Madame Chairman, the GOP casts all its votes....

Why not? The guy was president for eight years. The military that rolled up in Afghanistan and Iraq didn't build itself. And he didn't "prepare" the military for a fulltime occupation of Iraq because everybody who knew anything about the place, up to and including Bush 41, knew that was a fool's errand.
Meanwhile, back at the polls,
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political%20Tracking/Presidential%20Match-Ups/McCainvs.ObamaEdwards20070123.htm

Not good at all, John.
The war. The war. The war.

 

That's true, although there's more to it than that. He was the first enlisted sailor ever to achieve the full rank of admiral, and to be the top admiral made it all the more impressive. He was an enlisted man's admiral and he created programs intended to help them advance their careers.

 

Printdust, Fenian, let's not open a new front to this war, please. Clinton didn't build the military any more than the Shrub has. The military might look different in 2006 than it did in 1998 when I left after nearly a decade, but not because of Clinton/Bush, except that the forces are a lot smaller because of BRAC (base realignment and closure), which was a nightmare on its own.

 

Yeah, I believe most of the base closure orders started under Clinton.

 

The BRAC aside, and that was about a decade in coming, the military that lined up in 2001 came from somewhere. It didn't create itself. It wasn't done on automatic pilot. Somebody was president in the previous eight years. I insist on this point only to counter the "Clinton gutted the military" crap that's been churned out by the other side since Poppy Bush left him the Somalia fiasco as a going-away president.

 

BRAC actually began under the first Bush administration (Big Daddy Bush), following an expansion to the Navy that was actually more than should have been done. Reagan promoted a 600+ ship Navy, among other things, and the downturned economy and the fall of the Soviet Union (as well as the completion of Desert Storm) forced the start of BRAC. But yes, a majority of the drawdown was done while Clinton was in office.

That, however, doesn't mean it's Clinton's fault, nor do I blame either Bush. The military expanded to such large numbers, then the majority of the country questioned the need to have it that big. Now a lot of military leaders are wishing they had even a quarter of the armed forces they used to have, in terms of size.

 

Fenian, for the short time I've surfed this board, I don't think I've ever seen you have anything bad to say about any Democratic president or leader. If you have, do you have the thread? I'd love to see what slipped by me. Otherwise, I'm going to toss out that 99.999999 percent of your venting is simply anti-GOP, and in a way most conservatives label people like you - displaying the politics of anger. Prove me wrong about the percentages.

 

printdust --

I'm going to assume that when you're not on here, you fuck little retarded boys in the ass.

Please, prove me wrong.

 

AA -- I was covering the Reagan campaign and the administration at the time, and I still am unclear what the "600-ship Navy" actually meant? Was it capital ships, in which case (I think) it would mean carriers and their escorts, or was it all manner of ships up to and including submarines?
And 'dust, you haven't looked hard enough. Please counter, if you can, and I admit I am inexpert on military procurement practices, the points in the post cited above.

 

Just one reason why minors should be blocked from posting. That "12" is your age, right Zeke?

 

While the rhetorical flourishes are mine, the craptacular logic I stole from your previous post.

I am not surprised that the point was lost on you.

 

I guess Fenian it's the passion that glares from all your posts. Maybe it blinds me to the exceptions. My apologies.