German Aid Sent Back

[handjive]

If Reagan was the Teflon President, Bush is the Velcro President...

That's awesome!

 

[IRfly]

If Reagan was the Teflon President, Bush is the Velcro President...

IMHO, never in American history (with the exception, perhaps, of Ulysses Grant) has the nation gone so far downhill so fast and in so many ways and the President gets re-elected as with the first term of G.W. Bush. True, not everything that went wrong was his fault or could have necessarily been avoided by his making better decisions. But much of it could have. His re-election probably had to do with the fact that he was running against a corpse for his opponent (reminds me that John Ashcroft, former attorney-general, literally did lose an election to a corpse), but don't even complain for one second that the President has been accountable for anything. This is the guy who couldn't even think of something he'd done wrong during the election (third debate, towards the end). There are always going to be people who want to blame everything on him unjustly, but that doesn't mean that they're actually right part of the time. And then it blows my mind that guys like George Tenet (JUNK intel) and Tommy Franks (either completely incompetent or guilty of dereliction of duty) were awarded Medals of Freedom.

As far as the current crisis, there's an article on Newsweek.com that details the President's involvement in the current crisis. Judge for yourselves whether he could have done anything better.

As far as the original topic of the thread, the U.S. has been so d@mned proud in not accepting foreign aid, including substantial offers of oil from Iran and Venezuela. Don't think that if someone at the top of the food chain wants aid from Germany to get in, it gets in. There's something bigger, something political going on her. It smells like we're trying to punish others by hurting ourselves.

 

[bunk22]

Don't think that if someone at the top of the food chain wants aid from Germany to get in, it gets in. There's something bigger, something political going on her. It smells like we're trying to punish others by hurting ourselves.

You've concluded this from that little article? Do you even fly? Know what it takes to come into a country with food or other supplies? Your conspiracy theories sound nice and all but often there are rules and regulations that can affect any mission. I remember getting a call when in Hawaii that my 2nd COD had landed but were not allowed to taxi onto the Hickam Ramp. Though filed to the field, the appropriate chain (I assume Hickam Base Ops) had not recieved the clearance. They were not given permission to taxi onto the base for almost an hour. I had to run around and finally speak with a Col to clear up the matter. An American military aircraft denied access to a US facility. Now that I think about it, probably was a much bigger conspiracy. By that time, the Navy had beaten the Air Force. I'm sure that had pissed off some of the upper Air Force echelon. I assume one way of getting back at the US Navy was to deny the entry of a C-2 Greyhound onto their facilities, even though the appropriate facilities request message had been sent and approved a month prior. That's the real reason, an Air Force conspiracy.

You sound like a college student with a very large imagination. Not that it's a bad thing but not everything is a government cover-up. You're hoping to become a naval aviator? Should I worry?

......Tommy Franks (either completely incompetent of guilty of dereliction of duty) were awarded Medals of Freedom.

This one confuses me. Please explain.

 

[IRfly]

Easy...Nobody is talking about cover-ups or conspiracies. But do you think that the Germans would just load tons of supplies onto however many planes and send them over without talking to someone here first? Germans usually get their ducks in a row...And after that they get sent back anyway? Is it so far-fetched that the U.S. wants to try to save face by not accepting foreign aid as though we're a country that can't take care of its own problems? I know that there are rules and regulations that need to be followed. I also know that there are ways to get things done, and rules and regulations are rarely an excuse for inaction. As you pointed out, you finally got a Col. to clear things up...And there was no one with a higher paygrade than Colonel around to clear this up? Maybe, um, like an ambassador? Undersecretary of State? Director of Customs? Look, when screw-ups like this happen, there's a reason. And I, for one, find it hard to believe that that reason is simply because Americans are such dumb@sses that "temporary technical and logistical problems that have accompanied recovery operations in the devastated region" would make us turn back a fully-loaded military transport. Maybe I have too much faith in the intelligence of the personnel working in the upper echelons of the gov't.

Should you be worried? Most probably...Very worried, in fact...

About Tommy Franks...
Either a) he honestly believed that 135,000 troops were enough to secure the whole freakin' country, or b) he agreed to send only that many because that's what the SecDef wanted and his job was more important to him than speaking truth to power.
a= incompetence
b= dereliction of duty

 

[jamnww]

... I, for one, find it hard to believe that that reason is simply because Americans are such dumb@sses that "temporary technical and logistical problems that have accompanied recovery operations in the devastated region" would make us turn back a fully-loaded military transport.

I don't think that we should make light of the sheer magnitude of the recovery opersations in that area, I mean we aren't talking about a little bit of disturbance. You are talking about millions of people relocated, thousands more unaccounted for, hundreds dead and billions of dollars worth of damage. The government has already shipped tons of food to the region and (at least it appears to me) that they are more focused on collecting money for the recovery effort than more food which there is no longer a desperate need for. Regardless of how intelligent people are mistakes will happen and you have to remember that hindsight is always easy but seeing the future much more difficult.

... About Tommy Franks...
Either a) he honestly believed that 135,000 troops were enough to secure the whole freakin' country, or b) he agreed to send only that many because that's what the SecDef wanted and his job was more important to him than speaking truth to power.
a= incompetence
b= dereliction of duty

That kind of simplifies things a bit far. There is a problem with oversimplifying these things. There were hundreds of factors that led them to believe that 135,000 troops were enough for the expected situation. You must remember that they were planning on standing up what remained of the Iraqi army immediately afterward under new leadership. They also were expecting some of our allies to provide humanitarian support after the invasion. Don't simplify things down so far and maybe you shouldn't give those in power as much credit as you seem to give them...not all mistakes are the result of a= incompetence or b= dereliction of duty...sometimes mistakes are just honest mistakes...

 

[bunk22]

Should you be worried? Most probably...Very worried, in fact...

I am worried. Well maybe not, there are plenty of wannabe's who think they know it all. You a dreamer or a doer? I'm sensing dreamer here.

Easy...Nobody is talking about cover-ups or conspiracies. But do you think that the Germans would just load tons of supplies onto however many planes and send them over without talking to someone here first? Germans usually get their ducks in a row...And after that they get sent back anyway? Is it so far-fetched that the U.S. wants to try to save face by not accepting foreign aid as though we're a country that can't take care of its own problems? I know that there are rules and regulations that need to be followed. I also know that there are ways to get things done, and rules and regulations are rarely an excuse for inaction. As you pointed out, you finally got a Col. to clear things up...And there was no one with a higher paygrade than Colonel around to clear this up? Maybe, um, like an ambassador? Undersecretary of State? Director of Customs? Look, when screw-ups like this happen, there's a reason. And I, for one, find it hard to believe that that reason is simply because Americans are such dumb@sses that "temporary technical and logistical problems that have accompanied recovery operations in the devastated region" would make us turn back a fully-loaded military transport. Maybe I have too much faith in the intelligence of the personnel working in the upper echelons of the gov't.

How do you know the Germans had their ducks in a row? How do you they had the appropriate manifest filled out, stating all cargo in the aircraft? How do we know what was declared prior to take-off or landing? The article leaves all of this out. There isn't enough info to make the call but an educated guess could made. You're making yours from what seems to be an overly distrust or dislike of the administration. I'm making mine based on logistical flying experience into foreign country's. Afterall, that's what I do for a living. I can see there being a problem here without it relating to the President of the United States.

About Tommy Franks...
Either a) he honestly believed that 135,000 troops were enough to secure the whole freakin' country, or b) he agreed to send only that many because that's what the SecDef wanted and his job was more important to him than speaking truth to power.
a= incompetence
b= dereliction of duty

What give you the qualification to make the call that more were needed? A monday morning QB call? Easy to make I suppose. That's why I worry, a college student, naval aviator wannabe, makes a call on a General's incompetance based on what knowledge? Gen Franks reformed the how the military was to fight. Instead of focusing on overwhelming force, or numbers if you will, our military would focus on communication and information for a highly mobilized, specialized force. In that way, our forces could committ fewer to battle to defeat the enemy. Gen Franks, in his own words, convinced the Sec of Def to enter battle this way. The initial success our forces had, overcoming the Iraqi military was due in part to his planning.

 

[IRfly]

:sleep_125 How fun is this?? You know what, Bunk? I appreciate the experience that you've accumulated throughout your career and readily acknowledge that you might be right...But this forum would get really boring very quickly if everyone always agreed with each other. It'd be like one of President Bush's cabinet meetings...

Also, for the record, although I readily admit my dislike and distrust of this administration, I don't think that the "accidental" bombing of the Chinese embassy several years ago was very accidental--so my distrust isn't limited to only this administration. It's true, though...The U.S. might just be able to commit such major screw-ups. If that's the case, then do you understand why it grates on the whole rest of the world's nerves to always have to listen to our pontificating on what they should be doing better?

True, I don't know very much at all about the situation with this plane. No more than you, the next guy, or really anyone else not involved. Like I said, though, I know that there are ways to get things done. Having no other choice than to send a fully-loaded cargo plane back to Germany just doesn't ring well with me. Sorry. Could have at least have offloaded the cargo, put it in a bonded warehouse, etc. Curious...Do you usually fly cargo into foreign countries without the proper paperwork? Is it your experience that Germans usually do?

As far as General Franks, no, that's not a Monday morning QB call. It's actually more like when you're actually watching the game and you see 8 guys lined up in the box and you're screaming at the TV for a pass play, but the coaches keep deciding to run it up the middle. A general's job is to plan for the worst-case scenario, not the best. Heck, I could be a four-star general if the best-case scenarios always played out. There were people, some insignificant (like myself) and some important (like the former Chief of Staff of the Army) who saw the mess coming a long way away.

Let's run down the laundry list of veiled epithets now...College student? Supposed to be insulting but not. It's true, I am in school, but thank goodness for not much longer. Dreamer? Active imagination? I try. Finding out what's "really going on" in the world (what I do for a living) requires a good deal of both. I've been around enough to appreciate the experience and insight of others while reserving the right to respectfully disagree and argue my points.

And, for the record, I'm an NFO wannabe...

 

[snizo]

You know - it has always amazed me how much a group whose purpose is supposed to be defending freedom (such as ... say the freedom of speech?) opposes those who use it so much.

But this forum would get really boring very quickly if everyone always agreed with each other.

Couldn't agree more - but it is even more boring when those in the majority refuse to even consider the opposition just because they are in the majority.

You've concluded this from that little article? Do you even fly?
...
You sound like a college student with a very large imagination. Not that it's a bad thing but not everything is a government cover-up. You're hoping to become a naval aviator? Should I worry?

And because you might be more experienced than IRfly on this subject, you know what is going on? I think that I would be more concerned about someone who doesn't even consider alternative explanations being in positions of power than I would an idealist "college student." You can't say that the US did the right thing when you have no more an idea that your theory was correct than IR's.

 

[bunk22]

:sleep_125 How fun is this?? You know what, Bunk? I appreciate the experience that you've accumulated throughout your career and readily acknowledge that you might be right...But this forum would get really boring very quickly if everyone always agreed with each other. It'd be like one of President Bush's cabinet meetings...

There is a difference between disagreeing and believing you know it all. Think about it.

Also, for the record, although I readily admit my dislike and distrust of this administration, I don't think that the "accidental" bombing of the Chinese embassy several years ago was very accidental--so my distrust isn't limited to only this administration. It's true, though...The U.S. might just be able to commit such major screw-ups. If that's the case, then do you understand why it grates on the whole rest of the world's nerves to always have to listen to our pontificating on what they should be doing better?

Once again, conspiracy theory. Try looking at issues from a non-emotional basis. Screw-ups happen, being a super power doesn't mean we are free from making mistakes. I've seen much of how other countries operate and much of what I've seen is half-ass at best.

:True, I don't know very much at all about the situation with this plane. No more than you, the next guy, or really anyone else not involved. Like I said, though, I know that there are ways to get things done. Having no other choice than to send a fully-loaded cargo plane back to Germany just doesn't ring well with me. Sorry. Could have at least have offloaded the cargo, put it in a bonded warehouse, etc. Curious...Do you usually fly cargo into foreign countries without the proper paperwork? Is it your experience that Germans usually do?

Except for that fact I have experience in flying logistics from foriegn countries. Thus I have ability to make an educated guess on the subject based on experience, unlike yourself. Again, a foriegn aircraft can't just land and off load cargo that was not manifasted, especially when food is involved. Yes, there have been times when we didn't have the appropriate paperwork on the cargo. So is it possible the Germans did the same? Sure it is.

:As far as General Franks, no, that's not a Monday morning QB call. It's actually more like when you're actually watching the game and you see 8 guys lined up in the box and you're screaming at the TV for a pass play, but the coaches keep deciding to run it up the middle. A general's job is to plan for the worst-case scenario, not the best. Heck, I could be a four-star general if the best-case scenarios always played out. There were people, some insignificant (like myself) and some important (like the former Chief of Staff of the Army) who saw the mess coming a long way away.

Again, monday morning QB call, no matter how you want to look at it. How do you know worst case was not played out? The former Chief of Staff of the Army disagreed because he held the old view of massive force vs smaller, rapid and mobile forces. I'm obviously not a soldier or anywhere near an expert on the matter but reading through a few good books on the fight shed some light on the issue.

: Let's run down the laundry list of veiled epithets now...College student? Supposed to be insulting but not. It's true, I am in school, but thank goodness for not much longer. Dreamer? Active imagination? I try. Finding out what's "really going on" in the world (what I do for a living) requires a good deal of both. I've been around enough to appreciate the experience and insight of others while reserving the right to respectfully disagree and argue my points.

And, for the record, I'm an NFO wannabe...

Nothing wrong with disagreeing but coming off as a know it all college student isn't going to impress anyone.

And, for the record, I'm an NFO wannabe...

Why doesn't this surprise me? No offense to our current and former NFO's.

 

[kmac]

IRfly,
A General's job is not to plan for the worst-case scenario. They plan for the realistic scenario while maintaining flexibility in their plans. That's my take anyway. Remember, the goal is to use the minimum force required to complete the objective (this goes back well before Iraq was ever an issue).
In regards to your lack of knowledge on the issue of the German plane... do not discredit the experience of those doing simliar missions (ie, logistical support/humanitarian) and the problems associated with such. It is incredibly naive to believe that a complex operation such as this can get done without following procedures (your "red tape") or that difficulties in conducting these operations are resolved in near-instantaneous time.
Answering your "do you usually fly cargo into foreign countries without proper paperwork"... yes, it happens. Why? Because not every country follows the same guidelines and procedures. Did you know that Yemen does not take DD1801s? Or that proper clearance into the UAE does not always get sent correctly (via message) to ALL of the governing bodies that have to allow the clearance? (We had a bird have to declare a fuel emergency just to land there since they kept them orbitting overhead). Or that even our USAF brethren have different weather minimums posted for the approach and for landing in Kuwait (although their aircraft have looser restrictions)? Singapore...that's a whole 'nother story in itself. My point is that there are a TON of different things that can go wrong... i's not dotted, t's not crossed...etc.

 

[bunk22]

You know - it has always amazed me how much a group whose purpose is supposed to be defending freedom (such as ... say the freedom of speech?) opposes those who use it so much.

Couldn't agree more - but it is even more boring when those in the majority refuse to even consider the opposition just because they are in the majority.

Holy ****, are you going to cry snizo? Who here has told anyone to keep quiet, not to speak their mind. Maybe I missed it so please, do me a favor and cut and paste it. Thanks.

If you mean disagreeing with a point of view or with a person who thinks they know it all for what ever reason, I have that right.

And because you might be more experienced than IRfly on this subject, you know what is going on? I think that I would be more concerned about someone who doesn't even consider alternative explanations being in positions of power than I would an idealist "college student." You can't say that the US did the right thing when you have no more an idea that your theory was correct than IR's.

I am much more experienced with respect to this issue. Granted, I could be wrong but I can make much more of an educated guess as to why the aircraft was turned away. Taking it to the nth degree that the President was responsible for it is silly, IMO of course. I like to make my decisions based on sound judgement as opposed to emotions based on a dislike for the current administration. So I disagree with you, I have more of an idea as to why the plane was turned around than IR.

I certainly hope the majority of our future/current NFO's and/or pilot's are a bit more cock strong than our two Mary's here.

 

[bunk22]

IRfly,
A General's job is not to plan for the worst-case scenario. They plan for the realistic scenario while maintaining flexibility in their plans. That's my take anyway. Remember, the goal is to use the minimum force required to complete the objective (this goes back well before Iraq was ever an issue).
In regards to your lack of knowledge on the issue of the German plane... do not discredit the experience of those doing simliar missions (ie, logistical support/humanitarian) and the problems associated with such. It is incredibly naive to believe that a complex operation such as this can get done without following procedures (your "red tape") or that difficulties in conducting these operations are resolved in near-instantaneous time.
Answering your "do you usually fly cargo into foreign countries without proper paperwork"... yes, it happens. Why? Because not every country follows the same guidelines and procedures. Did you know that Yemen does not take DD1801s? Or that proper clearance into the UAE does not always get sent correctly (via message) to ALL of the governing bodies that have to allow the clearance? (We had a bird have to declare a fuel emergency just to land there since they kept them orbitting overhead). Or that even our USAF brethren have different weather minimums posted for the approach and for landing in Kuwait (although their aircraft have looser restrictions)? Singapore...that's a whole 'nother story in itself. My point is that there are a TON of different things that can go wrong... i's not dotted, t's not crossed...etc.

kmac, don't try to argue with logic and experience!!! Afterall, what do we know when it comes to logistic flying into foriegn countries. Be careful as well, you might hurt snizo's feelings by disagreeing with IR. Wouldn't want one our hard chargers to cry.

 

[snizo]

How many freighters land in the US every day from Germany and have no problem? Now which is more likely? You can make educated guesses all you want, but you have no place to say that any alternative theories are wrong because you (presumably) weren't there.

Am I going to cry? God - what are you, 6? I'm sure everyone here is capable of telling the difference between a fact an opinion. All I said was that there are a lot of people in the mil who won't even consider that they may be wrong and that their govenment is fallible. I thought your posts put you right there among them. (Hey - thats an opinion! It doesn't matter how much you disagree with it, saying I'm going to cry about it doesn't make me think of you on any respectable level!)

"If you mean disagreeing with a point of view or with a person who thinks they know it all for what ever reason, I have that right.

You're right - and I have the right to think the same of your view for the same reason...

 

[IRfly]

I was wondering how long it would take before someone started talking about cocks. Strange fascination with genitals...

Anyway, Bunk, I've never flown logistics. So you're right--you definitely know more than me about that. And this whole thing certainly could be a snafu with paperwork or something.

I do know government, though--at least better than I know logistics. And I know two things about governments in general: 1) Saving face is vitally important, even in the most distressing of times. Why do you think the Indonesians gave us such crap when we were trying to help them with the tsunami stuff. 2) There is ALWAYS a way to get things done. I'm sorry, but I just don't buy the idea that when a full plane lands on a tarmac, some low-level clerk reads the manifest, shrugs his shoulders, and says, "Sorry, this isn't in order. You'll have to go back." This, of course, is followed by the pilots saying, "Oh, you're right...My bad. See ya later," and taking off. Sorry. Phone calls are going to be made, arguments ensue, etc. And with a prominent shipment coming from a prominent ally during a prominent crisis, someone near the top is going to be aware of it. Nor is this the only aid that has been rejected. In an Israeli newspaper I regularly read there was an article the other day expressing puzzlement that a shipment of Israeli emergency medical supplies had been turned away. Another close ally.

Is it all the President's fault? Not directly, of course not. Just part of an overall pattern of poor leadership, misplaced resources, etc. Conspiracy? Hardly not...I don't think it qualifies as a conspiracy to reject aid from someone in order to save face. It happens quite frequently, in fact. Anyway, this discussion is starting to get a little too heated for my taste. You might want to try looking at things from a non-emotional basis: the U.S., like any other country, acts in its own self-interest. This crisis will pass--people will be fed, clothed, housed, etc. with or without German aid. But you can bet that Mr. Bush doesn't want to end up owing any favors to "Old Europe."

Oh, and by the way...Kmac, every decent general in history has had a contingency plan for when things go wrong. That's because no one can know the future, right? That's also why your plane has ejection seats.

 

[IRfly]

Why doesn't this surprise me? No offense to our current and former NFO's.

What exactly does that mean? "No offense"??? Sir, I'm sorry if I touched a nerve somewhere... Come on, insult me all you want, but did you really need to drag a whole Naval community (with which I have as yet had nothing to do) into it?