabilities. That is not a reason for war, it is just a fact. When generals speak most will not be PC. mike

To: E who wrote (25851)	1/23/2004 7:28:05 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793896

I was thinking of staying out of this dogfight, BWTH, that would ruin my reputation for caution. :-) I think you are interpreting the General's remarks out of context. What he said before that was Many senior military figures have expressed concern about "overstretch", a problem which has become particularly acute in post-war situations like Iraq which require more troops than combat. But General Schoomaker says the answer could be to expand combat strength by freeing troops from other assignments. 'Silver lining' General Schoomaker said the attacks on America in September 2001 and subsequent events had given the US army a rare opportunity to change. IOW, what he is saying is that the war is going to force necessary change on the army. Not that combat and killing are things to be desired. Now he also said General Peter Schoomaker said in an interview with AP news agency that the wars had allowed the army to instil its soldiers with a "warrior ethos". But the general, who became chief of staff in August, denied warmongering saying the army must be ready to fight. But those are simple facts. What is the use of an army that cannot fight and win? Eat up taxpayer dollars? Keep unemployment down? As the old saying has it, "NOTHING is more expensive than a second-place military."