Question for Liberals

[ShockTalk]

Oh yeah its all clear to me now.

Well, the minimum number of flag officers (Generals/Admirals) would be 240. I don't know the level of all the 9 that were replaced in one year, but there would seem to be a fair minimum number of other flag officers to take their place/promote.

[pogo]

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/59...-many-generals

That was an interesting article. Kind of a humorous image of a full colonel being called a chart bunny. Same thing happens in the business world as far as fighting to protect ones turf. The problem with the military is it usually costs the taxpayer. There is a reason that so many 'retired' military types live in and around the DC area, and its not because of the wonderful weather or low cost of living.

[pogo]

Well if it is baiting it worked! I sucked you in like a tractor beam on the death star, Crusty.

Anyhow, I get that the good ol' boy network may be in full swing at the highest echelon, and that means POTUS needs to mix it up. It still gives me pause that 9 generals have been fired in a single year, and a large number of the colonels that would normally back fill those positions have been dumped too. It's unprecedented. Not having precedence doesn't mean it's bad -- maybe this was very, very long overdue. But I believe it should give anyone pause to really consider the motives and ramifications of such a drastic overhaul.

Mainly I just wanted to understand the liberal mindset on the topic and whether there was any consideration (positive or negative) about it or if it's just much ado about nothing in their minds.

Ahhhh, the old bait and switch. I get it now.

[RoyalShock]

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/59...-many-generals

That definitely outlines the need to dump a lot of brass. Now the question is, are the right ones getting dumped for the right reasons?

I don't have time to track down the references, but in the past few years I've heard of a litmus test for Pentagon officials under the current administration. Basically, if they weren't willing to issue orders to kill US citizens at the sole directive of the president, they were either fired or faced other undisclosed disciplines.

[Kung Wu]

Well, the minimum number of flag officers (Generals/Admirals) would be 240. I don't know the level of all the 9 that were replaced in one year, but there would seem to be a fair minimum number of other flag officers to take their place/promote.

That link you sent me hurts my brain. :)

There have been 13 general/flag officers fired by Obama in total. 4 from his first term, 9 just this year. So we are talking like only 5% of the total pool, using your number. But there is no precedence for firing 9 generals in a single term, let alone a single year. The dismissals are clearly accelerating -- will that acceleration stop?

[ShockTalk]

That link you sent me hurts my brain. :)

There have been 13 general/flag officers fired by Obama in total. 4 from his first term, 9 just this year. So we are talking like only 5% of the total pool, using your number. But there is no precedence for firing 9 generals in a single term, let alone a single year. The dismissals are clearly accelerating -- will that acceleration stop?

Hey guys, I didn't mean for you to read the whole thing. :hopelessness: I just saw at the beginning what gave me a ballpark figure. I didn't even know how much more there was to it. :biggrin-new: I do agree with Royal, are the right ones getting dumped for the right reasons?