Meet the US Army's 1st 4 star Female General

[pbear19]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Why is this any more fallacious than, say, you thinking that because you don't make the leap, no one will?

Or that the (perceived, or even relative) efficacy of the action has any bearing on whether or not the concept is possible?

To answer the second point, I never said it wasn't possible, I said it is illogical. All kinds of illogical things are possible, but their possibility does not make them logical.

As to the first point, you are more than welcome to say that you disagree with my position, or that you find it to be illogical. I am not trying to prove the original point, I am merely stating my own opinion. My single opinion in some part disproves the original point, as did the opinion of the other people in this thread who disagreed with it. The person making the initial point has the onus of backing it up in some logical fashion, and I believe that was not done. Hence I consider the premise to be illogical. PhiGam didn't say maybe a couple of people will buy into it, and I didn't say that maybe a couple of people wouldn't. My interpretation of the original point was that PhiGam believes this to be an intentional political ploy with the possibility that a good number of people will make what I consider to be an illogical leap, and I am challenging that premise.

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by pbear19

To answer the second point, I never said it wasn't possible, I said it is illogical. All kinds of illogical things are possible, but their possibility does not make them logical.

As to the first point, you are more than welcome to say that you disagree with my position, or that you find it to be illogical. I am not trying to prove the original point, I am merely stating my own opinion. My single opinion in some part disproves the original point, as did the opinion of the other people in this thread who disagreed with it. The person making the initial point has the onus of backing it up in some logical fashion, and I believe that was not done. Hence I consider the premise to be illogical. PhiGam didn't say maybe a couple of people will buy into it, and I didn't say that maybe a couple of people wouldn't. My interpretation of the original point was that PhiGam believes this to be an intentional political ploy with the possibility that a good number of people will make what I consider to be an illogical leap, and I am challenging that premise.

That's fair but obviously I don't have the resources to prove that this would have a significant effect or to prove the Army's motive behind the promotion. Perhaps it was just a coincidence that she is promoted during the slow news cycle that leads up to the first election since 2000 with a republican running without incumbent status. I, however, feel that it is entirely possible that this move was a political move by the military.

[pbear19]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

I, however, feel that it is entirely possible that this move was a political move by the military.

Fair enough. I disagree, obviously. There is also the question of whether the 'military' (which is such an ambiguous term, in many ways) is without question in favor of McCain, and would thus work in specific action to support him. While 'the military' is probably more likely to support McCain, the individuals who were responsible for promoting this deserving woman may or may not be pro-McCain. Again, I think it far more plausible that the political move had nothing to do with him, if it was indeed a political move at all. I think it is fair to surmise that 'the military' can do things for its own purpose without the need to turn it to presidential politics. But, I think I'm repeating myself now.