Even the SCOTUS is fed up with Bush's nonsense.

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
Then, clearly, Congress has studiously ignored your version of what the
Constitution requires for the past half century. We fought the entire
Korean
War without Congress declaring that a state of war existed.....not to this
day a
half century or so later has such a declaration been made. But it was a
war
nevertheless. Oh, and be sure to tell our VN vets that the little
brouhaha they
were involved in didn't count as a war because Congress forgot to declare
it.

Not my fault they don't have the balls to actually call it a war.

Sure it is.....it's all our faults because we elect the people who sit in the
Congress. I'm not sure I fully understand the rationale for them failing to
declare war in every instance but, unlike you, I prefer to withhold that kind of
criticism until I know why they did or didn't do whatever it was that I might
have expected of them.

Come to think of it, those little dust ups that passed for wars in Panama,
Granada, and Kuwait (the Gulf War) were similarly undeclared. I guess
they
didn't count either.

Finally, a right answer from you. They weren't "wars" since Congress didn't
declare them that.

You must be the only person in the country who's never heard of "undeclared
wars", like the one we're engaged in right now with the sovereign nation of
Iraq. The Congress may have said numerous things on the subject in many
different formats, but one thing they didn't say was that a state of war existed
between the Government of Iraq and the Government of the United States.

Those Congressmen sure must be stupid to fail to recognize what they're
supposed
to do before young Americans in uniform are placed in harm's way.

(Snip)

You obviously don't have a clue how things work at the flag level.

You obviously don't have a clue about what I know. Try again.

I guess everybody's out of step but you. You're the one who doesn't seem
to
know squat about the subject.

Well, lets see what I know:

1. Shinseki didn't clean out his desk.
2. Didn't leave the building.
3. Didn't lose one iota of his command authority.
4. Didn't stop attending JCS meetings.
5. Didn't stop travelling around giving speeches as the CSA.
6. Served his ENTIRE assignment period as specified under Public Law.

Yep, not "fired".

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
k.net...
Ragnar wrote:
Congress didn't declare "war", so we were not "clearly" at war.

They came close enough for most purposes. The 18 September 2001 Joint
Resolution is effectively a declaration of war. It certainly activates the
various "in time of war" clauses in other legislation, such as the recall of
troops and so forth (though a good lawyer might argue out of a treason
charge on the technicality).

Note that Admiral Clark, the current Chief of Naval Operations, has had his
appointment extended by an additional two years (for a total of six).

Regarding Shinseki, I agree he was not fired. But he was clearly
marginalized by OSD. Rumsfeld named his preferred successor (the serving
Vice COS) over a year in advance, an unprecendented announcement. (General
Keane then declined the post, also unprecedented, IME. Then General Franks
also turned it down when offered.) Notably, no senior OSD officials
attended Shinsiki's retirement ceremony, which is rather unusual for an
outgoing service chief.

Any flag officer who was as "marginalized" as much as Shinseki was would have
been considered "fired" by his peers. What he was told was, in effect, that his
services would no longer be required once his lease had expired. Were I
Shinseki, when my colleague in the Navy Department got an extension in time of
war, I'd expect one as well. Failing that, I'd consider myself "fired".

George Z.

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

(Snip)

Well, lets see what I know:

1. Shinseki didn't clean out his desk.
2. Didn't leave the building.
3. Didn't lose one iota of his command authority.
4. Didn't stop attending JCS meetings.
5. Didn't stop travelling around giving speeches as the CSA.
6. Served his ENTIRE assignment period as specified under Public Law.

Yep, not "fired".

Didn't get an extension similar to the one the CNO got. Under those
circumstances, you may not think he was fired, but I'd bet a bucket of warm spit
that Shinseki thinks he was. A flag officer I know thinks he was and, further,
says that most flag officers see it that way.

So you differ with them.....but they made flag rank and you and I made what???
Are you trying to tell us that you know how those things work better than the
ones who are directly involved? If so, then I give up because I can't argue
with such arrogance.

George Z.

George Z.

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

(Snip)

Well, lets see what I know:

1. Shinseki didn't clean out his desk.
2. Didn't leave the building.
3. Didn't lose one iota of his command authority.
4. Didn't stop attending JCS meetings.
5. Didn't stop travelling around giving speeches as the CSA.
6. Served his ENTIRE assignment period as specified under Public Law.

Yep, not "fired".

Didn't get an extension similar to the one the CNO got.

Extensions aren't mandatory, nor has one been used for any CSA since 1964,
including during Vietnam.

Under those
circumstances, you may not think he was fired, but I'd bet a bucket of
warm spit
that Shinseki thinks he was.

Yes, please tell us what Shinseki thinks. Perhaps a link to his opinion
would help.

A flag officer I know thinks he was and, further,
says that most flag officers see it that way.

So you differ with them.....but they made flag rank and you and I made
what???

I know the definition of "fired" and he doesn't fit it.

Are you trying to tell us that you know how those things work better than
the
ones who are directly involved? If so, then I give up because I can't
argue
with such arrogance.

Speaking of arrogance . . .


George Z.

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
k.net...
Ragnar wrote:
Congress didn't declare "war", so we were not "clearly" at war.

They came close enough for most purposes. The 18 September 2001 Joint
Resolution is effectively a declaration of war. It certainly activates
the
various "in time of war" clauses in other legislation, such as the
recall of
troops and so forth (though a good lawyer might argue out of a treason
charge on the technicality).

Note that Admiral Clark, the current Chief of Naval Operations, has had
his
appointment extended by an additional two years (for a total of six).

Regarding Shinseki, I agree he was not fired. But he was clearly
marginalized by OSD. Rumsfeld named his preferred successor (the
serving
Vice COS) over a year in advance, an unprecendented announcement.
(General
Keane then declined the post, also unprecedented, IME. Then General
Franks
also turned it down when offered.) Notably, no senior OSD officials
attended Shinsiki's retirement ceremony, which is rather unusual for an
outgoing service chief.

Any flag officer who was as "marginalized" as much as Shinseki was would
have
been considered "fired" by his peers. What he was told was, in effect,
that his
services would no longer be required once his lease had expired. Were I
Shinseki, when my colleague in the Navy Department got an extension in
time of
war, I'd expect one as well. Failing that, I'd consider myself "fired".

Then by your standards, ALL of the following were "fired":

CNO
ADM David L. McDonald 01 Aug 63 01 Aug 67
ADM Thomas H. Moorer 01 Aug 67 01 Jul 70
ADM Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr. 01 Jul 70 01 Jul 74
ADM James L. Holloway III 01 Jul 74 01 Jul 78
ADM Thomas B. Hayward 01 Jul 78 01 Jul 82
ADM James D. Watkins 01 Jul 82 01 Jul 86
ADM Carlisle A. H. Trost 01 Jul 86 30 Jun 90
ADM Frank B. Kelso II 01 Jul 90 23 Apr 94
*ADM Jeremy M. Boorda 23 Apr 94 16 May 96
ADM Jay L. Johnson 02 Aug 96 20 Jul 00


CSA
*GEN Harold K. Johnson 03 Jul 64 02 Jul 68
GEN William C. Westmoreland 03 Jul 68 30 Jun 72
GEN Bruce Palmer, Jr. (acting) 01 Jul 72 11 Oct 72
*GEN Creighton W. Abrams 12 Oct 72 04 Sep 74
GEN Fred C. Weyande 03 Oct 74 01 Oct 76
GEN Bernard W. Rogers 01 Oct 76 21 Jun 79
GEN Edward C. Meyer 22 Jun 79 22 Jun 83
GEN John A. Wickham, Jr. 23 Jun 83 22 Jun 87
GEN Carl E. Vuono 23 Jun 87 21 Jun 91
GEN Gordon R. Sullivan 21 Jun 91 19 Jun 95
GEN Dennis A. Reimer 20 Jun 95 21 Jun 99


USAF*GEN Curtis E. LeMay 30 Jun 61 31 Jan 65
*GEN John P. McConnell 01 Feb 65 01 Aug 69
*GEN John D. Ryan 01 Aug 69 31 Jul 73
*GEN George S. Brown 01 Aug 73 30 Jun 74
GEN David C. Jones 01 Jul 74 20 Jun 78
GEN Lew Allen, Jr. 01 Jul 78 30 Jun 82
GEN Charles A. Gabriel 01 Jul 82 30 Jun 86
GEN Larry D. Welch 01 Jul 86 30 Jun 90
GEN Michael J. Dugan 01 Jul 90 17 Sep 90
GEN John M. Loh (acting) 17 Sep 90 27 Oct 90
GEN Merrill A. McPeak 27 Oct 90 25 Oct 94
GEN Ronald R. Fogleman 26 Oct 94 1 Sep 97
GEN Michael E. Ryan 6 Oct 97 6 Sep 01
GEN John P. Jumper 6 Sep 01 present


USMC
GEN Wallace M. Greene, Jr. 01 Jan 64 31 Dec 67
GEN Leonard F. Chapman, Jr. 01 Jan 68 31 Dec 71
*GEN Robert E. Cushman, Jr. 01 Jan 72 30 Jun 75
GEN Louis H. Wilson 01 Jul 75 30 Jun 79
GEN Robert H. Barrow 01 Jul 79 30 Jun 83
GEN Paul X. Kelley 01 Jul 83 30 Jun 87
GEN Alfred M. Gray, Jr. 01 Jul 87 01 Jul 91
GEN Carl E. Mundy, Jr. 01 Jul 91 30 Jun 95
GEN Charles C. Krulak 01 Jul 95 30 Jun 99
GEN James L. Jones 1 Jul 99 14 Jan 03
GEN Michael W. Hagee 14 Jan 03 Present



Not one extension of duty in the entire list, even during the Vietnam war.
And the ones who were really fired, like General Dugan, really cleaned out
their desks and left the building.

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

(Snip)

Extensions aren't mandatory, nor has one been used for any CSA since 1964,
including during Vietnam.

Picky...picky...picky! Admiral Vern Clark, our present Chief of Naval
Operations, is presently serving on a two year extension to his four year term
of office. It doesn't matter one bit, for the purposes of this discussion,
whether the flag officer concerned is a Naval officer or an Air Force officer or
an Army officer. If an extension is available to one of them during an
undeclared war, it's available to all of the others.

Under those
circumstances, you may not think he was fired, but I'd bet a bucket of
warm spit
that Shinseki thinks he was.

Yes, please tell us what Shinseki thinks. Perhaps a link to his opinion
would help.

A flag officer I know thinks he was and, further,
says that most flag officers see it that way.

So you differ with them.....but they made flag rank and you and I made
what???

I know the definition of "fired" and he doesn't fit it.

Are you trying to tell us that you know how those things work better than
the
ones who are directly involved? If so, then I give up because I can't
argue
with such arrogance.

Speaking of arrogance . . .

I do give up. You surely are convinced that you know more about it than they
do. Oh, well.....

George Z.

From: "Ragnar"

GEN Fred C. Weyande 03 Oct 74 01 Oct 76

Probably a slip of finger on keyboard, but it's (LG) Weyand without the "e."
Becoming Army CoS was not a bad career topper for an ROTC type. One of his
more famous and keen observations was:
"Vietnam was a reaffirmation of the peculiar relationship between the American
Army and the American people. The American Army really is a people's army in
the sense that it belongs to the American people who take a jealous and
proprietary interest in its involvement. When the Army is committed the
American people are committed, when the American people lose their commitment
it is futile to try to keep the Army committed."


Chris Mark

George Z. Bush wrote:
Any flag officer who was as "marginalized" as much as Shinseki was
would have been considered "fired" by his peers. What he was told
was, in effect, that his services would no longer be required once
his lease had expired. Were I Shinseki, when my colleague in the
Navy Department got an extension in time of war, I'd expect one as
well. Failing that, I'd consider myself "fired".

Clark got his extension two months after Shinseki retired. AFAIK, he's the
only service chief to get this treatment.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
ink.net...
George Z. Bush wrote:
Any flag officer who was as "marginalized" as much as Shinseki was
would have been considered "fired" by his peers. What he was told
was, in effect, that his services would no longer be required once
his lease had expired. Were I Shinseki, when my colleague in the
Navy Department got an extension in time of war, I'd expect one as
well. Failing that, I'd consider myself "fired".

Clark got his extension two months after Shinseki retired. AFAIK, he's the
only service chief to get this treatment.

So, what was the significance of that? No other flag officer in the entire US
Navy competent to become CNO while the war is going on, and particularly since
the Navy is so heavily committed and engaged during those operations? What was
his peculiar contribution to a service barely visible in the ongoing operations
that required him to be held over if not to rub the noses of other possibly
disapproving flag officers in how the carrot and stick game is being played by
this administration?

George Z.

"Chris Mark" wrote in message
...
From: "Ragnar"

GEN Fred C. Weyande 03 Oct 74 01 Oct 76

Probably a slip of finger on keyboard, but it's (LG) Weyand without the
"e."
Becoming Army CoS was not a bad career topper for an ROTC type.

Can't vouch for the spelling, but the list came straight from the JCS' own
web page.