HolidayBuyer's Guide

Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Media reports Lt. Gen. Sanchez admits the war is lost.

by duckman / October 15, 2007 9:09 PM PDT
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Media reports Lt. Gen. Sanchez admits the war is lost.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Media reports Lt. Gen. Sanchez admits the war is lost.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Response
by JP Bill / October 15, 2007 11:23 PM PDT
Sanchez didn't speak out about the conduct of the war when he was in a position to influence public policy and opinion.

When would that be?

While he was in the military?

When they say "didn't speak out" does that mean to the press OR to the government that is controlling his actions?

Most military officers are mouthpieces for government policy. IF they speak (to the press) at all.

They go where they're pushed and say what they're told.
Collapse -
(NT) its just shows the bias
by jimandjerry / October 15, 2007 11:29 PM PDT
In reply to: Response
Collapse -
Retired officers...
by Angeline Booher / October 15, 2007 11:53 PM PDT
In reply to: Response

...... are free to speak as long as they are not in uniform while making a speech.

However, after retirement they are always military officers, and will not bad-mouth the Commander-in-Chief under whom they served. And he did not.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator

Collapse -
Not at all surprised
by duckman / October 16, 2007 12:22 AM PDT
In reply to: Response

That you either completely miss the point or deliberately wander away from it. Good luck on your walk about.

Collapse -
RE: Good luck on your walk about
by JP Bill / October 16, 2007 12:35 AM PDT
In reply to: Not at all surprised

If you agree with a certain position you read a certain paper, watch a certain channel, listen to a certain station, visit a certain website.

Military doesn't meanmouth military, press/media don't meanmouth media, unless they are competing for readers/viewers

Why didn't he complain about the media when he wasn't expressing his point of view while serving?

Oh wait, he was silent about his point of view on the war.

Silent then, talking now.

That's what happens when you're out of uniform. (retired)

Good luck on your walk about,

Collapse -
Completely off subject
by grimgraphix / October 16, 2007 1:39 AM PDT
In reply to: Not at all surprised

JP commented about the subject of the thread. DM commented about JP.

Just an observation.

Wink

Collapse -
An observation yes,
by duckman / October 16, 2007 1:42 AM PDT
In reply to: Completely off subject

ableit a dumb one

Collapse -
(NT) Was I wrong?
by grimgraphix / October 16, 2007 1:48 AM PDT
In reply to: An observation yes,
Collapse -
(NT) Ummm...Uh Huh...Yep...most of the time.
by Jack Ammann / October 17, 2007 7:54 PM PDT
In reply to: Was I wrong?
Collapse -
Actually, JP was trying to CHANGE the subject.
by Kiddpeat / October 16, 2007 6:09 AM PDT
In reply to: Completely off subject

That seems to be a favorite tactic on SE. I've seen it quite recently when someone changed the subject of a thread from animal populations to a definition of 'natural'. It is quite understandable, in light of that, why you are supporting JP.

The SUBJECT of the thread was what the General said about the media, not what he might or might not have said before or after retirement.

Now, would you like to make a comment on the General's view of the media?

Collapse -
If that was the subject...
by grimgraphix / October 16, 2007 6:28 AM PDT

... then DM could have been a bit more clear about his objectives... that being his intended topic was about the press and their accuracy rather than using the tag line..."Media reports Lt. Gen. Sanchez admits the war is lost.".

No?

That being said... you have recently made some comments to the effect that just because I asked you to jump did not mean that you were going to. In light of your declarations about not being agreeable to others demands, just how should I consider your request... "Now, would you like to make a comment on the General's view of the media?". Does this not fall under the same motive to control the flow of the conversation that you have seemingly been so upset when I have done the same?

Again... JP commented about the subject. DM commented about JP. I observed.

Now I'm observing that you are coming in with guns blazing about other people's behaviors too. Something that you have condemned me for on multiple times. I would ask... isn't it about time that we both quit doing this? Or is it just that it's OK when you do it, but not when I do it?

Did you get to watch that movie yet?

Collapse -
I didn't have a bit of trouble understanding the subject.
by Kiddpeat / October 16, 2007 4:07 PM PDT

It's interesting to see who claimed to have trouble.

Collapse -
(NT) ;-)
by grimgraphix / October 16, 2007 9:25 PM PDT
Collapse -
I get frustrated when pundits say the military leadership...
by grimgraphix / October 16, 2007 2:08 AM PDT
In reply to: Response

... have the power to control policy, let alone opinion. The military have the ability to inform the civilian leadership. That is all.

As far as Sanchez expressing dissatisfaction with the state of news reporting today? I think his stated opinion reflects many Americans' opinions accurately... including my own. I do not see him saying that current news reporting practices are unpatriotic or threaten the overall security of the US as some pundits would have us believe. Of course, I haven't read the whole transcript or seen the speech yet, so maybe I missed that part.

Collapse -
I'm sorry you don't get it, Bill.
by Paul C / October 16, 2007 8:19 PM PDT
In reply to: Response
Most military officers are mouthpieces for government policy. IF they speak (to the press) at all.

They go where they're pushed and say what they're told.


That's a complete distortion of reality. The reality is that the Founders established the rule of civilian control of the military specifically to prevent the actions that you seem to think Lt. Gen. Sanchez and his fellow officers should have taken; namely, interfere in the policy making process and the political process that accompanies policy making. Would you rather have Gen. Sanchez and his fellow senior officers dictate policy? Down that road, my friend, lies military dictatorship.

The fact is that there are many strenuous disagreements regarding the use of the U.S. military - but they are (with the exception of the occasional leak) conducted behind closed doors in the White House and the Pentagon. However, once the decision is made by the civilian authority, then in fact there is nothing left to do for the professional military man or woman - trained (and properly so) to be apolitical - but to either salute sharply and get on with the assigned mission or to leave the military in protest.

We vote, we do express our concerns about policy - but we will ABSOLUTELY NEVER do so to the press or public while on active duty; that is anathema to the ethic of the professional soldier, sailor, airman or Marine.

I write this from the perspective of a 20 year military veteran; I know whereof I speak.
Collapse -
You said
by JP Bill / October 16, 2007 8:50 PM PDT
we will ABSOLUTELY NEVER do so to the press or public while on active duty;

I said

Most military officers are mouthpieces for government policy. IF they speak (to the press) at all.

I'm not talking about all the Bettle Baileys (anyone remember him) out there.

So if they speak to the press they will not speak against the government, when giving a briefing slant the info to express the government view. We both agree.

Sanchez said

Asked why he did not speak out about his concerns, Sanchez said general officers take an oath to carry out the orders of the president while in uniform.

?I think once you are retired, you have a responsibility to the nation, to your oath, to the country, to state your opinion,? he said.

Abu Ghraib was a sore subject Friday for Sanchez, who lambasted the media for using phrases like "dictatorial and somewhat dense," "liar" and "torturer" to describe him.

"I also refused to talk to the European Stars and Stripes for the last two years of my command in Germany, for their extreme bias and single-minded focus on Abu Ghraib," he said.


So if you express one point of view while in the military and giving a press conference, and express another point of view after you get out of the military.

The truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Collapse -
You STILL don't get it!
by Paul C / October 17, 2007 8:36 PM PDT
In reply to: You said

Let me simplify it: Active duty military personnel, especially senior officers and enlisted personnel, are perfectly free to have opinions, even those which are at odds with the stated policy of the Administration in power. We often do, and we discuss those opinions among each other in private. However, since the civilian executive exercises final control over the military in America, public airing of those differences is at best discouraged, and at worst can constitute insubordination - an offense that is totally at odds with the maintenance of good order and discipline in a military force.

Every career military person understands these facts completely, and overtly agrees to them when he or she swears the commissioning or enlistment oath, which includes the words "and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

The most famous example of this involved then-President Truman's relieving Gen. Douglas MacArthur from his command during the Korean War. Ge. MacArthur repeatedly made statements to the press while in uniform and on duty expressing his opposition to Mr.Truman's policies in prosecuting the war (among other things, he wanted the authority to use nuclear weapons of Chinese supply lines and staging areas within China). Knowing insubordination when he saw it, and knowing that after China's entry into the war a bloody restoration of the status quo ante of June 1950 was the only possible acceptible outcome, Mr. Truman acted and relieved Gen. MacArthur from his command, essentially forcing MacArthur to retire.

Once a military member is no longer on active duty, he or she is welcome to say whatever he or she wants - as a private citizen. That is exactly what Lt. Gen. Sanchez did - complete with a ringing denounciation of the press' role in taking the side of the enemy - a fact you cheerfully overlooked in your original post.

The system of civilian control of the military has worked just fine for some 231 years; there's no need to change it, IMO.

Collapse -
Response
by JP Bill / October 17, 2007 8:51 PM PDT
senior officers and enlisted personnel, are perfectly free to have opinions, even those which are at odds with the stated policy of the Administration in power.

They can have any views they want, [while serving] just don't tell the press.

Are they allowed to/going to express these views in a press conference?[while serving]

NO!!!

That's what I'm saying, that's what you're saying .

What don't I get?
Collapse -
I saw and listened to his speech
by Angeline Booher / October 15, 2007 11:47 PM PDT

...... in it's entirety on CNN.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator

Collapse -
and heres what else he had to say
by jimandjerry / October 16, 2007 12:19 AM PDT

funny how this wasn't heard


AMERICA HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO CONTINUE OUR EFFORTS IN IRAQ. A PRECIPITOUS WITHDRAWAL WILL UNQUESTIONABLY LEAD TO CHAOS THAT WOULD ENDANGER THE STABILITY OF THE GREATER MIDDLE EAST. IF THIS OCCURS IT WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY. COALITION AND AMERICAN FORCE PRESENCE WILL BE REQUIRED AT SOME LEVEL FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. GIVEN THE LACK OF A GRAND STRATEGY WE MUST MOVE RAPIDLY TO MINIMIZE THAT FORCE PRESENCE AND ALLOW THE IRAQIS MAXIMUM ABILITY TO EXERCISE THEIR SOVERIEGNTY IN ACHIEVING A SOLUTION.

AT NO TIME IN AMERICA'S HISTORY HAS THERE BEEN A GREATER NEED FOR BIPARTISAN COOPERATION. THE THREAT OF EXTREMISM IS REAL AND DEMANDS UNIFIED ACTION AT THE SAME LEVELS DEMONSTRATED BY OUR FOREFATHERS DURING WORLD WAR I AND WORLD WAR II. AMERICA HAS FAILED TO DATE.


bipartisan cooperation, means stop bad mouthing our soldiers, supporting them. not giving strength to our enemy!!!!

http://www.militaryreporters.org/sanchez_101207.html

Collapse -
Yes, and so?
by duckman / October 16, 2007 12:23 AM PDT

Was it headline news like his ?other? comments?

Collapse -
No, duckman!
by Angeline Booher / October 16, 2007 12:41 AM PDT
In reply to: Yes, and so?

In fact, I watched and listened to it 3 times in it's entirety on CNN.

Live, then on a later news segment, and then an even later one.

Again, all of it. From start to finish!

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator

Collapse -
Yes and
by duckman / October 16, 2007 12:42 AM PDT
In reply to: No, duckman!

Was it ALL headline news?

Collapse -
If you'd care to read this
by Angeline Booher / October 16, 2007 1:06 AM PDT
In reply to: Yes and
Collapse -
That's nice
by duckman / October 16, 2007 1:19 AM PDT

But was the part about Sanchez being critical of the mainstream media headline news?

Collapse -
What I do........
by Angeline Booher / October 16, 2007 2:08 AM PDT
In reply to: That's nice

..... when there is an important news conference or speech, I follow it on CNN's "Pipeline" where it is always complete, or to to C-SPAN.

That way, I know what I have heard, so don't depend on others to tell me what was said.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator

Collapse -
Again, that's swell,
by duckman / October 16, 2007 2:10 AM PDT
In reply to: What I do........

but how about the original topic?

Collapse -
Just what was the original topic?
by grimgraphix / October 16, 2007 2:22 AM PDT
In reply to: Again, that's swell,

From your tag line... "Media reports Lt. Gen. Sanchez admits the war is lost"... one would assume the subject was the subject of the Iraqi war and whether it is a winnable situation or not.

But your link gives us this... "Retired general issues sharply worded rebuke of 'unscrupulous reporting'".

Did you make an ethical effort here to be completely accurate about the subject you wanted to discuss?

Collapse -
In the original subject line by you....
by Angeline Booher / October 16, 2007 2:42 AM PDT
In reply to: Again, that's swell,

.... was not at all what the General said.

After giving a blistering assessment of media coverage (and he did not say there were any media outlets that were not guilty), he opined that bipartisan cooperation for a strategy would be necessary for victory.

No where did he say it was lost. Period.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator

Collapse -
Any words here you don't understand??
by duckman / October 16, 2007 2:50 AM PDT

Media reports Lt. Gen. Sanchez admits the war is lost.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE 2017

Cameras that make great holiday gifts

Let them start the new year with a step up in photo and video quality from a phone.