On one occasion I met the Admiral, but that's it. I have had reservations about voting for "carpetbaggers" for some time and truly believe Iowa can find better people to run for Senate right here in the state. That also says you can find poor ones as well, if that is what you are looking for and Grassley has had his moments of stupidity way too often. Back to the subject at hand, I'm no spring chicken, and 54 years ago I spent two years as a SP/5 in Vietnam. I and many others continue to suffer from the machinations of grandeur that came from general staff officers. Currently I have a 50% disability from Agent Orange that will eventually kill me. I was fortunate to go to Vietnam late, and consequently I am still alive. Many died waiting for the VA to finally declare what was killing us was service connected. No matter how you want to slice it, people like Admirals seldom die and certainly they don't lead the charge, not unlike members of Congress that they find ways to keep their children and themselves from even getting shot at. Nonetheless, the decisions they make do kill people and destroy lives, both ours and others, combatant and civilian. They roll up housing and hospitals, water supplies and sewage treatment facilities, and turn cities into wasteland and farmland into killing fields for years after the war is over. These people, like the Admiral, claim this as their job to make this happen, they really don't get their hands dirty in the blood and guts of these situations and lose their humanity in the trappings of rank and privilege. War is a chess game to them, and being involved in negotiations to bring an end to war simply is not their forte! It is simple, you play the game to win, that's it. What he thinks has little to do with bringing a conclusion to conflict, he is trained to "out conflict" his opponents! That is how he sees his role! So what he thinks doesn't give me any insight in how we can end conflict by using combatants to bring peace! I thought we tried that with the Indians and every time didn't end until most of the Indians were dead and we had the land, the minerals, the forrests and the farmland. That is what I see from the Admiral and not anything that gives any incite to how this is going to end or if anything is improving. All I hear is negatives that will eventually lead us to war. That simply means more death, more wounded, more destruction for those who always suffer the most, the poor and disenfranchised. Not Franken. Steve Hanken (Yes I'm biased, but my humanity is fully intact!)
I am only one person, so what I think really doesn't matter much, but once you get Franken talking that is the end of the conversation. I listened for awhile, but I am of the opinion, the military is largely responsible for most of the things that cause problems and not solutions. Getting the point of view from a person who was an admiral is hardly a balanced view of what is going on in the world. Just my humble opinion.
On one occasion I met the Admiral, but that's it. I have had reservations about voting for "carpetbaggers" for some time and truly believe Iowa can find better people to run for Senate right here in the state. That also says you can find poor ones as well, if that is what you are looking for and Grassley has had his moments of stupidity way too often. Back to the subject at hand, I'm no spring chicken, and 54 years ago I spent two years as a SP/5 in Vietnam. I and many others continue to suffer from the machinations of grandeur that came from general staff officers. Currently I have a 50% disability from Agent Orange that will eventually kill me. I was fortunate to go to Vietnam late, and consequently I am still alive. Many died waiting for the VA to finally declare what was killing us was service connected. No matter how you want to slice it, people like Admirals seldom die and certainly they don't lead the charge, not unlike members of Congress that they find ways to keep their children and themselves from even getting shot at. Nonetheless, the decisions they make do kill people and destroy lives, both ours and others, combatant and civilian. They roll up housing and hospitals, water supplies and sewage treatment facilities, and turn cities into wasteland and farmland into killing fields for years after the war is over. These people, like the Admiral, claim this as their job to make this happen, they really don't get their hands dirty in the blood and guts of these situations and lose their humanity in the trappings of rank and privilege. War is a chess game to them, and being involved in negotiations to bring an end to war simply is not their forte! It is simple, you play the game to win, that's it. What he thinks has little to do with bringing a conclusion to conflict, he is trained to "out conflict" his opponents! That is how he sees his role! So what he thinks doesn't give me any insight in how we can end conflict by using combatants to bring peace! I thought we tried that with the Indians and every time didn't end until most of the Indians were dead and we had the land, the minerals, the forrests and the farmland. That is what I see from the Admiral and not anything that gives any incite to how this is going to end or if anything is improving. All I hear is negatives that will eventually lead us to war. That simply means more death, more wounded, more destruction for those who always suffer the most, the poor and disenfranchised. Not Franken. Steve Hanken (Yes I'm biased, but my humanity is fully intact!)
I am only one person, so what I think really doesn't matter much, but once you get Franken talking that is the end of the conversation. I listened for awhile, but I am of the opinion, the military is largely responsible for most of the things that cause problems and not solutions. Getting the point of view from a person who was an admiral is hardly a balanced view of what is going on in the world. Just my humble opinion.
Have you met Franken? I’ve found when I make blanket assumptions based on limited information, I’m usually way off.