View Single Post
  #13  
Old May 9th 04, 01:14 AM
BUFDRVR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Absolutely. The Wing Commander is ultimately responsible for the *general*
conduct of every squadron in the wing...however he is not personally
responsible for for the actions of every individual in the wing...which is
exactly what you are arguing.


Yes, definitely yes. He is -ultimately- responsible, good or bad, whole or
incomplete for -everything-.


Does that mean he should be charged under the UCMJ if a Hummer driver deosn't
maintain the proper tire inflation on his vehicle and it leads to an accident
or unreasonable damage to the vehicle? No, of course not.


I agree, however that is exactly what you're arguing by claiming the President
should be held accountable for the actions of individual US service members.

But the president -is-
repsonsible to the American people. Could he have prevented or been aware
directly that a female national guardsman had an naked iraqi man on a leash?
No.


This is a far cry from your intital statements and that of like Democrats
calling for the Presidents impeachment over the scandal.

Does he need to take the appropriate action to ensure that the most
culpable are held responsible, yes.


Absolutely.

Did the blatant disregard for the rule of law by the Bush administration add
to
the climate that led to the abuses at Al Ghraib? Probably.


That's funny. I can see it now, U.S. service members sitting around discussing
the "illegal invasion of Iraq" when one looks at the other and says; "hey, if
he's breakin' the law...we should too". Please tell me you don't honestly
believe a Presidents actions have any direct influance over the actions of
individual soldiers. I seved in the U.S. military for 8 years under Clinton and
never had an inkling to smoke pot, cheat on my wife with a fat woman or make a
false official statement (although...since I was never involved in any
investigations, this one was never put to the test).

But no US service
person should have engaged in such conduct.


Absolutely.

They knew better


Concur, despite what their lawyers will say.

Of course with a fuzzy understanding of command and responsibility -- like
you
have-- it's not as surprising as it might otherwise be.


My understanding of command and responsibility is crystal clear, its your that
doesn't mesh with reality.

but the president is ultimately
responsible -- he --absolutely is


And when have I said any different? One of your problems is, you believe this
"ultimate responsibility" to mean he is answerable for the actions of
individual service members.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"