Obama knows he's going to get slaughtered on national security

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Spaz

I have no opinion on Obama's National Defense credibility, but I've got to throw in here...

To minimize the effect personal experience in the military has in one's understanding of the workings of said military, the effects of war on soldiers, and so on, is incredibly dishonest. This knowledge on the inner workings of the military cannot be underestimated in terms of National Defense.

Furthermore, while the fact that my father was a retail-store manager for 30 years doesn't qualify me as being a credentialed economist, it certainly gives me some insight into the effects of minimum wages on the operation of a business. My degree in economics, however recent, certainly does give me those credentials.

The items Tex listed are, to me, compelling reasons to trust McCain in terms of National Defense as POTUS.



IMO, you're barking up the wrong tree here. Your best bet is the route Cali has taken. I find his arguments in this case to be far more compelling. Alternatively, pointing out the inherent fallacy in the original post would be the way I would go (specifically, that attacking someone using that person's support for an unpopular war isn't defensive in nature at all - it's an offensive tactic, and may well be effective in the anti-war community).

The effects of war on soldiers? Here is the effect of war on soldiers....it traumatizes and scars them for life. Since McCain understands this, are you suggesting that he will pull everyone out of Iraq, where we are currently at war? What is the relevance of understanding the effect of war on soldiers?

The POTUS has very little, if any, contact with the military at the troop level (other than the aforementioned speeches and expensive motorcades). The POTUS stays in Washington, gets briefed by the Pentagon and his cabinet advisors, asks them what THEY think we should do, and then goes with it. Do you think the Pentagon presented GWB with a plan for invading Iraq and then Bush said...."no, I think we should flank from the left, not the right!"

I have already taken the stance that neither resume (Obama nor McCain) truly qualifies them to do ANY of the things everyone is talking about....what knowledge do either of them have of running the nation's economy? What do they know about sealing our national borders? What inside information does either man have with regards to the state of the environment? These men spend the majority of their lives in meetings and giving speeches. Everything they know is largely fed to them by someone else...they dont even write their own speeches, for cying out loud.

The only intellectual dishonesty being perpetrated here is the notion that one stuffed shirt "lacks serious credentials," while the other stuffed shirt has them.

The notion that McCain is a credible source for national defense is almost laughable. Didnt he basically finish dead last at the Naval Academy? He basically almost flunked out of school....the very place many here are proporting that he received credible training to lead up our national security efforts.

The critique that Obama has no specific plan for Iraq is fair. I get it. So what is the specific plan coming from McCain? one plan is to leave.....it is criticized for not being specific enough. The other plan simply seems to be to stay...with no real ability to provide an accurate timeline or details. Why is one plan more credible than the other.

The real issue is not to determine which person is the most "qualified." It should be to determine which person assembles the strongest overall team.

Mitt was allegedly the most qualified candidate...the brilliant strategist....yet he failed to run an effective campaign and failed to focus on key strengths....so much for his "gravitas" and "qualifications" as someone who can anticipate problems and adapt to them.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

The POTUS has very little, if any, contact with the military at the troop level (other than the aforementioned speeches and expensive motorcades). The POTUS stays in Washington, gets briefed by the Pentagon and his cabinet advisors, asks them what THEY think we should do, and then goes with it. Do you think the Pentagon presented GWB with a plan for invading Iraq and then Bush said...."no, I think we should flank from the left, not the right!"

You really ought to stop typing. You're not helping your case.

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

These men spend the majority of their lives in meetings and giving speeches. Everything they know is largely fed to them by someone else...they dont even write their own speeches, for cying out loud.

Being President is easy! Just do what you're told!

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Tex

You really ought to stop typing. You're not helping your case.



Being President is easy! Just do what you're told!

Until you can cite something to the contrary, I have no reason to stop typing.

Being a President isnt easy--it is a lot work....travel, speeches, motorcades, debriefings, rinse, repeat. But it doesnt require any personal specialities in the areas of economics, military, environment, education, etc..

On the other hand, being Tex seem to be easy. Lob out partisan rhetoric and then hide behind empty platitudes when asked for specifics.

Being a good president is likely the hardest job in the world, I would guess.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Until you can cite something to the contrary, I have no reason to stop typing.

I have. But keep talking. You make yourself look more fringe.

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Being a President isnt easy--it is a lot work....travel, speeches, motorcades, debriefings, rinse, repeat. But it doesnt require any personal specialities in the areas of economics, military, environment, education, etc..

On the other hand, being Tex seem to be easy.

You were the one saying it's just doing what you're told.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Tex

I have. But keep talking. You make yourself look more fringe.



You were the one saying it's just doing what you're told.

You actually have not. If I missed it, apologies. My original question still stands...cite 3 or 4 specific qualifications as they pertain to National Security.

Examples: "McCain was a key component in developing our strategy for the Iraq Invasion." or "McCain was instrumental in drafting legislature in AZ that wound up decreasing illegal immigration by X percent." I can see those are legitimate and compelling credentials.

You have definitely provided generic examples, though....McCain finished almost dead last in his class at the Naval Academy, McCain's relatives were soldiers, McCain is on an oversight committee that monitors military pensions, etc..

One thing you havent addressed is whether McCain played a lot of Stratego as a kid. Maybe that also qualifies him because he has an innate ability to guess whether the opposing piece is a bomb or higher ranking officer.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

You actually have not. If I missed it, apologies. My original question still stands...cite 3 or 4 specific qualifications as they pertain to National Security.

Examples: "McCain was a key component in developing our strategy for the Iraq Invasion." or "McCain was instrumental in drafting legislature in AZ that wound up decreasing illegal immigration by X percent." I can see those are legitimate and compelling credentials.

You have definitely provided generic examples, though....McCain finished almost dead last in his class at the Naval Academy, McCain's relatives were soldiers, McCain is on an oversight committee that monitors military pensions, etc..

One thing you havent addressed is whether McCain played a lot of Stratego as a kid. Maybe that also qualifies him because he has an innate ability to guess whether the opposing piece is a bomb or higher ranking officer.

Stratego! Damn, I loved that game. I have extensive experience in that area, and I even played Axis and Allies a time or two. Will you vote for me?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

Stratego! Damn, I loved that game. I have extensive experience in that area, and I even played Axis and Allies a time or two. Will you vote for me?

I think Risk is probably better military experience.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Tex

I think Risk is probably better military experience.

I played that one too!

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

Stratego! Damn, I loved that game. I have extensive experience in that area, and I even played Axis and Allies a time or two. Will you vote for me?

Not sure. Can you verify the building in which you were born? That will factor greatly into my decision.

I am looking for a President that was born in a bank or at a construction site because the economy and the housing crisis are important issues to me.

Also, what did you grandfather do for a living?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Not sure. Can you verify the building in which you were born? That will factor greatly into my decision.

I am looking for a President that was born in a bank or at a construction site because the economy and the housing crisis are important issues to me.

Also, what did you grandfather do for a living?

Your grandfather must have been an ass.