Fort Hood in Texas attacked

Originally Posted by thepetrostate
Or you could call Obama taking careful consideration before making a major decision in Afghanistan.


John Baker said:
Most people who know what their goal is, have little or no problem deciding on how to achieve it. An actual leader, if he knows what his goal is, has no problem whatsoever deciding on how to achieve it.

Taking little chicken steps to test the water is no way to lead a country or to win a war. Without a clear objective in mind, that is all about what anyone would, or could do.

Obama must decide what, exactly, he wants to accomplish in Afghanistan. If and/or when he ever figures that out, then deciding on what is needed will be no problem.

He has led us into a situation that is costing us in money and lives, while he wrings his hands, consults his magic eight ball, delivers us uplifting speeches, and continues on ahead, with no idea of where he is going.

His behavior is not careful consideration, it's confusion.

John
Click to expand...
Does it hurt, you know, the piecing white lit reflection from your crystal ball? :sleep:
 
Last edited:
John Baker said:
OK, this is the last of this stuff, after letting it rattle around in my semi empty head for a while, I have concluded that I'm the one who should be apologizing. Tim, there is nothing wrong with a little sick humor now and then. I was totally out of line for busting your chops over it. I also apologize to everyone else for screwing up this thread.

John
Click to expand...
No problem John I felt retarded the entire Bush presidency, What was wrong with me, I didn't get "it"?

When he left office, I was normal again. :yikes:

http://www.punkvoter.com/anim/anim-idiot.html
 
Well, today's news has a note that the perp has no feeling in his legs and his hands hurt. Lawyer says this might not get better. I can see it now. "You can't execute my client, he's disabled." As we used to say when I was younger, "My heart pumps peanut butter for you." Try him, convict him and have him return to room temperature as quickly as possible.
 
Ghery said:
Well, today's news has a note that the perp has no feeling in his legs and his hands hurt. Lawyer says this might not get better. I can see it now. "You can't execute my client, he's disabled." As we used to say when I was younger, "My heart pumps peanut butter for you." Try him, convict him and have him return to room temperature as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...

It's way too early to really speculate in detail, but I'm fairly confident in saying that, during this trial, we're going to see every mental defense in the book thrown out by the defendant. It's also way too early to even attempt to draw any conclusions about whether there would be any success with them.

I don't know how the insanity defenses are treated in the military judicial system - but, as a general rule, the UCMJ is governed by the same Constitution that the rest of us are. In other words, things like the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments still apply.

I'm not commenting on the merits of any such defense - but simply saying it's a safe bet that mental status will be a part of the defense (and anybody who's already reached a conclusion re: mental status has done so without the benefit of things like facts).
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
It's way too early to really speculate in detail, but I'm fairly confident in saying that, during this trial, we're going to see every mental defense in the book thrown out by the defendant. It's also way too early to even attempt to draw any conclusions about whether there would be any success with them.

I don't know how the insanity defenses are treated in the military judicial system - but, as a general rule, the UCMJ is governed by the same Constitution that the rest of us are. In other words, things like the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments still apply.

I'm not commenting on the merits of any such defense - but simply saying it's a safe bet that mental status will be a part of the defense (and anybody who's already reached a conclusion re: mental status has done so without the benefit of things like facts).
Click to expand...
I think that no matter what defense is going to be put up the US Army is not going to look good. If the guy is a nutter than the question will be asked why was he not identified as such early on. In light of some of the things coming out in the press one really has to wonder what was being thought about this person. After all he was promoted to Major which is to say that the US Army thought he was qualified for that high of a rank.

If he is not a nutter then surely there were warning signs that he was going to be a potential liability. How did the Army respond to those warning signs will become the issue. I have no doubt that this guy will not be set free. Now it is really a matter of how long in jail or death, and how bad the Army will look.

BTW if I am not mistaken the US Military still has death by hanging as their method of execution on the books for murder. I'll need to do some research if that is still on the books though.
 
smigaldi said:
I think that no matter what defense is going to be put up the US Army is not going to look good. If the guy is a nutter than the question will be asked why was he not identified as such early on. In light of some of the things coming out in the press one really has to wonder what was being thought about this person. After all he was promoted to Major which is to say that the US Army thought he was qualified for that high of a rank.
Click to expand...

It's not that high for medical types -- they start as Captains and MAJ is automatic (unless you have a DUI).

smigaldi said:
If he is not a nutter then surely there were warning signs that he was going to be a potential liability. How did the Army respond to those warning signs will become the issue. I have no doubt that this guy will not be set free. Now it is really a matter of how long in jail or death, and how bad the Army will look.
Click to expand...

The Army will look as bad as everyone else who ignores clear signs becuse we can't hurt anyone's feelings.
 
dmccormack said:
It's not that high for medical types -- they start as Captains and MAJ is automatic (unless you have a DUI).
Click to expand...

I think that's generally true for people going into the service as "professionals" (doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc.) I'd have started as an O-3 (well, after 6-8 weeks of training that didn't even include basic) straight out of law school (that was at 24, doctors are generally a few years older), and would probably go in as O-4 now. It struck me as kind of odd, but honestly I think it's a combination of offering salary to induce talented people in, and a recognition that if you're a professional going into the military you're getting a later start than someone who joined at age 18 or 21-22.

For instance, my brother's working on a PhD in medicinal chemistry and will probably be 27ish when he gets it. The military has an obvious need for that kind of career (antidotes for biological/chemical agents, anyone?), but it would be hard to get a 27-y.o. to enlist if: 1) he's going to be saluting a 21-y.o.; 2) he's going to be way behind that same 21-y.o. in terms of career advancement; and 3) he'll be making the pay of a 2nd Lt. when he could be making six figures in the civilian world.

The Army will look as bad as everyone else who ignores clear signs becuse we can't hurt anyone's feelings.
Click to expand...

It's going to come out smelling bad - I don't think there's any doubt of that. What the investigation will reveal, who's to say? It doesn't sound good so far, though.

We were discussing it here a few days ago. It sure seems that, given what was known, a discharge with a bill for education given (he got med. school on the government's tab, right?) would have been appropriate. Something like that, it seems reasonable just to get the guy out, no matter what. Does it set a precedent for allowing people to dishonor the commitment? I suppose so, but weigh that against the alternative....
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
I think that's generally true for people going into the service as "professionals" (doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc.) I'd have started as an O-3 (well, after 6-8 weeks of training that didn't even include basic) straight out of law school (that was at 24, doctors are generally a few years older), and would probably go in as O-4 now. It struck me as kind of odd, but honestly I think it's a combination of offering salary to induce talented people in, and a recognition that if you're a professional going into the military you're getting a later start than someone who joined at age 18 or 21-22.
Click to expand...

Very few 18 year olds have the degree required to enter either OCS or direct commission, so the more likely scenario is a 22 year old Second lieutenant.

Nevertheless, one of the early lessons everyone must learn is that you render due courtesy to the rank, and such courtesy is far from demeaning or subservient -- it's a mark and privilege of warriors (MASH to the contrary)

Obi Heed Kenobi said:
For instance, my brother's working on a PhD in medicinal chemistry and will probably be 27ish when he gets it. The military has an obvious need for that kind of career (antidotes for biological/chemical agents, anyone?), but it would be hard to get a 27-y.o. to enlist if: 1) he's going to be saluting a 21-y.o.; 2) he's going to be way behind that same 21-y.o. in terms of career advancement; and 3) he'll be making the pay of a 2nd Lt. when he could be making six figures in the civilian world.
Click to expand...

For most officers it's not a simple calculus. If it was, there would be very, very few officers.

Obi Heed Kenobi said:
It's going to come out smelling bad - I don't think there's any doubt of that. What the investigation will reveal, who's to say? It doesn't sound good so far, though.

We were discussing it here a few days ago. It sure seems that, given what was known, a discharge with a bill for education given (he got med. school on the government's tab, right?) would have been appropriate. Something like that, it seems reasonable just to get the guy out, no matter what. Does it set a precedent for allowing people to dishonor the commitment? I suppose so, but weigh that against the alternative....
Click to expand...


Actually, there already is plenty of precendent for those that fail to meet the contract commitments. You'll usually find the guy who has the huge US Marine truck, T-Shirt, and Hat served 18 weeks and got out due to a "busted knee" and is still paying back the enlistment bonus.

:rolleyes:
 
dmccormack said:
It's not that high for medical types -- they start as Captains and MAJ is automatic (unless you have a DUI).

.
Click to expand...
Yes I know that. But he still was promoted to Major from Capt. As you and I know getting to Capt is somewhat automatic. Keep you nose clean do a good job, you'll get O3. But Major is a big step where you are looked at closely. Even medical personal and lawyers will get reviewed for Major much closer than they they were for the O2 to O3 promotion.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
I think that's generally true for people going into the service as "professionals" (doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc.) I'd have started as an O-3 (well, after 6-8 weeks of training that didn't even include basic) straight out of law school
Click to expand...
Unless it has changed it would be more likely that you would have started as an O2 right out of law school with a fast track to O3.

Obi Heed Kenobi said:
(that was at 24, doctors are generally a few years older), and would probably go in as O-4 now. It struck me as kind of odd, but honestly I think it's a combination of offering salary to induce talented people in, and a recognition that if you're a professional going into the military you're getting a later start than someone who joined at age 18 or 21-22.
Click to expand...
Most medical doctors were awarded O3 when they came in for the reasons you mentioned above plus they completed a residency. Some medical specialists even get O4 when they finish up.




Obi Heed Kenobi said:
It's going to come out smelling bad - I don't think there's any doubt of that. What the investigation will reveal, who's to say? It doesn't sound good so far, though.
Click to expand...
It will also be the defense's job to keep bringing attention to mistakes of the Army in dealing with Nisan.

As for letting him out with a bill. It may seem reasonable to you guys but looking at this from the military's point of view it is not so clear. The military made a decision that they needed a person with his qualification. They reserved a slot for him and paid for all of his school. If they allowed him to leave, even with a bill, they are left being understaffed and unable to meet their mission requirements. Letting him go, even if he pays back the military still hurts the military. Perhaps if they let him go, paid back the education, and paid the contract of someone to take his place perhaps there would be a break even point.
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
Very few 18 year olds have the degree required to enter either OCS or direct commission, so the more likely scenario is a 22 year old Second lieutenant.

Nevertheless, one of the early lessons everyone must learn is that you render due courtesy to the rank, and such courtesy is far from demeaning or subservient -- it's a mark and privilege of warriors (MASH to the contrary)
Click to expand...

For sure - I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. All I'm saying is that a lot of people with professional degrees are arrogant (lawyers and scientists are generally the worst). With predictable consequences.

For most officers it's not a simple calculus. If it was, there would be very, very few officers.
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm following what you're trying to say....

Actually, there already is plenty of precendent for those that fail to meet the contract commitments. You'll usually find the guy who has the huge US Marine truck, T-Shirt, and Hat served 18 weeks and got out due to a "busted knee" and is still paying back the enlistment bonus.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Right - but is there precedent for kicking someone out due to...I'm not even sure what to call it here. I guess there's really not enough information yet to be sure what it was.
 
smigaldi said:
Unless it has changed it would be more likely that you would have started as an O2 right out of law school with a fast track to O3.

....
Click to expand...

It's O-2 starting straight out, with O-3 contingent on a few things - if you complete all those things, it's a matter of months (if you don't, I don't know what happens - but you're not eligible to be a lawyer at all, so you're obviously not going to be an attorney). If you go in with more experience, then you're looking at something higher (but not necessarily).
 
smigaldi said:
...



It will also be the defense's job to keep bringing attention to mistakes of the Army in dealing with Nisan.

....
Click to expand...

That *could* be a factor at the criminal trial. I say could because...that's the type of thing that could easily backfire. I'll put it like this - I think your reasonable person (based on what I think, of course), would hear "the Army didn't do this, the Army didn't do that, the Army could have prevented the whole thing" from the defense, and would think "yeah right, buddy."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top