I have 2 competing conspiracy theories

[sirs]

The mission was not flawless.

based on YOUR goals, YOUR mission parameters, & YOUR signing off on them

We endeth here

[BT]

The mission was not flawless.

based on YOUR goals, YOUR mission parameters, & YOUR signing off on them

We endeth here

Now you are just being ridiculous. I had no foreknowledge of the mission nor the parameters nor did i have the authority to sign off on them.

[sirs]

Ditto.....which brings us back full circle to IT DEPENDS on what the goals are.  It's pretty disengenuous to be pushing goals of budget and aircraft recovery as prerequisates to a flawless or not mission, if you're not in any position to sign off on them, as such

ergo, they're YOUR goals in determing if the mission was flawless or not

ergo, NO ONE IS WRONG

[Kramer]

Ditto.....which brings us back full circle to IT DEPENDS on what the goals are.  It's pretty disengenuous to be pushing goals of budget and aircraft recovery as prerequisates to a flawless or not mission, if you're not in any position to sign off on them, as such

ergo, they're YOUR goals in determing if the mission was flawless or not

ergo, NO ONE IS WRONG

this speaks volumes.

[BT]

Ditto.....which brings us back full circle to IT DEPENDS on what the goals are.  It's pretty disengenuous to be pushing goals of budget and aircraft recovery as prerequisates to a flawless or not mission, if you're not in any position to sign off on them, as such

ergo, they're YOUR goals in determing if the mission was flawless or not

ergo, NO ONE IS WRONG

Actually it is not disingenuous. Think about what you have written about all week. How the military's part of the operation was flawless vs the Obama Admins part of the aftermath which which looks like they are following the script to a Marx Brothers comedy.

The military is comprised of grownups. They as grown ups would not have used a state of the art helicopter for a mission of this importance unless they planned for it to come back after the mission. That it did not come back means that something did not go according to plan. Something not going according to plan indicates a flaw in the execution of the plan. And the existence of a flaw makes claiming something flawless a non sequiter.

[sirs]

We're done......no one was wrong, but your obsession is duly noted

[BT]

as is your flawed reasoning.

[sirs]

ooops, my apologies.  I forgot about your apparent growing pathologic need for the last word & erroneous dig.  By all means, the floor is yours

[BT]

Thank you for the last word on this, though your diagnosis was flawed.

[Plane]

  This reminds me strongly of President Bush and the "Mission Accomplished" banner that a Carrier greeted him with.

     The Carrier was returning from a successfull sortie , which to everysailor on board ment "mission accomplished" but because it was photographed above President Bush, who had not yet acheived permanant world peace, it was criticised as being premature.

      I think everyone in the Pentagon would have burned up a pack of new helicopters if the result was an end of Osama Bin Laden.

       On the other hand if one of the pilots returned with an enemy inflicted hangnail that would be a flaw, if you are looking for a flaw.

       I think that President Obama made a good decision here and has been getting more than the needed second guessing.

[sirs]

I'll go even further.....Obama made a very bold decision.  He put feet on the ground, and supported the military's plan of redundant back-ups, both in personnel and in equipment, with 2 extra helicopters, in reserve.  He and his administration have thoroughly screwed the post-act, punctuated by the PC decision of not releasing any photos, and losing what perception of strength he & this country had over Islamic terrorists like Al Qeada, but he gets full marks for supporting and authorizing the plan itself, and the "flawless aspects" to it

[BT]

This isn't about second guessing Obama.

This is about calling an operation flawless when it clearly wasn't.

[Plane]

This isn't about second guessing Obama.

This is about calling an operation flawless when it clearly wasn't.

   The quibbleing is about the meaning of "flawless".

    Would you beleive ,...."Fully successful"?

[Kramer]

This isn't about second guessing Obama.

This is about calling an operation flawless when it clearly wasn't.

   The quibbleing is about the meaning of "flawless".

    Would you beleive ,...."Fully successful"?

yeah but what about the copter crash?

[BT]

This isn't about second guessing Obama.

This is about calling an operation flawless when it clearly wasn't.

   The quibbleing is about the meaning of "flawless".

    Would you beleive ,...."Fully successful"?

i would believe successful