Zeb,

Guess that all depends on how you might wish to define "intimately,
now wouldn't it?

On Sep 29, 10:28 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote:
> Its probably better for the President to be intimately involved with
> the war in Afghanistan than it is for him to dally with the Olympics
> or appearances on Leno and Letterman.
>
> On Sep 28, 8:02 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > jgg,
>
> > Good. A President is NOT micro-managing the on-site CO and letting him
> > do his job. This is how it should be. President Obama does not have a
> > military background, remember?
>
> > On Sep 28, 5:06 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > in 70 days...   So much for giving the commander a direct uncensored
> > > access to the President...   Seems to me, a leader would want to
> > > direct communication with such a key commander in Afghanistan...
>
> > >http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/back-story/2009/sep/28/us-comm...
>
> > > >>> "I’ve talked to the president, since I’ve been here, once on a VTC 
> > > >>> [video teleconference]," Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CBS reporter 
> > > >>> David Martin in a television interview that aired Sunday.
>
> > > "You’ve talked to him once in 70 days?" Mr. Martin followed up.
>
> > > "That is correct," the general replied.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to