Petraeus' disappointing statement

[Show Me the Wire]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703713504575475500753093116.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLTopStories.

If we are so afraid of our enemies and do not want to preserve Freedom of Speech, why are we still in Afghanistan? Withdraw now

[Black Ruby]

I think it's more a case of not wanting to create more enemies or make the ones we already have more passionate. Kind of like bulletin board material in sports. Not good strategy to make the opponent more motivated.

[Canadian]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703713504575475500753093116.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLTopStories.

If we are so afraid of our enemies and do not want to preserve Freedom of Speech, why are we still in Afghanistan? Withdraw now


At what part in his statement does he mention he does not want to preserve freedom of speech? Please let us know.

[Mike at A+]

Much ado about nothing. We tolerate burning of the American flag in Afghanistan and it doesn't affect our military actions against the enemy. Hell, we even tolerate that over here and protect it as a First Amendment right. Some insignificant Florida preacher will get his 15 minutes of fame and a YouTube moment. When the Muslims become more tolerant of other religions, then this will be an actual news flash. Until then, no one will even remember this guy's name a week after his pyrotechnic display. If anyone is endangering our soldiers, it's the press that should have totally ignored this idiot.

[Show Me the Wire]

At what part in his statement does he mention he does not want to preserve freedom of speech? Please let us know.

Burning the Koran is Freedom of Speech. If he is against the event it is implied. Thoughts and ideas can be implied to a statement.

However, any way you want to slice it, the statement sends the wrong message. It shows fear of a supposedely inferior enemy (fighting force) and/or Petrasius does not understand his oath and a general's job is to protect the right of any U.S. Citizen to burn the Koran, the U.S. flag, etc, without condemming the Constitutionally protected act.

I ask you you how you can take anything else away from the statement?

[Show Me the Wire]

Much ado about nothing. We tolerate burning of the American flag in Afghanistan and it doesn't affect our military actions against the enemy. Hell, we even tolerate that over here and protect it as a First Amendment right. Some insignificant Florida preacher will get his 15 minutes of fame and a YouTube moment. When the Muslims become more tolerant of other religions, then this will be an actual news flash. Until then, no one will even remember this guy's name a week after his pyrotechnic display. If anyone is endangering our soldiers, it's the press that should have totally ignored this idiot.


Agree totaly, and the General should have not made a public statement about the event.

War is not about appeasing your enemy, but defeating your enemy. If we want to apease the Afghans and not defeat them, let's not endanger another soldier's safety and withdraw now.

[bigmack]

Because the guy is American that makes us more of an enemy to Muslims? When do they get as intellectual and civilized as us?

An entire country is judged by the actions of one man. What simpletons.

lne0NoxEoz8

[ArlJim78]

So if we all study and worship the Koran, will that make our troops safer?

[mostpost]

Much ado about nothing. We tolerate burning of the American flag in Afghanistan and it doesn't affect our military actions against the enemy. Hell, we even tolerate that over here and protect it as a First Amendment right. Some insignificant Florida preacher will get his 15 minutes of fame and a YouTube moment. When the Muslims become more tolerant of other religions, then this will be an actual news flash. Until then, no one will even remember this guy's name a week after his pyrotechnic display. If anyone is endangering our soldiers, it's the press that should have totally ignored this idiot.
I mostly agree with you here. This church has fifty members. In my church we get more than that out to plant flowers in the spring. Terry Jones is a fame whore. The worst thing we could do to him is to ignore him.

[PaceAdvantage]

So if we all study and worship the Koran, will that make our troops safer?Apparently so...that's the message, taken to its logical extreme...

[TJDave]

Because the guy is American that makes us more of an enemy to Muslims? When do they get as intellectual and civilized as us?

An entire country is judged by the actions of one man. What simpletons.


Unless the "good" pastor has a death wish I'm betting this doesn't happen. Someone will sit down and explain it to him. :lol:

[redshift1]

Terry Jones interviewed tonight on nightline.



http://abcnews.go.com/US/terry-jones-pastor-burn-koran-day/story?id=11575665

[bigmack]

Unless the "good" pastor has a death wish I'm betting this doesn't happen. Someone will sit down and explain it to him. :lol:
And IF there is violence perpetrated on him by someone who is Muslim we'll get a chance to see the media obfuscate their religious affiliation and watch Eric Holder rev-up his prosecutorial team to about 1/10th of his vigor towards Arizona.

Guess which cable outlet will be running this story non-stop for days? Bingo - MSNBC.

[boxcar]

Unless the "good" pastor has a death wish I'm betting this doesn't happen. Someone will sit down and explain it to him. :lol:

He might be "good" but doesn't have the sense of a toad. Why deliberately provoke another religious group? How in the world is that Christ-like? Maybe he's desperate for his 2 minutes of fame? Or hungry for some publicity, perhaps? But in any case -- another very misguided [professing] Christian.

Boxcar

[Mike at A+]

He's playing to a very small minority, pretty much like Rosie saying that Bush was complicit in taking down the Twin Towers. There's are fringe people on both sides. If we condemn one but not the other it simply exposes partisanship.

[hcap]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vdtFk_V6A4M&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vdtFk_V6A4M&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[mostpost]

He might be "good" but doesn't have the sense of a toad. Why deliberately provoke another religious group? How in the world is that Christ-like? Maybe he's desperate for his 2 minutes of fame? Or hungry for some publicity, perhaps? But in any case -- another very misguided [professing] Christian.

Boxcar
Did not expect that. :eek:

[Mike at A+]

Did not expect that. :eek:
Therein lies the difference between a conservative and a liberal. Conservatives will slam the far right like this asshole but liberals didn't fall over themselves to slam Rosie for her WTC conspiracy theory or Jeanine Garofalo for her outlandish claim that everyone in the Tea Party is a racist and disliked Obama simply because he's black. That's about the ONLY thing I like about Obama - he's black - and it's been a long time coming that we elected a more diverse president. Unfortunately, he's not qualified.

[boxcar]

Did not expect that. :eek:

Shows how little you know me after all this time on the forum. You need to pay better attention. :p

Boxcar

[Canadian]

Burning the Koran is Freedom of Speech. If he is against the event it is implied. Thoughts and ideas can be implied to a statement.

However, any way you want to slice it, the statement sends the wrong message. It shows fear of a supposedely inferior enemy (fighting force) and/or Petrasius does not understand his oath and a general's job is to protect the right of any U.S. Citizen to burn the Koran, the U.S. flag, etc, without condemming the Constitutionally protected act.

I ask you you how you can take anything else away from the statement?



Ok... this is getting into one of my biggest pet peeves. THIS IS NOT A FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUE.

No where in his statement did he say burning the Koran should be banned.... NO WHERE.

He said it was a bad idea and he shouldn't do it.

How you can possibly derive that he is against freedom of speech or wants to limit freedom of speech from anything he has said is beyond me.

Lets clairify.... Being against a stupid idea.... or a good idea for that matter is not being against freedom of speech.... that's using his freedom of speech.

I am against Fred Phelps protesting at fallen soldiers funeral.... does that make me against freedom of speech? No.

[Canadian]

I mostly agree with you here. This church has fifty members. In my church we get more than that out to plant flowers in the spring. Terry Jones is a fame whore. The worst thing we could do to him is to ignore him.


Which is maybe the most hilarious/sad thing about this story. How some random loser can generate this much attention to himself is beyond me.... and the media....... "Will he do it"... "is he going to do it"...... Who gives a rats ass what some random loser does?

[Mike at A+]

I'm glad someone brought up Phelps. Here's how I would "bend the law" a little. The local police should convey to the family attending the funeral of a fallen soldier that they would not be providing protection to Phelps and his gang of assholes. And that they would look the other way should said family decide to administer a well deserved beating to these scum. I'd love to see this piece of garbage have every bone in his body broken along with his evil wife and misguided kids and his "God hates fags" sign shoved up his butt.

[Show Me the Wire]

Ok... this is getting into one of my biggest pet peeves. THIS IS NOT A FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUE.

No where in his statement did he say burning the Koran should be banned.... NO WHERE.

He said it was a bad idea and he shouldn't do it.

How you can possibly derive that he is against freedom of speech or wants to limit freedom of speech from anything he has said is beyond me.

Lets clairify.... Being against a stupid idea.... or a good idea for that matter is not being against freedom of speech.... that's using his freedom of speech.

I am against Fred Phelps protesting at fallen soldiers funeral.... does that make me against freedom of speech? No.

Now you get it. Using your right to speak may not be the wisest move. Regarding this specific matter, Petraeus should have followed his own advice and not publically commented. With that said it is a Freedom of Speech issue.

As I stated earlier Petraius is confused about a general's role regarding his obligation to defend Constitutional rights and especially should not declare that he is afraid that an enemy, already committing violence against U.S. troops, may increase violence because a citizen of the U.S. is exercising a Constitutionllly protected right.

The General's statement was a bad idea and he should not have made it.

Being a Canadian are you an expert on U.S. Fredom of Speech?

[bigmack]

Which is maybe the most hilarious/sad thing about this story. How some random loser can generate this much attention to himself is beyond me.... and the media....... "Will he do it"... "is he going to do it".
It's the usual suspects in the media that LOVE stories about over zealous Christians.

WATCH OUT - Says MSNBC, those Christians are nuts and by the way, rightwing.
CAREFUL - Says CBS, the biggest threat we have are Christian who are oftentimes militant.

Stokin' those flames. It's about as irresponsible as the BP spill coverage. They vilified BP and made the damage sound so horrific everyone cancelled their travel plans. Tourism was obliterated as they packed their TV trucks and went back to NY.

Left leaning media (98% of all media) has blood, guts and cancelled travel plans all over its hands & face. All in hopes of finding the next villian and that villian is almost always Christian, Republican and/or Corporate.

BOO! :eek:

[Canadian]

I'm glad someone brought up Phelps. Here's how I would "bend the law" a little. The local police should convey to the family attending the funeral of a fallen soldier that they would not be providing protection to Phelps and his gang of assholes. And that they would look the other way should said family decide to administer a well deserved beating to these scum. I'd love to see this piece of garbage have every bone in his body broken along with his evil wife and misguided kids and his "God hates fags" sign shoved up his butt.


It's funny about Fred Phelps.... he doesn't really get me that angry.... and I'm not sure if he would even it was my family members funeral....... he is so hatefull so deranged.... I almost don't view him as human...... Like a person who gets attacked by a shark and doesn't hate the shark... it's what sharks do....... though I still would like to see him get the tar beat out of him... and if I were a cop.... it wouldn't be hard for me to look the other way.... but man... what a hateful human being.

[Canadian]

Now you get it. Using your right to speak may not be the wisest move. Regarding this specific matter, Petraeus should have followed his own advice and not publically commented. With that said it is a Freedom of Speech issue.


You could not be more wrong if your head was screwed on backwards. In no way shape or forum is the generals remarks on the issue raise anything at all about freedom of speech or expression.... NOTHING.

Not once did the general say he should not be allowed to do it. Not once did he say he should not have the freedom to speak his mind or express himself, thus he is not trying to limit anyones freedom of speech.

Some how.... some way... you must think that when someone doesn't agree with what someone else is doing they must NOT be allowed to say anything... .. thus if they do, they are denying the persons freedom of speech. You are wrong.


As I stated earlier Petraius is confused about a general's role regarding his obligation to defend Constitutional rights and especially should not declare that he is afraid that an enemy, already committing violence against U.S. troops, may increase violence because a citizen of the U.S. is exercising a Constitutionllly protected right.


Part of his job is protecting his troops... and if he feels some loser in the states actions have the potential to put his troops in danger then he has very right to speak his mind... now whether or not this will put his troops in additional danger is debatable..... But again... how you get a freedom of speech issue out of this is beyond me.



Being a Canadian are you an expert on U.S. Fredom of Speech?


No. But far better then you.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
Now you get it. Using your right to speak may not be the wisest move.

Sounds like Ron White (Blue Collar). he said when he got arrested that he had the right to remain silent.....but not the ability. :lol:

I think Petraeus should keep his mouth shut and do his job, whatever that is, considering Obama doesn't want victory there. If he want to shout off his mouth, he should enter politics and retire.

But this nut with the matches.....it would be far better, IMHO , if he were take the Koran and expose it for what it really is, page by page. Show how all the so-called devoted leaders in the ME are nothing more than dogs and pigs and do not follow it at all. Start with "royal" pig family of Sorry Arabia. Show the world what bottom feeding animals they all are and how none of them are fit to walk this earth.

New show won HBO premiered tonight - My Trip To Al Qeda. Must see TV. No one needs to burn a Koran when just show ing how the miserble dogs over there really live and how useless th K really is to ME leaders.

[Show Me the Wire]

Canadian:

You clearly do not understand the nuance. Petreaus is not any ordinary citizen. As a general he has taken an oath to protect any U.S. citizen's right to burn Korans and he is being grossly negligent in his duties even suggesting burning Korans or any object is not a good idea if violence from a foreign agressor will result.

FYI burning a Koran is an act of protected Free Speech.
His remarks imply that this U.S. citizen, excercising "Free Speech" is harming the United States.

If you read my posts I have said nothing about the General denying anyone "Free Speech" as you suggest. MY posts are about the General's lack of discretion can be interpreted as failing to defend Free Speech rights to appease the enemy.

[Canadian]

Canadian:

You clearly do not understand the nuance. Petreaus is not any ordinary citizen. As a general he has taken an oath to protect any U.S. citizen's right to burn Korans and he is being grossly negligent in his duties even suggesting burning Korans or any object is not a good idea if violence from a foreign agressor will result.




I really think it's more of an issue that you personally want to see that Koran burn and fan the flames of insane Muslim rage... and have a hardy laugh in the process..... which is all good...... But you... me.... we're in front of a computer. He's on the ground...... If someone pokes the hornets nest over here he feels it over there..... So yeah...... when someone elses actions mean an increased probablity of getting a bullet in the head (which is debatable), then he has the right to say... hey... maybe not such a great idea.

[newtothegame]

Not that my opinion matters much with some lol...but , for what its worth (being ex military), here is my take.
I sorta understand where both Canadian and Show me are coming from.
Patreus in my opinion was not saying anything about free speech.
But, with that being said, Patreus shouldnt open his mouth when it comes to issues that are of political nature.
He is a U.S general and as such, has a responsibility to uphold the constitution. And providing I am not severly lacking in history, one of those amendments is the right to free speech.
As a general, I can see his concern for his men and women who he is charged to protect.
But, like McCrystal, he is opening a can of worms. Leave the politics to those in washington. Leave the fighting to those on the ground overseas.
I seem to recall Patton making some of these few mistakes.....I guess it's true that with great power, comes great responsibility. Maybe these generals should heed that warning a bit better when it comes to voicing political concerns!

[bigmack]

I really think it's more of an issue that you personally want to see that Koran burn and fan the flames of insane Muslim rage... and have a hardy laugh in the process.....
Thought police episode # 253. Canadian to US citizen commenting on US policy of free speech while US bringing a sound, well thought point.

Canadian collapses into melted marshmallow as debate points dry-up; accuses other of schadenfreude. Canadian rendered nonsensically as useless debater.

Fade to black...

[Canadian]

Thought police episode # 253. Canadian to US citizen commenting on US policy of free speech while US bringing a sound, well thought point.

Canadian collapses into melted marshmallow as debate points dry-up; accuses other of schadenfreude. Canadian rendered nonsensically as useless debater.

Fade to black...


Exactly... I win.

[Canadian]

But, with that being said, Patreus shouldnt open his mouth when it comes to issues that are of political nature.



What about issues of an..... it could increase the odds of me coming home in a body bag nature?

[newtothegame]

What about issues of an..... it could increase the odds of me coming home in a body bag nature?

Those issues...when they arise should be addressed through the chain of command. There is no real benefit to going "public" with your concerns. Someone will always get their feelings hurt which ultimately could lead to another McCrystal or Patton event.
Chain of command has a purpose...like it or not.
If you start allowing generals to make political statements, then who's to say colonels can't? So on and so forth...before you know it, you have sargeants and down questioning their orders.

[bigmack]

Exactly... I win.
You're just simple enough to not get that Petraeus only added flames to the story and that it was HIS freedom of speech to say what he wants though as his current military position it's a questionable play.

What you also don't get is that the burning of these books is clearly a freedom of speech issue.

Of course here's how things are handled in The Great White North:

On February 13, 2006 the Western Standard attracted controversy when it became the first widely-published English Canadian media outlet to republish the cartoons of Muhammad first published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Conservative Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor criticized this decision, saying that it put the lives of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan at increased risk.

Thought Police roll in to ask "What was your intent?"

3iMNM1tef7g

Canada: Dolt Central

[newtothegame]

And, had this been addressed properly through the chain, washington can address their concerns with the church and have alot less fan fare then this story is recieving.
this is not about whether or not I think Petreus' agenda was right. It's about how it was handled.

[Canadian]

Those issues...when they arise should be addressed through the chain of command. There is no real benefit to going "public" with your concerns. Someone will always get their feelings hurt which ultimately could lead to another McCrystal or Patton event.
Chain of command has a purpose...like it or not.
If you start allowing generals to make political statements, then who's to say colonels can't? So on and so forth...before you know it, you have sargeants and down questioning their orders.


Get their feelings hurt?.... You give a damn if that meatball preacher gets his feelings hurt?

If I were a general.... and someone did something to put my life in danger (not saying this is the case here) or the life of my men.... I wouldn't go through no chain of command.... I might beat the guy with a chain

[Canadian]

What you also don't get is that the burning of these books is clearly a freedom of speech issue.



It certianly would be if the general said they should ban the burning of the Koran.... which is the issue here.... which he did not. Bringing what some useless bureaucratic body from Canada (I think I posted that months ago) is not the issue that was brought up.

[newtothegame]

Get their feelings hurt?.... You give a damn if that meatball preacher gets his feelings hurt?

If I were a general.... and someone did something to put my life in danger (not saying this is the case here) or the life of my men.... I wouldn't go through no chain of command.... I might beat the guy with a chain

Well canadian...never did I say ANYWHERE I gave two cents about what this preacher thinks. We are talking about politics and service members making statements. On a WORLD stage, military personel should not be making statements. My comments about feelings are more towards countries and their leaders. Not some two bit preacher.

Want an example.....Patton would of easily got us into another war with his mouth.
And its not about was he right or wrong...its about a chain of command and using it. So please...don't play games trying to bait me into something else.

If you want my two cents on a preacher who wants to burn a book...ask.
I think this preacher has a right to do it if he so sees fit.
And a fitting end would be a statement I recently heard....
"Just because you have a right to do something...doesn't make it right to do it"!

[newtothegame]

Get their feelings hurt?.... You give a damn if that meatball preacher gets his feelings hurt?

If I were a general.... and someone did something to put my life in danger (not saying this is the case here) or the life of my men.... I wouldn't go through no chain of command.... I might beat the guy with a chain

Its easy to talk behind a computer....
Ok so lets say you are a general.....
And in your words, "someone did something to put my life in danger or the life of my men"......
You've just been told by upper command to take a hill at all cost! Now what big guy??? You will lose men. But because of some political statement being made around the world on some "red" phone in some oval office, this hill is important.

Don't make this out more then it is.

Petreus made a comment...He should'nt have. It's done! It's not very likely that the taliban...al queda...muslims...are now gonna be able to "rise up" and cast a massive blow at our troops.

Our troops were in danger the minute they stepped foot on middle eastern soil. The dangers do NOT increase because of a book burning in the backwoods of georgia or wherever it is. The dangers increase because of media coverage and our attempts to be politically correct.

Our military are the worst ambassadors. Sorry guys but thats from experience. Don't send our youg men and women in harms way and tell them not too shoot at religeos sites. Don't shoot unless shot at. Don't...(you fill in the blank).

How much grief or INCREASED fighting did the Abu Gharib prison incident cost us?
You want to get technical?? WHY THE F&* %^$ HAS GITMO not been closed?? Now there's an issue that THIS administration said would be closed in 12 months yet remains open! That carries alot more consequences with foriegners then some book burning in back woods Georgia (or wherever).

By the way....just so you don't try and turn something else...if not gitmo, then where? Just so you know where I stand!

[Canadian]

Its easy to talk behind a computer....
Ok so lets say you are a general.....
And in your words, "someone did something to put my life in danger or the life of my men"......
You've just been told by upper command to take a hill at all cost! Now what big guy???



I'd quit... or fake sick or something..... That's why I'm not a general.



Petreus made a comment...He should'nt have. It's done! It's not very likely that the taliban...al queda...muslims...are now gonna be able to "rise up" and cast a massive blow at our troops.


correct.

Our troops were in danger the minute they stepped foot on middle eastern soil. The dangers do NOT increase because of a book burning in the backwoods of georgia or wherever it is. The dangers increase because of media coverage and our attempts to be politically correct.


also correct

[Robert Goren]

If it gets world wide news coverage, it doesn't matter if it happens in the backwoods of Georgia or in times square. This a lot like the Rev. Fred Phelps or the ground zero mosque issues. Do they have the constitutional right to do it? Yes. Is it a good idea? No. We are trying to win the hearts and minds of Afghans(whether we should be trying or whether we can is another question), this clearly is not going to aid that effort. This pastor is getting his 15 minutes of fame. That what this is all about. Lets hope some brave GI doesn't pay for it with his life his life.

[Native Texan III]

Was this gentleman the same pastor that starred as Simon The Holy Man in "Life of Brian" ?

"Brian: Look, you've got it all wrong! You don't need to follow me, you don't need to follow anybody! You've got to think for yourselves! You're all individuals!The Crowd (in unison): Yes! We're all individuals!Brian: You're all different!The Crowd (in unison): Yes, we are all different!Man in Crowd: I'm not.Another Man: Shhh!"