Gates' book holds high praise for Hillary

[BDBoop]

"high praise"
NO, Gates says she did her job effectively.
That is what she is supposed to do.

Well, half the board thinks she didn't - and therefore this is in fact high praise.

 

[jasonnfree]

Had he come forward with his concerns, he would have been branded a traitor, naturally. He would be another Edward Snowden. What happened to Stanley McChrystal when he said the same things about obama's incompetence?

How many people in the military, in government KNOW how bad obama is and don't say anything? They will never come forward to tell what they know or will wait until they have retired before they do.

Obie's incompetence may well be the reason there has been an inordinate exidous of senir General Staff officers. Who knows?

By the same token, do you think Gates doesn't now have a great big target on his back right now? How feverishly do you imagine Holder's minions are working, trying to dig up any amount of dirt on him that they can?

The inordinate exodus has not been voluntary. obama has been quietly decapitating senior military for a long time. He's dismissed over 400 officers. They are given a choice, resign, retire or be fired. If they make too much of an issue, they are court martialed.

So senior officers have been decapitated. Why don't you repubs run with this instead of Benghazi which really isn't going anywhere. Names and pictures would help.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"high praise"
NO, Gates says she did her job effectively.
That is what she is supposed to do.

Well, half the board thinks she didn't - and therefore this is in fact high praise.

No, it's a statement of opinion.... and I guarantee you, many here disagree with his assessment.

 

[g5000]

I listened to an interview with Gates and he criticized the hacks who have taken his quotes about Obama out of context.

The only person he is unequivocally critical of is Joe Biden. He slams Biden hard, saying Biden was wrong on every foreign policy issue of the last 40 years.

He did not mention Hillary in the interview, but if he praises her in the book, then I think we can see where Gates is going with this. I mentioned in the first topics about this book that Gates is a politician, and now it is starting to sound like he is helping shape a Hillary candidacy, and if so, that would require a take-down of Biden.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Interesting we should be talking about her job performance:

Hillary Clinton team reportedly created list of traitors after '08 bid

The Clintons are known for holding grudges against their political enemies. But according to a new book, their aides went so far as to build a formal spreadsheet rating their friends and foes.

The so-called "hit list" reportedly was entered into a Microsoft Excel document at the end of Hillary Clinton's unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid. In one draft, Democrats in Congress were even given a rating, from 1 to 7, with 7 being the worst.

The details were reported Monday in The Hill and Politico, excerpted from the forthcoming book, "HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton."

According to the report, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.; Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.; Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa.; and Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., were among those to earn a score of 7 on the list.

The list of who's naughty and who's nice -- in their eyes -- was largely based on who endorsed then-candidate Barack Obama in 2008, who endorsed Clinton and who sat out the race.

Others to earn the Clintons' scorn were Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., who delivered a significant early endorsement to Obama in the 2008 race.

Hillary Clinton team reportedly created list of traitors after '08 bid - Fox News

 

[BDBoop]

I listened to an interview with Gates and he criticized the hacks who have taken his quotes about Obama out of context.

The only person he is unequivocally critical of is Joe Biden. He slams Biden hard, saying Biden was wrong on every foreign policy issue of the last 40 years.

He did not mention Hillary in the interview, but if he praises her in the book, then I think we can see where Gates is going with this. I mentioned in the first topics about this book that Gates is a politician, and now it is starting to sound like he is helping shape a Hillary candidacy, and if so, that would require a take-down of Biden.

Good point. That was the next paragraph after my quote, but I didn't want to risk an edit because I got too 'original article' happy.

 

[Stephanie]

Damn "high praise"

I'd hate to see "low praise" of her....She (Hillary) had no experience or business to be in that position (SoS) in the first place

This was Obama placing his political crony from the Democrat party to government for falling on the sword for him to become President

most CORRUPTED administration EVER

 

[mudwhistle]

lets not forget it mosty dems who get the bullets in the head in this country huh?

Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist.

Malcom X was murdered by blacks.

Robert Kennedy, Serhan Serhan.

Gabby Gifford, left-wing nut-case.

Lincoln, Southern-Democrat.

Even MLK was shot by a Democrat.

With the exception of Oswald, most of the murderers were Conservative.

That's the way conservatives roll with political discourse. By use of bullets. Or what they call "Second Amendment Solutions".

Democrats, communists, and non-whites.

None of this can be laid on the GOP's lap like you're attempting to.

 

[mudwhistle]

"high praise"
NO, Gates says she did her job effectively.
That is what she is supposed to do.

Well, half the board thinks she didn't - and therefore this is in fact high praise.

The State Department and the DoD are two different animals. Politics plays a greater role in diplomacy than in military actions. That goes without saying. I'm sure Hillary is bright, sometimes funny, and compitent. I'm also sure she is vindictive, careless when it comes to security, and something of a heinous bitch.

 

[BDBoop]

"high praise"
NO, Gates says she did her job effectively.
That is what she is supposed to do.

Well, half the board thinks she didn't - and therefore this is in fact high praise.

The State Department and the DoD are two different animals. Politics plays a greater role in diplomacy than in military actions. That goes without saying. I'm sure Hillary is bright, sometimes funny, and compitent. I'm also sure she is vindictive, careless when it comes to security, and something of a heinous bitch.

Not believing the bit in the middle, but the other two are true from what I've been reading.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Clinton-Crack-Up-Presidents-After/dp/B007F89FFQ]The Clinton Crack-Up: The Boy President's Life After the White House: R. Tyrrell Jr.: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Wait.... I thought Gates was bad guy number 2 last week?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama's Middle East DoubleThink

 

[mudwhistle]

Well, half the board thinks she didn't - and therefore this is in fact high praise.

The State Department and the DoD are two different animals. Politics plays a greater role in diplomacy than in military actions. That goes without saying. I'm sure Hillary is bright, sometimes funny, and compitent. I'm also sure she is vindictive, careless when it comes to security, and something of a heinous bitch.

Not believing the bit in the middle, but the other two are true from what I've been reading.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Clinton-Crack-Up-Presidents-After/dp/B007F89FFQ]The Clinton Crack-Up: The Boy President's Life After the White House: R. Tyrrell Jr.: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

One thing that Hillary and Obama have in common is lack of trust if not distain for the military. They feel diplomacy solves everything and military action is never a first option. Punishing political opponents is one thing, but bringing massive military might against an aggressor is frowned upon.

Why would one want a POTUS that only punishes Americans?

 

[Sallow]

Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist.

Malcom X was murdered by blacks.

Robert Kennedy, Serhan Serhan.

Gabby Gifford, left-wing nut-case.

Lincoln, Southern-Democrat.

Even MLK was shot by a Democrat.

With the exception of Oswald, most of the murderers were Conservative.

That's the way conservatives roll with political discourse. By use of bullets. Or what they call "Second Amendment Solutions".

Democrats, communists, and non-whites.

None of this can be laid on the GOP's lap like you're attempting to.

I posted Conservatives.

They come in all shades and political party affiliations.

But they generally are the same animal.

 

[Vox]

With the exception of Oswald, most of the murderers were Conservative.

That's the way conservatives roll with political discourse. By use of bullets. Or what they call "Second Amendment Solutions".

Democrats, communists, and non-whites.

None of this can be laid on the GOP's lap like you're attempting to.

I posted Conservatives.

They come in all shades and political party affiliations.

But they generally are the same animal.

not true.

 

[Sallow]

The State Department and the DoD are two different animals. Politics plays a greater role in diplomacy than in military actions. That goes without saying. I'm sure Hillary is bright, sometimes funny, and compitent. I'm also sure she is vindictive, careless when it comes to security, and something of a heinous bitch.

Not believing the bit in the middle, but the other two are true from what I've been reading.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Clinton-Crack-Up-Presidents-After/dp/B007F89FFQ]The Clinton Crack-Up: The Boy President's Life After the White House: R. Tyrrell Jr.: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

One thing that Hillary and Obama have in common is lack of trust if not distain for the military. They feel diplomacy solves everything and military action is never a first option. Punishing political opponents is one thing, but bringing massive military might against an aggressor is frowned upon.

Why would one want a POTUS that only punishes Americans?

And that's a half truth.

Both are more pragmatic and hold that if diplomacy doesn't work, then a military option should be on the table.

Which is different from you folks..who really just want rivers of blood.

 

[Stephanie]

Not believing the bit in the middle, but the other two are true from what I've been reading.

The Clinton Crack-Up: The Boy President's Life After the White House: R. Tyrrell Jr.: Amazon.com: Books

One thing that Hillary and Obama have in common is lack of trust if not distain for the military. They feel diplomacy solves everything and military action is never a first option. Punishing political opponents is one thing, but bringing massive military might against an aggressor is frowned upon.

Why would one want a POTUS that only punishes Americans?

And that's a half truth.

Both are more pragmatic and hold that if diplomacy doesn't work, then a military option should be on the table.

Which is different from you folks..who really just want rivers of blood.

really? so it's ok Obama has rivers of blood on his hands from droning the hell out of places?
with you people it's ok as long as it's OUT OF SITE OUT MIND and then it doesn't exist and you don't have to CLAIM it

 

[Truthmatters]

how many Iraqis died during Bushs watch?


how many Americans?

 

[mudwhistle]

With the exception of Oswald, most of the murderers were Conservative.

That's the way conservatives roll with political discourse. By use of bullets. Or what they call "Second Amendment Solutions".

Democrats, communists, and non-whites.

None of this can be laid on the GOP's lap like you're attempting to.

I posted Conservatives.

They come in all shades and political party affiliations.

But they generally are the same animal.

Not if they're Democrats, and there's the rub.

You want to blame the GOP for the actions of Democrats

 

[Truthmatters]

White phosphorus use in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Use in Fallujah[edit]

In April 2004, during the First Battle of Fallujah, after the fall of Saddam Hussein's government, Darrin Mortenson of the North County Times in California reported that white phosphorus was used as an incendiary weapon. Embedded with the 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, Mortenson described a Marine mortar team using a mixture of white phosphorus and high explosives to shell a cluster of buildings where insurgents had been spotted throughout the week.[4]

In November 2004, during the Second Battle of Fallujah, Washington Post reporters embedded with Task Force 2-2, Regimental Combat Team 7, wrote on November 9, 2004 that "Some artillery guns fired white phosphorus (WP) rounds that create a screen of fire that cannot be extinguished with water." [5] Insurgents reported being attacked with a substance that melted their skin, a reaction consistent with white phosphorus burns.[5]

On November 9, 2005 the Italian state-run broadcaster Radiotelevisione Italiana S.p.A. aired a documentary titled "Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre", alleging that the United States' used white phosphorus as a weapon in Fallujah causing insurgents and civilians to be killed or injured by chemical burns. The filmmakers further claimed that the United States used incendiary MK-77 bombs in violation of Protocol III of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. According to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, quoted in the documentary, white phosphorus is permitted for use as an illumination device and as a weapon with regard to heat energy, but not permitted as an offensive weapon with regard to its toxic chemical properties.[6][7] The documentary also included footage which purported to be of white phosphorus being fired from helicopters over Fallujah. It also quoted journalist Giuliana Sgrena, who had been in Fallujah, as a testimony. [8]

On November 15, 2005, U.S. Department of Defense spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Barry Venable confirmed to the BBC that white phosphorus had been used as an incendiary antipersonnel weapon in Fallujah. Venable stated "When you have enemy forces that are in covered positions that your high explosive artillery rounds are not having an impact on and you wish to get them out of those positions, one technique is to fire a white phosphorus round into the position because the combined effects of the fire and smoke - and in some case the terror brought about by the explosion on the ground - will drive them out of the holes so that you can kill them with high explosives."[9][10]

On November 16, 2005, BBC News reported that an article published in the March–April 2005 issue of Field Artillery, a U.S. Army magazine, noted that white phosphorus had been used during the battle. According to the article written by a captain, a first lieutenant, and a sergeant, "WP [White Phosphorus] proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes where we could not get effects on them with HE [High Explosives]. We fired "shake and bake" missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."[6] BBC News noted that the article had been discovered by bloggers after the US ambassador in London, Robert Holmes Tuttle, stated that US forces do not use napalm or white phosphorus as weapons.[6]

On November 22, 2005, the Iraqi government stated it would investigate the use of white phosphorus in the battle of Fallujah.[11]

On November 30, 2005, General Peter Pace stated that white phosphorus munitions were a "legitimate tool of the military" used to illuminate targets and create smokescreens, saying "It is not a chemical weapon. It is an incendiary. And it is well within the law of war to use those weapons as they're being used, for marking and for screening".[