The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ouze**

In a completely unrelated topic, did you know Ted Cruz has a book coming out soon?

In no way is his utterly unwinnable presidential campaign related to that, obviously. This is not a - shall we say - Palinesque fleecing of the rubes.

Just a coincidence.

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:
In a completely unrelated topic, did you know Ted Cruz has a book coming out soon?

In no way is his utterly unwinnable presidential campaign related to that, obviously. This is not a - shall we say - Palinesque fleecing of the rubes.

Just a coincidence.

Okay... work with me here.

Why is this something that should be held against any politician?

**dogma**

whembly wrote:
There's no GOP candidate that can take on the combined Clinton Machine + favorable media + low information voter using massed media like Facebook/Twittah/etc...

There are plenty of low-information voters on both the Democratic and Republican sides, and they will all happily attack each other; thereby cancelling one another out.

The Clinton machine is overrated, I would be shocked if she could mobilize the youth vote, though it depends on who she runs against (if she runs).

Favorable media is a conservative victim argument, not unlike the one Palin is fond of.

whembly wrote:

In fact, this is an argument for revising the tax codes to something simpler... like the Flat-Tax.

Flat taxes are not simple. Only low information voters believe that.

**Ensis Ferrae**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
In that same instance he also did the same to John Kerry, who received the Silver star and bronze star.

To be a little fair, Kerry has said things (at least one, but one I still remember, and laugh at to this day) in the public eye that are "less than favorable" to the military.

I am of course referring to his remark during his ill-fated presidential run where he said to the effect of, "graduate high school, go to college and get a good education, or end up stuck in the military"
The strong implication being that you're either graduating college and a success, OR in the military and a complete dummy and failure (which is somewhat endemic of today's school systems as well to a point)

**ScootyPuffJunior**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I am of course referring to his remark during his ill-fated presidential run where he said to the effect of, "graduate high school, go to college and get a good education, or end up stuck in the military"
The strong implication being that you're either graduating college and a success, OR in the military and a complete dummy and failure (which is somewhat endemic of today's school systems as well to a point)

That's how it was taken, but according to man who said it, the line was directed at President Bush being a failure and getting us "stuck in Iraq."

Apparently, the line in his speech was written as: "Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."

What he said, however, was: “You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

So take it as you will I suppose.

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:
Trump though not a career politician though. I would love to see economic trade deals he would hash out with other countries though. Be a interesting change

You mean the guy who the majority of time has been bankrupt? That Trump? He's good at working the mob to build casinoes that bilk investors then fail but thats about it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
How much money does the military actually want?

Not all of it just most of it plus a dollar?

**whembly**

dogma wrote:
whembly wrote:
There's no GOP candidate that can take on the combined Clinton Machine + favorable media + low information voter using massed media like Facebook/Twittah/etc...

There are plenty of low-information voters on both the Democratic and Republican sides, and they will all happily attack each other; thereby cancelling one another out.

That's likely true as well...

The Clinton machine is overrated, I would be shocked if she could mobilize the youth vote, though it depends on who she runs against (if she runs).

But, the youth vote are traditionally a tiny slice of the voting population.

Yeah, Obama needed them for his re-election, but I don't believe HRC needs the youth voters. Unless, you're talking about the young Obama voters (who are 8 years older... are they still in the "youth voter" bucket?)??

Favorable media is a conservative victim argument, not unlike the one Palin is fond of.

Yeah.. that Katie Curic interview with Palin was a straight up fair interview.

Buddy... are you still blind to that?

whembly wrote:

In fact, this is an argument for revising the tax codes to something simpler... like the Flat-Tax.

Flat taxes are not simple. Only low information voters believe that.

To repeal current tax laws in favor of a Flat Tax law? Of course it wouldn't be simple. That's not what I was implying.

**Jihadin**

Frazzled wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Trump though not a career politician though. I would love to see economic trade deals he would hash out with other countries though. Be a interesting change

You mean the guy who the majority of time has been bankrupt? That Trump? He's good at working the mob to build casinoes that bilk investors then fail but thats about it.

Who else can you think of who can comeback from bankruptcy mulitple times without a strand of hair out of place. Can you imagine during trade negotiation if someone on the US side falters during talks him, in a firm authority type of voice goes "Your FIRED"

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
How much money does the military actually want?

Not all of it just most of it plus a dollar?

We're at pre- WWII strength active duty wise I believe
Hell we're pink slipping Officers and NCO's in a combat zone

**Prestor Jon**

Jihadin wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Trump though not a career politician though. I would love to see economic trade deals he would hash out with other countries though. Be a interesting change

You mean the guy who the majority of time has been bankrupt? That Trump? He's good at working the mob to build casinoes that bilk investors then fail but thats about it.

Who else can you think of who can comeback from bankruptcy mulitple times without a strand of hair out of place. Can you imagine during trade negotiation if someone on the US side falters during talks him, in a firm authority type of voice goes "Your FIRED"

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
How much money does the military actually want?

Not all of it just most of it plus a dollar?

We're at pre- WWII strength active duty wise I believe
Hell we're pink slipping Officers and NCO's in a combat zone

I think that has a lot more to do with how the military budgets its money more so than how much money they get from Congress. Some of it is also the fault of Congress whose members happily force the military to buy tanks it doesn't need to make sure factories in congressional districts stay open.

**Frazzled**

Who else can you think of who can comeback from bankruptcy mulitple times without a strand of hair out of place. Can you imagine during trade negotiation if someone on the US side falters during talks him, in a firm authority type of voice goes "Your FIRED"[/color]

In the business world he is a joke who has excellent..."contacts."

**Ensis Ferrae**

Prestor Jon wrote:

I think that has a lot more to do with how the military budgets its money more so than how much money they get from Congress. Some of it is also the fault of Congress whose members happily force the military to buy tanks it doesn't need to make sure factories in congressional districts stay open.

I do think that congress does have a bit of control of the budget as well, which leads to horrible situations like the JSF-35

I am heavily biased here, but I personally think the Abrams is one of the absolute best combat platforms the US has... To take it away, and move more towards the striker vehicles is a travesty.

So yeah, there's quite a bit in there where the money flows through the military, but there's quite often times where the military's hands are tied.

**Prestor Jon**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:

I think that has a lot more to do with how the military budgets its money more so than how much money they get from Congress. Some of it is also the fault of Congress whose members happily force the military to buy tanks it doesn't need to make sure factories in congressional districts stay open.

I do think that congress does have a bit of control of the budget as well, which leads to horrible situations like the JSF-35

I am heavily biased here, but I personally think the Abrams is one of the absolute best combat platforms the US has... To take it away, and move more towards the striker vehicles is a travesty.

So yeah, there's quite a bit in there where the money flows through the military, but there's quite often times where the military's hands are tied.

Agreed on all counts.

**Jihadin**

Bergdahl getting charged with Desertion and Misbehavior before the Enemy (or something)

**CptJake**

About time.

**Jihadin**

Sounds like they're going all out on UCMJ

**CptJake**

I suspect he is allowed a plea and doesn't go to court.

**Jihadin**

Same thought here. Though I do not see him getting POW pay for time spent in captivity due to it was his own actions that got him captured. I can see reduction in rank and forfeiture of all pay during that time frame to.

The one NCO killed searching for him when he got "stupid" though seems to be right for jail time. We all know how we hate when someone action gets another soldier harmed or killed.

**Tannhauser42**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:

I think that has a lot more to do with how the military budgets its money more so than how much money they get from Congress. Some of it is also the fault of Congress whose members happily force the military to buy tanks it doesn't need to make sure factories in congressional districts stay open.

I do think that congress does have a bit of control of the budget as well, which leads to horrible situations like the JSF-35

I am heavily biased here, but I personally think the Abrams is one of the absolute best combat platforms the US has... To take it away, and move more towards the striker vehicles is a travesty.

So yeah, there's quite a bit in there where the money flows through the military, but there's quite often times where the military's hands are tied.

Yeah, I remember a few years back when the military wanted a new in air refueling jet thing (the technical term escapes me). The military decided Airbus made the best option and chose them. Boeing whined to congress and guess what happened?

**Co'tor Shas**

Jihadin wrote:
Same thought here. Though I do not see him getting POW pay for time spent in captivity due to it was his own actions that got him captured. I can see reduction in rank and forfeiture of all pay during that time frame to.

The one NCO killed searching for him when he got "stupid" though seems to be right for jail time. We all know how we hate when someone action gets another soldier harmed or killed.

I personally doubt he'll see jail time. He already spend plenty of time in a place much worse for jail, and it would be horrible from a PR standpoint.

**CptJake**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Same thought here. Though I do not see him getting POW pay for time spent in captivity due to it was his own actions that got him captured. I can see reduction in rank and forfeiture of all pay during that time frame to.

The one NCO killed searching for him when he got "stupid" though seems to be right for jail time. We all know how we hate when someone action gets another soldier harmed or killed.

I personally doubt he'll see jail time. He already spend plenty of time in a place much worse for jail, and it would be horrible from a PR standpoint.

I don't think good PR is mentioned as a possible mitigating factor when the jury is read their instructions.

Unfortunately, it will be a factor in this case.

As to 'spending plenty of time in a place much worse than jail', it was his choice to go join the Talibs... If it went to a jury or panel the sympathy level would correctly be pretty damned low.

**Co'tor Shas**

You don't know the power of compassion. People have gotten away with murder, simply because people felt sorry for them. It's a legitimate tactic. I agree that it shouldn't be a factor, but it will be. We are people, not robots after all.

**Ouze**

Here's one of the articles, although this might deserve it's own thread rather than here:

Military charges Bergdahl with desertion
By Eric Bradner, Barbara Starr and Ed Lavandera, CNN
Updated 4:00 PM ET, Wed March 25, 2015

Washington (CNN)The U.S. military has charged Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl with one count each of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, officials announced Wednesday afternoon.

Bergdahl left his post in Afghanistan before being captured and held captive for five years. For that, he faces charges that carry a maximum penalty of life in a military prison, and he could also have to forfeit pay and be stripped for his rank, Army Col. Daniel King said as he announced the charges.

Bergdahl now faces a military procedure similar to a grand jury deciding whether charges are appropriate, King said. Then, he could face court martial proceedings.

The decision comes nearly a year after Bergdahl returned to the United States as part of a prisoner exchange and since the Army began a formal investigation into his disappearance from his unit in eastern Afghanistan in June 2009.

The Army concluded its investigation into the circumstances of Bergdahl's capture in December. Until now, it has been in the hands of Gen. Mark Milley, head of U.S. Army Forces Command, who made the decision to charge Bergdahl. Several U.S. military officials CNN has spoken with suggested privately that the process took longer than expected.

Ahead of Wednesday's announcement, officials said Milley only had a few choices. Though the sense had been that Bergdahl must be held accountable for his actions, there had been little appetite for a lengthy term in military confinement given the five years Bergdahl was held by the Taliban.

Bergdahl, who's now 28, was taken by the Haqqani terrorist network. But the circumstances of Bergdahl's departure from his base and how willingly he left have not been clear.

King said he couldn't offer those details on Wednesday, and that they're being treated as evidence for the upcoming proceedings against Bergdahl.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Arizona, called the charges an "important step" on Wednesday.

"This is an important step in the military justice process towards determining the accountability of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl," he said in a statement. "I am confident that the Department of the Army will continue to ensure this process is conducted with the utmost integrity under the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, meanwhile, lambasted the "unevenness" of Obama's swap of five Taliban prisoners for Bergdahl.

"I wouldn't have done this trade for a Medal of Honor winner," he told CNN. "No military member should expect their country to turn over five Taliban commanders to get their release. Nobody should expect that. It's not the nature of his service that drives my thinking it's just the illogical nature of the swap".

Some members of Bergdahl's platoon have criticized him, labeling Bergdahl a deserter.

"I was pissed off then, and I am even more so now with everything going on," former Sgt. Matt Vierkant, a member of Bergdahl's platoon when he went missing on June 30, 2009, told CNN last year. "Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war, and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him."

Bergdahl was freed in May when President Barack Obama agreed to swap five Taliban prisoners who had been detained in Guantanamo Bay to secure Bergdahl's freedom, sending those detainees to Qatar.

Obama announced Bergdahl's release to fanfare in the White House Rose Garden, flanked by the Army sergeant's parents, Bob and Jani Bergdahl. His hometown of Hailey, Idaho, had planned a parade to celebrate Bergdahl's homecoming but later canceled that celebration amid security concerns stemming from the unanswered questions surrounding his disappearance and the resulting controversy over his release.

After returning to the United States, Bergdahl had been on active duty at an administrative job at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas. There, the Army assigned Bergdahl a "sponsor" to help him adjust to life in his new post. Upon returning, Bergdahl refused to meet with his parents -- and months later, Army officials had said he was communicating with them but still had not met them face to face.

The five figures the United States exchanged to secure Bergdahl's release were Khair Ulla Said Wali Khairkhwa, Mullah Mohammad Fazl, Mullah Norullah Nori, Abdul Haq Wasiq and Mohammad Nabi Omari. They were mostly mid- to high-level officials in the Taliban regime and had been detained early in the war in Afghanistan because of their positions within the Taliban, not because of ties to al Qaeda.

The detainee swap for Bergdahl has become increasingly controversial in recent weeks after a report published by the office of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said one of the 17 intelligence agencies operating under its umbrella had judged that a prisoner released in the exchange had since contacted the Taliban.

I think it was the right thing to get him back, and if it's true he deserted, then it's the right thing to charge him now. I see them as separate issues.

**Co'tor Shas**

Wait, you can get life in prison for desertion?

**CptJake**

I know the 'power of compassion'. I also may know a bit about how a bunch of combat arms senior NCOs and officers would view deserting to join the enemy they have been fighting the last decade or so.

**Co'tor Shas**

True, I forgot, this would be a millitary trial wouldn't it?

**Bookwrack**

whembly wrote:

Yeah.. that Katie Curic interview with Palin was a straight up fair interview.

Ha, well it's a good lesson that you don't get to complain when you deliberately sabotage yourself by not preparing for a softball Q&A, then double-down that being ask what you read is a gotcha.

**CptJake**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
True, I forgot, this would be a millitary trial wouldn't it?

Yep, if it goes to trial.

I still think he pleas out.

**Ouze**

Bookwrack wrote:
Ha, well it's a good lesson that you don't get to complain when you deliberately sabotage yourself by not preparing for a softball Q&A, then double-down that being ask what you read is a gotcha.

In all fairness, being asked what magazines you read is a pretty "gotcha" question that I don't think any politician's ever been asked before, and is clearly gutter journalism by a left-wing hack.

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:
Bookwrack wrote:
Ha, well it's a good lesson that you don't get to complain when you deliberately sabotage yourself by not preparing for a softball Q&A, then double-down that being ask what you read is a gotcha.

In all fairness, being asked what magazines you read is a pretty "gotcha" question that I don't think any politician's ever been asked before, and is clearly gutter journalism by a left-wing hack.

Biden still got a pass bro...

In fact, the things Biden have said were so fething looney, he makes Palin Cum Laude of the Political Class™.

War on Women™ indeed.

**A Town Called Malus**

Ouze wrote:
Bookwrack wrote:
Ha, well it's a good lesson that you don't get to complain when you deliberately sabotage yourself by not preparing for a softball Q&A, then double-down that being ask what you read is a gotcha.

In all fairness, being asked what magazines you read is a pretty "gotcha" question that I don't think any politician's ever been asked before, and is clearly gutter journalism by a left-wing hack.

And that whole "how does living near a foreign country make you experienced in foreign affairs?" thing