What's up with Admiral Mullins?
By John Amato Tuesday May 27, 2008 6:30pmHe told the troops to keep quiet in voicing their opinions when it comes to the presidential race:
The highest-ranking U.S. military officer has written an unusual open letter to all those in uniform, warning them to stay out of politics as the United States approaches a presidential election in which the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be a central, and certainly divisive, issue.
"Keeping our politics private is a good first step," he added. "The only things we should be wearing on our sleeves are our military insignia."
Mullen said he was inspired to write the essay after receiving a constant stream of legitimate, if troubling, questions while visiting U.S. military personnel around the world, including, "What if a Democrat wins?" and, "What will that do to the mission in Iraq?"
But I don't buy that line because Kyra Phillips reported that:
CNN’s Kyra Phillips speaks to some Iraqi soldiers about the U.S. presidential election and democracy in Iraq. While they spoke enthusiastically about the American soldiers teaching them discipline and how to effectively combat their enemies in Iraq, the soldiers were less effusive in their praise for those managing the war and their plans for bringing about democracy. Phillips tried in vain to locate any McCain supporters among the group.
“Just to be perfectly clear here, I did ask them are you following any of the republican candidates?…Do you want to talk about John McCain? Within that whole group, not one wanted a republican in the US presidential seat. They were all for a democrat. They were all for that type of change because they said they were living a republican war.”
We all know that they keep an eye out on the media and do not want to see any more reports like this one. What say you?
Login or Register to post comments.
Obama '08!!!
So, should all of us active duty military just not vote then either?
I think the timing of his opinion was perfectly tuned with the GI Bill. What Mullen didn't want to happen was to have the troops asked what they thought of the GI Bill, and what they thought of McCain's opposition to it.
I also found interesting in his opinion was asked about retired officers, he said he'd prefer they not talk politics either. To which we must say WTF? how about retired military serving in congress? How about reserved military serving in congress?
Apparently you can't voice your opinion if you volunteered.
Are ya listening General Petraeus?
Wait until they come back to the States to live a republican economy.
It's like living in Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, but instead of chocolate, it's all sh*t.
Kyra Phillips was speaking to Iraqi soldiers while Mullins was talking about U.S. military personnel.
But it's hard to imagine that many U.S. soldiers would be thrilled about the way they've been used and abused as political shields by Republicans.
We have Generals parading around on TV, spitting out the GOP party line. It's not the Private E-nothings that need to be told to keep their mouths shut. It's the military brass that need to be told to keep their mouth shut.
When you let incompetent ass-wipes like General Betrayus parade before Congress and tell lies....when dozens of 'retired' Generals are herded like the dumb cattle they are onto TeeBee to lie to the American people....
In short when a nation, a people are stupid enough to believe that just because some Ass Clown Majorus has a bunch of medals on his uniform that he knows what he's talking about and....
Must NOT be criticised in any way shape or form why folks you're well on your way to.
George Bush's Amerika, home of the fascist skinhead...home of the unthinking political goon...home of all that millions of Americans fought and died to PREVENT from happening. So it comes as no surprise that another graduate of West Point would speak words that would have been at home in the mouths of Himmler, Stalin or even Mao.
Amerika, Fuck Yeah!
My take on this is that these are two very different events. Admiral Mullins, rightly so, wants American servicemen and women to make sure to understand that the military by law is not political and should not be for the safety and security of this nation. If the US military were to ever engage in politics, we can say goodbye to this grand democratic experiment as a military coup will not be far behind. Iraqi soldiers expressing their discontent with McCain is perfectly reasonable and warranted given the Republican conduct of the war in Iraq. I don't think anyone would have a problem with Iraqi's giving their opinion on our elections, but it is very advisable for the US military to stay out of bounds.
moniker @ 4:
I don't think America benefits in any way by hiring killers (soldiers) and then having them vote.
To hell with them!!!!!!!!!!!
While our servicemen should not be wearing their political views on their sleeves as it were. I think a large reason why this is coming out now is because Obama has raised more money from servicemen than any other candidate. The big brass generals and admirals came up the ranks under Repub administrations and aren't liking the idea that those of lower rank would support a candidate they so obviously oppose.
I was phoned by and American General today and told that I souldn't comment on the American election.
I think his name was General Halftrack.
Yeah, they want servicemen and women to keep quiet about politics so the right wing can continue to cast "the troops" as a pro-Republican body, and "the terrorists" as pro-Democratic one. This will also help when they try to sink all of those absentee ballots that soldiers will cast in favor of Obama.
Maybe it's Adm. Mullins who should keep his opinions to himself and stay out of politics.
Underground Pirate @ 11:
Now that was a really stupid comment.
I find it ironic that our "final" rationale for continuing the Iraq War is to give Iraqis freedom and democracy while our government is acting to suppress the freedom of speech of those soldiers fighting it.
-AF
Andrew Sullivan Is A Fraud
PS I confess to having seriously mixed feeling about Kyra Phillips and CNN in general. (Their election coverage has been laughably abysmal).
Censorship and a steady diet of propaganda. Yup....RIP the Frist Amendment in this country.
Remember how bad the Soviet's had it back in the 60's? Well, I bet they're saying that same thing about us today.
We are f*cked, and the repug party and it's right wing neocons are giving us the f*cking!
So, in telling the troops not to comment on the election, Mullins comments on the election by pretending to convey their "concern" that a Democrat might get elected. Yeah, imagine what a Democrat might do . . . might send them off to fight a phony war. No, wait . . .
Mullins short version;
"Don't let anybody know how much you hate this shit hole fucked up war the Repuglic*nts have created and how you pray each and every night a Democrat wins in November."
seevee @ 19:
YEAH! what you said!
Who did the admiral talk to? If he talked to other field grade officers, then he's probably describing their sentiments exactly. They are the ones who benefit from the war, so concerns about continuing the "mission" sounds just like them. Anyone from captain on down--the cannon fodder--is probably a little more jaded. They don't even get pay raises or a GI Bill.
will the politcos then in return please stop constantly referencing the fucking military.. I doubt is says in the contract one signs that you must remain apolitical. How do you vote! So this is really a freedom of speech issue. Mccain and obama are not the president/ "commander and chief". YOU should be able to say whatever you want about them.
To those who complain about propaganda: Remember William Randolph Hearst.
Then, as now, it is up to each of us to educate ourselves and others.
this still sounded like a pro-hillary video.
Lollimom @ 6:
And McIhatethetroops telling the troops that they are not worthy of a collage education and decent medical attention.
Question authority. Always.
As long as it's enforced in a non-partisan manner, I think it's a good idea to de-politicize the military.
While the Admiral is in the general vicinity (pun intended), maybe he'll address the problem with the evangelicals at the Air Force Academy as well.
I guess they are tired of paying for their own meals, buying their own bullets, and body armor. Hey, that's privatization of the military!
So I guess that whole Mission Accomplished carrier thing was just one of those days where the crew was out on the flight deck scrubbing for loose debris and lo and behold the CinC drops out of the sky to pitch in.
I've never been comfortable with lifer REMFS at the top of the DoD food chain - it just seems like most of the generals who tried to be honest about this GWOT clusterfuck were boots-on-the-ground-Army, guys who actually have to look at the people they're killing close up and not from the safety and comfort of a fucking cockpit then fly back to some floating resort and claim to be at war.
The stand up so that we can stand down strategy is the reason we lost Iraq.
Basically, we are just arming and training the Iraqis.
Big surprise!
They are using the arms and training to kill Americans.
You don't arm your enemies! Especially, when you have invaded their country.
After WWII, Germany and Japan were banned from having militaries for at least 10 years.
Why?
BECAUSE, YOU NEVER GIVE THE NATION YOU ARE OCCUPYING THE CAPACITY TO RESIST YOUR OCCUPATION OF THEIR COUNTRY!
It's just common sense.
The Iraqis have lost a lot of family members. This is something that you don't get over. First, we have the Iran-Iraq war where we promised to help them against the Iranians. Bush turned around and secretly armed their enemies. They also suffered 2 devastating wars against the Americans. I also should throw in the incident where we promised to help them if they rose up against Saddam and we let Saddam slaughter them. They, also, suffered 10 years of US backed economic sanctions that crippled their economy. These are things that you DON'T get over. Make no mistake; the Iraqis hate us with every fiber of their existence. The Iraqis that are helping us with the occupation are not our friends. They cooperate with us to the extent that it helps the insurgency. During the Russian Revolution, hundreds of thousands of young aspiring revolutionaries joined the Tzar's Army to get military training and acquire arms to fight the Tzar's Army. They also gathered valuable intelligence information. This is why the Iraqi Army has such a huge desertion rate.
We spend all this money on our military. What we should be doing is buying college level history text books for our Generals. I was against this war from the beginning. I felt that we had wronged the Iraqi people already and that we just needed to quit; the Bush Administration decided to ignore me and go anyways. No Big Surprise! Bush thinks that he is smarter than people like me; because, his daddy was able to buy him the Presidency and all my daddy could afford to buy me was a used Ford Tempo.
I'm not trying to absolve the Bush Administration of blame. They are guilty as sin. I just think the blame needs to be distributed more equally. The Generals leading our troops in Iraq are complete and utter morons. They have armed and trained an insurgency; when they should of been going door to door rounding up weapons.
McClellan will be on Olbermann TOMORROW night.
i see, the republican propagandists are scaring the troops, so everyone loses their freedom to speak
would telling our soldiers that, if a democrat is elected, they and their families might actually get the support services that they were promised be out of line?
One Year Wonder @ 29:
I think you might be mistaking the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the Secretary of Defense. In matters of of public relations, the SoD trumps anyone wearing a uniform. Not saying there weren't Generals and Admirals who were behind Bushco 100%, but their support was...moot.
Andy K Jong Il @ 33:
Sorry, was just refering to your first paragraph. Fixed!
Mr. Flibble @ 21:
“What if a Democrat wins?” and, “What will that do to the mission in Iraq?” are not "sentiments"; they're questions, and common ones at that. Asking them does not imply a political stance, regardless of rank or station.
Please, explain how a major, colonel, or even a general "benefits" from this war. One could argue Petraeus and perhaps others benefitted politically, but that happens in any war. Others, yes, could see their careers fast-tracked because of the conflict, but the attendant personal risks and possible costs are quite real. Iraq is no field-officer meal ticket.
Andy K Jong Il @ 33:
Oh no, I know the diff between say, Myers, Gates, Rumsfeld, and Mullins. I also know that each branch chief, to include the Joint, get their time before congress to express their opinions. Only ONE, Shinseki, was honest about what was going to happen. In defense of the USS Lincoln and her crew, I doubt they had much choice when the WH forced them into the PR stunt, but for leaders like Mullins to even mention the name of a political party in a negative way crosses the line. And that makes him a scumbag. A squid scumbag, to be precise.
First of all..it is not the soldiers mission to determine mission. That is the job of the elected civilians that command our military. Let me repeat this....the soldiers have NO VOICE in choosing or dictating the military missions of the USA. They just do what they are told. From General Officer to recruit..they work for the American people and the American people give them their mission.
The answer to what do they do if a Democrat is elected: whatever he or she tells them to and nothing else.
if they want clinton to write a book on democracy, they sure as heck havent been paying that close of attention to the election
but i thought the democratic movement was going swimmingly in iraq? guess these guys are a bit confused
but they do march well and look spiffy in their unis...wonder how many have taken part in killing suunis for being suuni
They aren't known as our brave men and women for nothing! I predict that very soon a few at first, then many, will go against the General's request and share their strong and highly-meaningful opinions with whomever will listen.
Richard @ 37:
Yeah, well, I don't read any inherent diss of Democrats in the examples given (“What if a Democrat wins?” and, “What will that do to the mission in Iraq?”). Those are fairly innocuous questions.
I'll grant that you could indict him for a sin of omission (ya know, maybe he shoulda thrown in a , "How long will we be here if the GOP wins the election?"), but I don't think you could convict on the charge of felony ommission. Maybe on misdemeanor tactlessness.....
And the Admiral wasn't exactly "quoted" in that paragraph we've been shown. I wonder if he did mention a Republican-oriented "troubling" question that failed to pass muster at the editing desk.
Fuck...Pittsburgh just scored. I've got a hockey game to watch. Let's go, Red Wings!
Andy K Jong Il @ 40:
Go Celtics!
I wanna see a Lakers / Celtics championship
Historically, the US hasn't even liked having a standard army to begin with, much less one that meddled in politics. Of course, when the leaders of the WWII era started the idea of a permanently large, standing US army, the military decided it was a good idea to get involved in the politics of death. And the fact that these soldiers are scared of Democrats is cute. It wasn't the GOP that started WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Mogidashu, the Bay of Pigs, and so on. The Democrats can be just as willing to let our boys get on with the business of killing other people (that's what a military does, and that's what war is) as the GOP, so these poor little darlings don't have to worry about abandoning their precious quagmire /snark.
Andy K Jong Il @ 40:
Heh. The CBC just had a "Viagra Intermission." Must be needed after watching Don Cherry for a period or so...
:D
miss_kitty @ 43:
Look at Don Cherry's suits for too long and you'll get hairy palms.
I Like Pie @ 30:
well done, very good rational logical and true description of the cluster f*ck that is Iraq
I hope some of the MSM journalists read your post and learn something about the reality of Iraq.
Bush, Feith, Bremner and all those utter moroninic war criminals coundnt be trusted to run a working country let alone a ruined one of theor own creation
Pazuzus Petals @ 44:
Tonight's jacket and tie are stuff of your worst nightmares. Plus, the jacket's too tight...
mudshark @ 41:
FUCK THE CELTICS! AND THE LAKERS! DEEE-troit BAS-ket-BALL!
As a soon to be officer, I can tell you that this letter reeks of personal politics. A good officer would not have revealed the nature of the political questions being asked, let alone mention about whom (or which party) those questions were asked. That is extremely unprofessional of the Admiral.
If it were any other military person but a Flag Officer (i.e. General/Admiral) writing that kind of letter, they'd get their ass handed to them by their CO.
diamondmc @ 15:
There's always at least one around here. I think they're here as a reminder that nutjobs with disgusting opinions aren't confined to the right wing.
Mullen, what a hypocrite. The entire invasion and occupation was political -- to get bu$hler reselected in 04.
We don't know how the troops voted in 2004, we won't know how they vote in 08, either.
Jo @ 26:
Who are you to tell me to question authority?
:)
I Like Pie @ 30:
That seems reasonable...
except you are very off in a lot of areas.
First off, the Germans and Japanese were allowed to keep defensive forces due to an irrational fear that Stalin was going to somehow take over the world when he barely had enough reserves in the case of pressing on pass the Elbe to make it to the Ardennes, much less try to conquer Eurasia. They were not totally disarmed, not by any means.
Second, the Iraqis hate the Iranians just as much as they do us, and the rivalry's been going on since the days of Sumer and Elam. And Iran is trying to interfere, and as soon as the Iraqis deal with us, it'll be Sumer vs. Elam Round #345353452523456245.
Third, yes, our generals clusterfucked the army by arming the insurgency by losing (more than once, even) enough caches of weapons to arm a small country, much less a hard-core guerilla movement like the Iraqis. And to round up weapons in Iraq would have as much success as trying to round up weapons in Appalachia and the Gulf Coast, and for similar reasons.
Iraq was bound to be a disaster from the beginning, it was not our duty to the world to remove Saddam, and we were basically in an unwinnable situation from the time the first Shock and Awe offensive began.
something about this post doesn't add up.
active duty soldiers are not supposed to comment on politics. at least not when they have the uniform on. IIRC.
What stinks is what prompted this admiral to comment at all. "what if a democrat wins the war?" OK, uh, admiral, you just made a comment of your own right there. Jaysus, they really think the whole world is too dumb to figure out their games.
dosido @ 53:
corrected. sigh.
this could be a refreshing change of course among the media, a newfound dedication to giving the full story and showing both sides, or it could be an Iraqi version of a Frank Luntz "Randomly Selected Focus Group"
tough call here.
Jo @ 26:
Why?
dosido @ 54:
"Verrrry Interestink" - S. Freud
Andy K Jong Il @ 47:
dream on bruddah.
ADMIRAL, SIR!
FUCK YOU!
Sir!
Its a shame the Pentagon's illegal and immoral OSP department didnt stay out of politics (and lying for personal gain) back in 2002.
mudshark @ 58:
[That was nice and all you guys, but no betting here OK. Site Monitor]
miss_kitty @ 56:
Authority tries to pass itself of as divinely ordained and above reproach and mistakes,
we live in a democratic republic, the people in high office are elected into them by the people,
anybody in a good job in say the Army have to earn their position by working for it in a career, not inheriting the good job.
Fathers passing their positions onto their sons and so on is monarchy.
A turd in a uniform who says he is god and do as he say or else, is still a turd to be ignored and laughed at.
Miatch @ 3:
GI's speaking their mind may well have something to do with Bush/Cheney's opposition to the GI Bill, not that this administration or Republicans would ever take retribution or punish someone for political disloyalty.
ferrofluid (Obama 08) @ 62:
Why?=joke. :D
miss_kitty @ 64:
sorry yes it was subtle, and I missed it :)
That memo makes quite an admission, albeit unintended.
A realization that a majority of his underlings no longer support the misguided Iraqi excellent adventure and will tell Iraqi war supporters and Iranian war promoters, McSame and Clinton to feck off if they could. I don't recall hearing of the Admirals 2003 memo urging the troops to stay out of presidential politics. The Kool aid has obviously lost its sweetness, or maybe there's only so much Kool aid one can stomach before they begin to feel the pangs of wretching at its smell.
I will be surprised if the absentee ballots of the troops see the light of day this coming election.
Please remind me Admiral Mullins, what and who's freedom are the troops fighting for?
I'd love to hear of an active serviceman who writes the Admiral a letter telling him to STFU and to shove any future memos up his ass so that he is able to proofread them before he sends them out.
Pazuzus Petals (#35)
Please, explain how a major, colonel, or even a general “benefits” from this war. One could argue Petraeus and perhaps others benefitted politically, but that happens in any war. Others, yes, could see their careers fast-tracked because of the conflict, but the attendant personal risks and possible costs are quite real. Iraq is no field-officer meal ticket
I'm astonished that I even have to write a response, because the personal advantages of war for the professional military officer have been a topic of criticism for centuries. Machiavelli and our founding fathers have plenty to say on the subject, and their points remain valid today. Anyway:
1. You've answered part of your own question. Careers are fast-tracked. That's a pretty damn big advantage. The "attendant personal risks" apply far less to a field grade officer than an E-2 or even an O-3.
2. The other part, among many, are the highly lucrative consulting/board membership gigs one can score upon retirement with defense contractors. Gigs that tend to become more available as monies pour into those industries. Which tends to happen in war. And get shut off when the war ends.
So, yes, they do personally benefit from war. Hugely.
As to your other point--the implied meaning of such questions, the questions cited in the post indicate to me that the field grade officers are afraid the gravy train is about to reach a terminus. With that in mind, explain to me how these folks will be overflowing with love or appreciation for teh Democrats? There is nothing innocuous or fair-seeming in their (or Admiral Mullin's? We have no idea who he talked to) questions.
By not "politicizing" the military, Admiral Mullins is politicizing the military.
-AF
Andrew Sullivan Is A Fraud
"“Keeping our politics private is a good first step,” he added. “The only things we should be wearing on our sleeves are our military insignia.”
so, how are we exactly to feel then when the white house next trots out general petraeus to shill for it while testifying in front of congress?
How silly. The very rights that these soldiers fight for they cannot express them? What a dumba** general.
I don't really think this has anything to do with the election. This is a shot across the bow to military bloggers. Suppression is the name of this game. Suspension (in the name of national security and good order and discipline) is next.
Somebody call Rush!!!
These are phony Iraqi soldiers!
=-p
If the military is being counselled to "appear neutral" in this election it can mean they anticipate a Democratic victory and don't want to begin a new regime with egg on its' face.
That's my take, anyway.
Mullins was chosen by the nutjobs at BushCo Inc to prepare the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy for an air and sea assault on Iran, an insane course of action that Dick Cheney is still advocating and which George W. Bush may still order done. Heaven help us...and our soldiers on the ground in both Iraq and Afghanistan if Cheney gets his way. (And there is every indication that John McCain has the same lust for never-ending war that the people in BushCo Inc. have, although one would think that John McCain would be hesitant, especially after his own horrific Vietnam War experience, to send any of our military personnel into harms way unless it was absolutely, positively necessary, like World War II was...and as our going into Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks was. One just can't let murderous, right-wing thugs like the Nazis and Taliban/al Qaeda get away with certain things).
Just like during the Vietnam War, the latter few years of which I served in the U.S. Air Force, U.S. citizens at home must keep the pressure on the civilian leaders in Washington D.C. to try to stop the spread of any more madness by BushCo Inc. and Dick Cheney particularly, because war is not only hell, it is madness...as George W. Bush and the neo-con Republicans have proven over the past five years.
I feel for our active duty soldiers today. They have a tough mission, especially with some of the same people from the Nixon/Vietnam War era running the show. Thankfully, though, I missed out years ago on facing a bunch of right-wing religious zealots trying to proselytize me on the bases where I served. Harassment is harassment. And being in a war zone is enough of a harassment without any of our soldiers having to put up with religious harassment, there or anywhere. When I served, I never knew the religious affiliation of anyone serving with me, nor was I aware of anyone specifically being a member of any political party. Not that I couldn't have found out by asking, but I considered this information irrelevant to my mission, our mission. With so much privacy lost while serving in the military, it is important to keep some things to oneself.
But today, the Bush administration has politicized everything, including our military. Remember the photo ops with our soldiers being used as backdrops? So, all bets are off. If our soldiers want to state their opinion, especially if it critical of the madness of the political leaders who put them in harms way in a country (Iraq) that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks nor represented any real threat to our national security, then they have my backing, as well as their constitutional right to do so. So, Mullin can go eat it.
I Like Pie @ 30:
Exactly. They hate us for good reason and I guarantee US intelligence is watching Maliki, Sitani, and others like a hawk, because they know it.
Makes me wonder if one day, the very people we put in power will turn on us en masse, either before we leave or after. The very troops we trained will attack us Tet offensive-style. Maybe Iran will join them. In reality, a low-level version of this scenario is already happening.
We have totally destroyed a country that never threatened us. How shameful and barbaric. May the Iraqis forgive us.
pat @ 66:
Right. It's ok for the military brass on down to speak favorably of Bush's political policies, but now that the pendulum is swinging the other direction, it's now time for "Keeping our politics private".
Wha she be doing in IIran interviewing IIIranian Communis
about ah'er alections? No wonder dey wanted Mocrats.
With all due respect and at the risk of sounding jejeune...well, DUH!!! On the whole, which one of our political parties has the reputation (regardless of whether it is actually deserved or not) for being more military-friendly -- Democrats or Republicans?
Given the answer to that question, why would anyone with two functioning brain cells to rub together be surprised that Admiral Mullins is making a not-so-subtle attempt to put a gag order on the military? My guess is that even if you remove the statements which McCain has made in support of the war out of the equation, your average career military type does not want to see Obama win the election -- and as a result, they've probably decided that the only viable way of dealing with this situation is to make politics a taboo subject altogether rather than permit any opportunity for praise of Obama or criticism of Bush and McCain.
Any soldier who is currently wearing the United States uniform should stay out of the political arena period. We (being liberals) have been bitching about the politicizing of our military by this President for years now with good cause - it's a bad idea.
It'd be nice to know who the men and women in uniform are supporting, but that information, while they wear that uniform, should stay private.
Wow, that's two more votes for hilary Clinton. She really does have the popular vote,
The main reason why he would be saying that, I believe, is because of morale. There is most assuredly a division within the military now between those who believe that the war was misguided and should be ended, and those who still support their "commander-in-chief". If you end up having vocal arguments among the troops about politics, when the frayed nerves and the enormous stress that the military faces right now, you could end up having some pretty serious problems coming out of the military. This is to keep everyone in the military "still on the same side".
Bryan
ICRO: Where cancer researchers connect!
http://icro.em.mpg.de
"we are living under the Republicans, we know the situation, it's difficult"
Hmm. Does that sounds like a person in a foreign army speaking? Sounds like someone in our own army speaking, to me. These service men don't report to Admiral Mullins, or at least they are not supposed to. So I'm at a loss to understand why he should have anything to say directly to them. Unless of course they really to report to him and we are running the Iraq armed forces, and Iraq is just a staging ground to invade other middle east countries... Nah, that would be complete stupidity. That could never happen under THIS administration.
I think Obama should visit Iraq to meet the troops and get a feel for their views. Obama will have to speak with the officers; senior enlisted, and junior enlisted. Next he needs to pull off to the side Jim Webb, Wesley Clark, and believe it or not Colin Powell.
Powell might just have some insight on matters that will help Obama greatly. I still say bring the troops home as soon as possible but to get out of Iraq and repair all of the damage the US has done in the middle east will take great planning. If Obama can run the war the same way he has run his campaign the US just may have a chance to pull Iraq out of the disaster it has become.
Kyra Phillips needs a nose job.
As Country Joe would ask..."and it's 1,2,3 what are we fighting for?"
I think Admiral Mullins issued that statement to the troops because the troops are becoming restless. Its common to have some dissent in units but those issues usually are handled at the NCO, SNCO, and junior officer levels. If Admiral Mullins had to step up and issue a blanket statement like this in order to keep the troops in all branches in line then something much larger is brewing as a whole in my opinion. In other militaries
Joe O. @ 86:
For some reason. This cut off the last of my comment. What I meant to finish up with was: In other military forces, when this happens, coup attempts and rebellion usually follow.
Well, that should have a chilling effect on free speech.
Joe O. @ 87:
It's a fact. They were saying the same thing in Thailand, right before the military took over.
R.I.P. U.S.A. :-(((
What say I is that Mullen is really pushing the envelope on what's legal under US military code. Besides lying about how the troops think for political reasons.
I'd say that Mullins is using the troops and stifling them at the same time, in order to perpetrate a deciet upon the American People.
Steve E @ 84:
And a boob job.
A bob and a boob?
Unless I'm missing the reference, you might want to correct the spelling: Not Mullins but Mullen. It will google better...
Tim in Japan @ 71:
Tim,
You've been been in Japan too long. This has everything to do with the election.
-AF
Andrew Sullivan Is A Fraud
DHavok @ 79:
Bull. This statement by Admiral is solely to frame the narrative that the military prefer Rethugs instead of Dems as leaders. But as we see from video, the soldiers all want Dems. It's just a preemptive strike by the Admiral to silence the voices of those who are risking their lives for us everyday.
Scum sucking, vermin motherf@#ker!
That being said, generally in the military, such as army, the saying is there is no red or blue, only green. and that's the healthy way to keep alive!
Admiral Michael Mullen (NOT "Mullins") is the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. His letter reminds active duty military personnel of the requirements and prohibitions of Federal law, the Hatch Act. Federal civil service employees and active duty military personnel are prohibited by law - not by Admiral Mullen or any other individual - from public involvement in politics in uniform. http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm
Punditry and hearsay are all fine and dandy..
I wonder the numbers of active duty service members whom have contributed to whose campaign and the total amounts collected by each campaign from our active service members. And no, there are more than 3 contenders.
You Gen know we provide weapons to the enemies, were do you officers want to take this. Tell our children the boogman lives underneath your bed, so you need to sleep with a private contractor. Fuck You gen what ever your name is./
Our men and women are entitled to the same constitutional protections the rest of this nation possesses, including the first amendment right to free speech. How dare this person tell our troops they can protect our rights but not their own.
Login or Register to post comments.