Ill Community Beta > The Social Lounge > So Sec. of Defense Gates will stay on with Obama's adminstration

So Sec. of Defense Gates will stay on with...

Page 1 of 2 • 1 2 Next

So Sec. of Defense Gates will stay on with Obama's adminstration

8 months ago :: Nov 25, 2008 - 10:24PM #1
darkcrusader Posts: 23192	what do u think of this. I just saw this on breaking news on CNN, it also said that it could be up to a yr as long as the two of them stay getting along
8 months ago :: Nov 25, 2008 - 11:12PM #2
Lo'Gosh Posts: 11357	I mean since he has experience with what's going on in the ME, but ehhh, the change man, critics and supporters will be harping on that Ya can't Floss on my level If you take the High Road, you'll reach the High Ground ergo Victory TRENTON, NJ
8 months ago :: Nov 25, 2008 - 11:33PM #3
bornnraisedCMR Posts: 11289	Him and Patreaus pretty much cleaned up the whole Iraq situation, so I dont see why not keep him around for a minute. yawn
8 months ago :: Nov 26, 2008 - 7:44PM #4
MidCity's Alias Posts: 2321	Nov 25, 2008 -- 11:33PM, bornnraisedCMR wrote: Him and Patreaus pretty much cleaned up the whole Iraq situation, so I dont see why not keep him around for a minute. oh yeah...they really cleaned up that mess. in other news, todays posts will include large storms of sarcasm.
8 months ago :: Nov 26, 2008 - 7:47PM #5
Gregory_House Posts: 878	You forgot a key part of what was mentioned. " for The next year" was added to that. So he has job security for a year at least and it make sense as it would be reasonable to have somewhat of a transition by having a person on from the previous administration on for a while to at least fill the current administration in on what history needs to be learned. I don't know why people have something against pragmatism. You people are unrealistically ideological.
8 months ago :: Nov 26, 2008 - 7:51PM #6
MidCity's Alias Posts: 2321	Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:47PM, Gregory_House wrote: You forgot a key part of what was mentioned. " for The next year" was added to that. So he has job security for a year at least and it make sense as it would be reasonable to have somewhat of a transition by having a person on from the previous administration on for a while to at least fill the current administration in on what history needs to be learned. I don't know why people have something against pragmatism. You people are unrealistically ideological. yes...the horrible job must be continued by the people performing the horrible job. kicking them out and making some CHANGES is **** retarded. stupids!!
8 months ago :: Nov 26, 2008 - 8:05PM #7
Gregory_House Posts: 878	Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:51PM, MidCity's Alias wrote: Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:47PM, Gregory_House wrote: You forgot a key part of what was mentioned. " for The next year" was added to that. So he has job security for a year at least and it make sense as it would be reasonable to have somewhat of a transition by having a person on from the previous administration on for a while to at least fill the current administration in on what history needs to be learned. I don't know why people have something against pragmatism. You people are unrealistically ideological. yes...the horrible job must be continued by the people performing the horrible job. kicking them out and making some CHANGES is **** retarded. stupids!! yes the world is nothing but a black and white right and wrong or bad and good world. So lets make our choices in everything in life based on that one dichotomy. I mean he can't possibly have any knowledge on foreign/domestic defense affairs that he has experienced in the current geopolitical climate by serving as secretary of defense for the past two years. I'm sure that he has no indepth knowledge or propensity to understand foreign and domestic affairs in military and intelligence matters by serving in the cia for 20+ years. I MEAN HE CAN'T KNOW ANYTHING BECAUSE HE SERVED UNDER BUSH AND BUSH IS BAD! BUSH = BAD OBAMA= good What a simple world we live in. I wonder why so many people have such a hard time living in it though. Again people missing the key phase here "for the next year" which indicates a transitional purpose in his role.
8 months ago :: Nov 26, 2008 - 8:18PM #8
Lebanon Posts: 4828	Even though i'm against this does it really make a difference, anybody Obama picks will have to be a war mongerer, you have to support US crimes around the world to have any real authority in the gov't. Its not like Obama is going to pick somebody who is so much better that it really makes a difference. It only looks bad because this guy goes against what Obama claims he supports and believes in. Let us not be shocked by who Obama appoints anymore unless he appoints somebody like Dennis Kucinich to a high position, than that would be shocking. "I am a black South African, and if I were to change the names, a description of what is happening in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank could describe events in South Africa." -Archbishop Desmond Tutu Victory to the Resistance in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan. Prosecute the US government for it's genocide against Vietnam and Cambodia. Ho Chi Minh showed us how to win, now let us unite and do it again. RIP Sean Bell.
8 months ago :: Nov 26, 2008 - 11:50PM #9
MidCity's Alias Posts: 2321	Nov 26, 2008 -- 8:05PM, Gregory_House wrote: Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:51PM, MidCity's Alias wrote: Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:47PM, Gregory_House wrote: You forgot a key part of what was mentioned. " for The next year" was added to that. So he has job security for a year at least and it make sense as it would be reasonable to have somewhat of a transition by having a person on from the previous administration on for a while to at least fill the current administration in on what history needs to be learned. I don't know why people have something against pragmatism. You people are unrealistically ideological. yes...the horrible job must be continued by the people performing the horrible job. kicking them out and making some CHANGES is **** retarded. stupids!! yes the world is nothing but a black and white right and wrong or bad and good world. So lets make our choices in everything in life based on that one dichotomy. I mean he can't possibly have any knowledge on foreign/domestic defense affairs that he has experienced in the current geopolitical climate by serving as secretary of defense for the past two years. I'm sure that he has no indepth knowledge or propensity to understand foreign and domestic affairs in military and intelligence matters by serving in the cia for 20+ years. I MEAN HE CAN'T KNOW ANYTHING BECAUSE HE SERVED UNDER BUSH AND BUSH IS BAD! BUSH = BAD OBAMA= good What a simple world we live in. I wonder why so many people have such a hard time living in it though. Again people missing the key phase here "for the next year" which indicates a transitional purpose in his role. what does any of that have to do with what i said?
8 months ago :: Nov 27, 2008 - 1:02AM #10
Gregory_House Posts: 878	Nov 26, 2008 -- 11:50PM, MidCity's Alias wrote: Nov 26, 2008 -- 8:05PM, Gregory_House wrote: Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:51PM, MidCity's Alias wrote: Nov 26, 2008 -- 7:47PM, Gregory_House wrote: You forgot a key part of what was mentioned. " for The next year" was added to that. So he has job security for a year at least and it make sense as it would be reasonable to have somewhat of a transition by having a person on from the previous administration on for a while to at least fill the current administration in on what history needs to be learned. I don't know why people have something against pragmatism. You people are unrealistically ideological. yes...the horrible job must be continued by the people performing the horrible job. kicking them out and making some CHANGES is **** retarded. stupids!! yes the world is nothing but a black and white right and wrong or bad and good world. So lets make our choices in everything in life based on that one dichotomy. I mean he can't possibly have any knowledge on foreign/domestic defense affairs that he has experienced in the current geopolitical climate by serving as secretary of defense for the past two years. I'm sure that he has no indepth knowledge or propensity to understand foreign and domestic affairs in military and intelligence matters by serving in the cia for 20+ years. I MEAN HE CAN'T KNOW ANYTHING BECAUSE HE SERVED UNDER BUSH AND BUSH IS BAD! BUSH = BAD OBAMA= good What a simple world we live in. I wonder why so many people have such a hard time living in it though. Again people missing the key phase here "for the next year" which indicates a transitional purpose in his role. what does any of that have to do with what i said? in few words... Gates can offer something, for a short period of time, for the obama administration first year in office. There are benefits, like the two things I mentioned, in keeping gates around despite your cynical sarcasm that the current administration has to be completely severed off even if there are benefits to not doing so. Not to be an obama stan, but take a saying from the debates. Problems are best solved with a scaple instead of a hatchet. I doubt the obama team would keep gates around without good reason.

Page 1 of 2 • 1 2 Next

Post Reply