Right, we're back to you not seeing it as a problem, which doesn't mean it isn't. Your response that it is bullshirt, or silly, is just your opinion. Got it. My opinion is that you're wrong, and don't know what the state department does. You want a key area? How about Saudi Arabia, Germany, and South Korea.USN_Hokie wrote:HokieFanDC wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:Your first question was rhetorical bullshirt. My entire premise is that we're not missing leadership in key areas, or that your/their definition of key areas (note that you still haven't defined or given me an example) is silly.HokieFanDC wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:1. "Without leadership in key areas, who is supposed to push our foreign policy?"HokieFanDC wrote:
Without leadership in key areas, who is supposed to push our foreign policy? Assuming we have an actual foreign policy, which may be debatable, it is the job of the diplomats to push those policies and work with other countries to push our priorities and agenda. Without those people in place, that doesn't happen.
The State department works to promote America's interests all over the world. Not filling those posts make that job a lot more difficult, in some cases impossible.
On your second point, how many of those gapped billets are commander/captain positions. Those are the positions that are not being filled, not rank and file positions.
WTF? C'mon, this is self-licking ice cream cone platitudes.
2. All the time.
You're trying to imply that there's some State Dept Office of Transgender Eskimo Underwear Gnome Research which is going to steer into the rocks without some political appointee hack at the helm. That's ludicrous.
You didn't answer either of my questions, and you made up a really terrific strawman. Good work.
I did give you an answer - "all the time."
And "all the time", isn't an answer to "how many". Most likely it means you don't have an answer.