Confirmation hearing: Emsworth for SecDef

[12th Doctor]

What, exactly, will be your policy regarding the Navy of Atlasia.  If a Senator were to, say, propose a bill to increase the carrier fleet by one or two ships within the next 6 years (6 months Atlasia time), would you support such a measure?

[12th Doctor]

Will it always be your policy to compare our forces to those of other nations, or will you acctually seek to obtain maximum effectivness and readiness for our own nation?

[12th Doctor]

Will it always be your policy to compare our forces to those of other nations, or will you acctually seek to obtain maximum effectivness and readiness for our own nation?

I will not make my decisions solely on the basis of comparisons. However, the military of Atlasia does not exist in a vacuum. I judge effectiveness not by the mere number of troops or ships, but by how well the military would do in actual combat. If there is no other nation that could match the military, there is simply no need for a great expansion in the military budget. At present, there is no other navy in the world that rivals that of Atlasia. Therefore, I see no need to conduct a significant expansion of naval forces.

If my previous answer suggested that I would make decisions on the basis of numerical comparisons, then I do certainly apologize, as I had no intention whatsoever of conveying such an impression.

Tell me, Mr. Emsworth, do you believe that Atlasia will be, in the coming years, commited to more small and medium scale military operations, as part of the War on Terror?

[12th Doctor]

Tell me, Mr. Emsworth, do you believe that Atlasia will be, in the coming years, commited to more small and medium scale military operations, as part of the War on Terror?

As long as Atlasia remains in Iraq and Afghanistan, it will have to conduct military operations in those countries. We will of course attempt to train and equip local troops; however, it would be unrealistic if I were to expect that the Atlasian military's involvement would suddenly come to an end.  Therefore, I would respond in the affirmative: we will be committed to more small and medium scale operations.

I suspect that large-scale involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan will be coming to a close. I cannot claim to know if Atlasia will invade or conduct military operations in other countries, such as Iran or Syria. It would not be my place to comment on the likelihood of such events; any new wars would require not only the approval of the President, but also the agreement of the Senate. However, the Army does presently have 14 divisions, and is not overstretched. Therefore, if any large-scale operations were to become necessary, the army would be able to cope.

Perhaps I need to restate the question.

Do you see it as possible, in the near future, that Atlasia will be involved in military operation where there does not exist readily based combat air support?

[12th Doctor]

Do you see it as possible, in the near future, that Atlasia will be involved in military operation where there does not exist readily based combat air support?

Although possible, the event is not probable. It would appear that several sponsors of terrorism are in the Middle East. Although I do not wish to generalize, it is highly likely that an anti-terrorism war would involve a nation such as Iran or Syria. Outside the Middle East, North Korea and Sudan seem to be the only other plausible possible targets. I am confident that the current twleve carriers, as well as the one under construction, will be able to handle these two regions, as well as others.

I see.  The reason that I ask, sir, is that it has become a fact in todays world that the primary job of our aircraft carriers is to act as easily deployable and ready air support for our groud forces.  As Atlasia is more liekly to commit to such opperations than are other nations, I find that you comparision to other navies is not apt at all, and shows a fundamental lack of understanding for the nature of sea power.

As I see Atlasia being more involved in such operations in the future, I find that a significant increase in our carrier fleet and perhaps attemps to branch out into different styles of carriers are more than warrented.  As you might know, I have a key interest in this area, not only because I am concerned with such things, but also because my district contains, not only the Norfolk Naval Ship Yards, but also the Atlasian Naval Academy.

I would encourage you to take another look at this problem, as most military experts would recomend an increase in the carrier fleet, as the status quo might not be enough to maintain effective opperations throughout the world.

[12th Doctor]

To add to my previous post, I think that we have a slight difference of opinion here. I believe that if Atlasia were to restrict itself to wars of self-defense, it appears unlikely that too many new operations would ensue.

Am I to understand, therefore, that you are against humanitarian interventions?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Unfortunatly, our problems could be fixed very easily, if the Senate were commited to a solution.

[12th Doctor]

Mr. Emsworth, if you were a dog, what kind of dog would you be, and why?


P.S.  I would advise you to be very careful in addressing this question.

[12th Doctor]

Mr. Emsworth, if you were a dog, what kind of dog would you be, and why?


P.S.  I would advise you to be very careful in addressing this question.

I remind the Senator that unless it is his intention to filibuster the said nominee, that the more questions he asks, the longer it takes to vote.

I think that this is a very important question Senator.  What type of dog he chooses says a lot about this charecter.

[12th Doctor]

I think that this is a very important question Senator.  What type of dog he chooses says a lot about this charecter.

Senator, if you would like to find out about my character, then I would respectfully request you to pose a somewhat more direct question, rather than the circumlocutous one above, which would inolve numerous, and greatly differing, metaphorical interpretations of the same species.

Oh, come on.  Just humor me.

[12th Doctor]

I think that this is a very important question Senator.  What type of dog he chooses says a lot about this charecter.

Senator, if you would like to find out about my character, then I would respectfully request you to pose a somewhat more direct question, rather than the circumlocutous one above, which would inolve numerous, and greatly differing, metaphorical interpretations of the same species.

Oh, come on.  Just humor me.

For some reason I'd kind of like to know too!

See.  You have our fullest attention, Mr. Emsworth.

[12th Doctor]

I think that this is a very important question Senator.  What type of dog he chooses says a lot about this charecter.

Senator, if you would like to find out about my character, then I would respectfully request you to pose a somewhat more direct question, rather than the circumlocutous one above, which would inolve numerous, and greatly differing, metaphorical interpretations of the same species.

Oh, come on.  Just humor me.

Since you insist, I should like to be the top dog.

I'm sorry, but that does not count as an answer.  Any dog breed can be a "top dog".  I'm sure that a group of toy puddles has a "top dog" of the group.  That means nothing.

Please answer the question.

[12th Doctor]

Please answer the question.

I would first like to note my objection to the question. It would, however, be indecorous of me to continue to refuse to answer the question. I should not at all like to be a dog, but, if you must have an answer, then one shall be compelled to respond: sheepdog.

And why is that, Mr. Emsworth?

What are the qualities are contained within the charecter of the Sheepdog that you find admirable.  And, as I am sure you are aware, there are different kinds of sheepdog, I invite you to be more specific with your answer, please.

[12th Doctor]

And why is that, Mr. Emsworth?

It is associated with the defense of sheep, is intelligent, and can adapt well. An Old English Sheepdog would be my specific choice, for the same reasons.

Thank you for you answer, Mr. Emsworth.  It is much apprieciated and you managed your way around that question quite well.

If my fellow Senators will allow me, I will now read from the Erie, PA phone book, so that my fellow Senators might know the names of the people their vote will have an effect on.

Aaron Abrahamson.  514 W. 8th Street.  555-7654

Adam Abrahamson. 11006 E. 36th Street.  555-8654

Adam P. Abrahamson.  4555 State Street.  555-9712...

[12th Doctor]

If my fellow Senators will allow me, I will now read from the Erie, PA phone book, so that my fellow Senators might know the names of the people their vote will have an effect on.

In my naïveté, I thought that you would filibuster somewhat more creatively, for instance by listing the names of warships. But alas, it seems that I was mistaken...

I'm getting there.

[12th Doctor]

May I ask why this filibuster is really necessary?

Well, this might be the last month I ever sepnd in the Senate, and I have always wanted to lead one.

[12th Doctor]

I'd like to remind Senators as they begin to vote that this is a completely different model of Defense Secretary than myself, Colin, or especially John Ford. Whether that is a good thing or not is up to each to determine. Personally, based on the comments Emsworth has made in this thread, I'd vote nay on his appointment.  I feel he would be better suited for the Treasury Department, rather than the DoD. 

I would like to echo Jake's sentiments.

From all the evidence that he himself has provided, Emsworth would be a reactive, rather than proactive, beurocratic, Secretary, who would seek to place diplomatic and budgetary concerns over those concerns that are most important and most beneficial to the Defense Department.  Some might say that this is nobel, but I say that it would be a dishonest farce.

Emsworth is a good man.  I would be happy to vote to confirm him to almost any other possition.  However, I am concerned that he displays a fundamental lack of knowledge of the subject matter.  As I question his knowledge, I must also call into to question his motive.  The job of the Defense Secretary is to be the primary advocate for the Defense Department.  Mr. Emsworth has proven that this is not how he would perform in this capacity.

Therefore, I have no choice but to vote "Nay" and encourage my fellow Senators to do the same.

[12th Doctor]

Some might say that this is nobel, but I say that it would be a dishonest farce.

Senator, I would respectfully request you not to impute improper motives to me.

I believe that you have the best intentions, I simply think that they are wrongly placed.

[12th Doctor]

Funny how this vote has become about the fact that I tried to filibuster him and not about his acctual qualifications.

I can't see how my fellow conservatives do not see this nominee as being, at least, somewhat contraversial, given the answers he gave to the questions.

Instead, they choose to cop-out bt making statements that basically amount to, "Well, he is good enough".

Well, I am sorry if, when it comes to national security, I feel that "good enough" is not good enough.  I'm concerned with what he will do as Secretary of Defense.  You all seem concerned with getting this vote over with and rubber stamping him so we can get through this and go home for our brief legislative break before the next session starts.  Sorry if I don't share in your enthusism for fishing.