MOAB

[detbuch]

Oh, wait . . . just heard on the news that the general who ordered the MOAB to be dropped said he did not need Trump's command to do it. He already had the standing authority to do so. And he has had it before Trump got elected.

So what does that mean to the narrative?

Will those who hate Trump and supported Obama, and said Trump did something dastardly or stupid for dropping the bomb now say that it was a good thing, all credit to Obama, and Trump would have been too stupid to drop it?

Or will those who hate Obama, but were queasy about the bomb and opposed Trump's bombing it, now feel relieved and shower Obama with all sorts of trash talk?

Or will those who were ecstatic about Trump using the bomb but hated Obama now say what a horrible thing it was to drop it?

Or will those who were for it and happy, not care who was responsible?

Or will those who were against it, will not care who was responsible, and still call it a horrible thing?

What say you, wdmso?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Oh, wait . . . just heard on the news that the general who ordered the MOAB to be dropped said he did not need Trump's command to do it. He already had the standing authority to do so. And he has had it before Trump got elected.

So what does that mean to the narrative?

Will those who hate Trump and supported Obama, and said Trump did something dastardly or stupid for dropping the bomb now say that it was a good thing, all credit to Obama, and Trump would have been too stupid to drop it?

Or will those who hate Obama, but were queasy about the bomb and opposed Trump's bombing it, now feel relieved and shower Obama with all sorts of trash talk?

Or will those who were ecstatic about Trump using the bomb but hated Obama now say what a horrible thing it was to drop it?

Or will those who were for it and happy, not care who was responsible?

Or will those who were against it, will not care who was responsible, and still call it a horrible thing?

What say you, wdmso?

"The narrative" just checked into rehab.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Oh, wait . . . just heard on the news that the general who ordered the MOAB to be dropped said he did not need Trump's command to do it. He already had the standing authority to do so. And he has had it before Trump got elected.


So what does that mean to the narrative?

Will those who hate Trump and supported Obama, and said Trump did something dastardly or stupid for dropping the bomb now say that it was a good thing, all credit to Obama, and Trump would have been too stupid to drop it?

Or will those who hate Obama, but were queasy about the bomb and opposed Trump's bombing it, now feel relieved and shower Obama with all sorts of trash talk?

Or will those who were ecstatic about Trump using the bomb but hated Obama now say what a horrible thing it was to drop it?

Or will those who were for it and happy, not care who was responsible?

Or will those who were against it, will not care who was responsible, and still call it a horrible thing?

What say you, wdmso?

doesn't change a thing

If you think that he did not ask for permission before dropping that thing your gullible.

when Trump was asked during a meeting with I-85 First Responders if he had authorized the strike.

“We have given them total authorization Trump can grant the
authority but its still Trumps responsibility



Pentagon officials say the generals have had the authority to launch whatever ordnance they had in theatre against ISIS since January last year, but President Donald Trump's comfort level with delegating new decision-making on counterterrorism strikes surely played into their thinking. General John “Mick” Nicholson ordered the weapon during the Obama Administration to use during Afghan’s fierce spring and summer “fighting season”, but it was only delivered in January this year, Salvin said.
While he may have had the authority to drop the bomb, it’s likely he notified commanders above him that he was about to use the munition, but it’s not clear how high that went. “Appropriate notifications were made,” U.S. Central Command spokesman Col. John Thomas emailed

Not sure how any justifies a 16mil dollar weapon to kill 100 and think it was done solely in the name defending America As for the general he say it was tactical not political ... but giving him the green light was political and strategic for the white house home and abroad

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I have said it before and will say it again its all cool until they start shooting back

*WHO* will be shooting back?

Originally Posted by Slipknot

I am disgusted by UnAmerican whiners, don't like it, don't watch it.

I sometimes disagree with WDMSO but he wore the fancy suit and went over and did his duty, so agreeing on particular subjects or not, he has beyond earned his right to speak them

Originally Posted by wdmso

doesn't change a thing

If you think that he did not ask for permission before dropping that thing your gullible.

when Trump was asked during a meeting with I-85 First Responders if he had authorized the strike.

“We have given them total authorization Trump can grant the
authority but its still Trumps responsibility



Pentagon officials say the generals have had the authority to launch whatever ordnance they had in theatre against ISIS since January last year, but President Donald Trump's comfort level with delegating new decision-making on counterterrorism strikes surely played into their thinking. General John “Mick” Nicholson ordered the weapon during the Obama Administration to use during Afghan’s fierce spring and summer “fighting season”, but it was only delivered in January this year, Salvin said.
While he may have had the authority to drop the bomb, it’s likely he notified commanders above him that he was about to use the munition, but it’s not clear how high that went. “Appropriate notifications were made,” U.S. Central Command spokesman Col. John Thomas emailed

Not sure how any justifies a 16mil dollar weapon to kill 100 and think it was done solely in the name defending America As for the general he say it was tactical not political ... but giving him the green light was political and strategic for the white house home and abroad

So help out here - are you saying that Trump is bad because he is not micromanaging the war (like Obama & Johnson did) and delegating those decisions to the generals and theater commanders? Or that he created the atmosphere that allows commanders to take more risk?

As for MOAB, yes that is a proper munition for caves and tunnels, no? The daisy cutter was used several times in similar situations before it was retired and replaced with this one.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

*WHO* will be shooting back?



I sometimes disagree with WDMSO but he wore the fancy suit and went over and did his duty, so agreeing on particular subjects or not, he has beyond earned his right to speak them



So help out here - are you saying that Trump is bad because he is not micromanaging the war (like Obama & Johnson did) and delegating those decisions to the generals and theater commanders? Or that he created the atmosphere that allows commanders to take more risk?

What i am saying is this general say's it was tactical not political ... but giving him the green light was political and strategic for the white house home and abroad .. the military doesn't set policy they carry it out .. and keeping a tight leash on your generals is not micromanaging nor is giving them a blank check a responsible choice.. Trumps Commanders intent is clear.. I feel he see's delegating authority removes him from responsibility and his administration has no plan for the next move .

As for MOAB, yes that is a proper munition for caves and tunnels, no? yes. however if you look at the target as one target one attack with no bigger plan...I questions its use .. The daisy cutter was used several times in similar situations before it was retired and replaced with this one.

I just dont agree with fox and friends dropping big bombs is not what freedom looks like