This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The following paragraph at < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_D._Hunter> needs editing. I do not understand it.
“Hunter is a United States Marine and veteran of both the Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan. He is one of only two members of the U.S. Congress, along with John Boccieri (D-OH), to have served in both conflicts and the only combat veteran of either serving in the Congress[1]”.
First it says Hunter is one of two members to have served in BOTH conflicts (NOTE: i.e., combat). Then it says “. . . and the only combat veteran serving in the Congress”. Those are mutually exclusive statements. Together, they don’t make sense.
Thanks, FES Jakarta, Indonesia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.166.73.124 ( talk) 07:16, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Based on this page, the Iraq Campaign Medal page, and the Afghanistan Campaign Medal page, there should be three stars on the ICM and one on the ACM. If wikipedia pages aren't good enough references, I can give better references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean118 ( talk • contribs) 00:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Apparently he has a list of 57 communists in the state department, er a list of defense cuts that target other congressional districts, but he's not ready to share it yet. When he does it should be worth a mention here, not least for being his first big fight. Hcobb ( talk) 23:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I have tagged the statement "...Obama policy of putting the Afghanistan army..." as failing verification. The reference used does not support the content. Only in the comment section does it mention President Obama. Therefore, without verification according to WP:BLP it could theoretically be removed.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 07:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
So do we put in Hunter's direct quote?
"Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether they can do this, but they are."
Is that any clearer? Hcobb ( talk) 21:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
After visiting Afghanistan in October 2012, Hunter said "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether they [Afghan forces] can do this, but they are."
In 2011, Hunter wrote in ''[[Politico]]'' that he is opposed to a complete withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, and was concerned of the challenge of an "unreliable Afghan leadership".<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> After a visit to Afghanistan in October 2012, Hunter returned with a more upbeat assessment, stating "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
In 2011, Hunter wrote of his doubts about the Obama administration plans for Afghanistan, which he perceived to be a complete American withdrawal and a handover to an "unreliable Afghan leadership".<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> Hunter returned from his October 2012 visit to Afghanistan with a more upbeat assessment, stating "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
Then let's go with:
In 2011, Hunter wrote of his doubts about the clarity of the Obama administration's plans for Afghanistan and of a handover to an "unreliable Afghan leadership".
Okay? Hcobb ( talk) 22:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
In 2011, Hunter opposed a complete withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, citing an "unreliable Afghan leadership" and calling on the Obama administration to "stop echoing a misshapen worldview that puts American interests last."<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> However, Hunter changed his position after visiting the country in October 2012: "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
In 2011, Hunter opposed a complete withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, citing the concern of an "unreliable Afghan leadership" and called upon the [[Obama Administration]] to "stop echoing a misshapen worldview that puts American interests last."<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> In October 2012, Hunter returned from his visit to Afghanistan, as part of a [[congressional delegation]], with a more upbeat assessment stating "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
Why delete any mention of what exactly the man is complaining about? Hcobb ( talk) 13:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Congressman Hunter; First let me thank you for both you military service and you civil service to our nation. I had the honor of hearing you speak a couple of years ago and I agree with your approach to solutions for many our national problems. I want to ask for your help in investigating a procedure being used by ICE or "border patrol", forgive me for not using the correct terms but it is difficult to keep up with the changing organizational structures. Each day I drive I15 from Temecula to San Diego. Over the past year or so I notice that Ice or border patrol vehicles park with their vehicle lights shining across the freeway lanes I never see any activity such as apprehensions which presumably would be the intent of this activity. Instead, I believe this activity is nothing more that a ruse to make travelers believe that something is in fact being. I am uncomfortable seeing my tax dollars flowing out the exhaust pipe of vehicle that are not performing any legitimate function. I would most appreciate if you could look into this apparently useless activity and report what the intent of it is. I would pursue this under FOIA but I'm sure it would be fruitless to do so.
Once again thank you for all you do in support of our nation and our way of life.
D USN retired — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.85.89 ( talk) 04:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
The congressman served on Active Duty from 2001 - 2005. He was recalled to Active Duty for an additional deployment to Afghanistan in 2007. Once he returned he returned back to the Reserves. In total his years of service should be from 2001 to current NOT 2001-2007.
Hunter has questioned the qualifications of Mary A. Legere to lead the Defense Intelligence Agency, given her involvement with the DCGS-A, which competes with the products of Palantir Technologies, which is based in the state he represents. [1]
Not supported? Which part? Quoting at length from the given source...
So what part is not supported? Hcobb ( talk) 00:44, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
But if you want additional sourcing, please read
Etc. Hcobb ( talk) 00:55, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
DCGS-A is a special interest of Hunter's.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/18/exclusive_pentagon_withholds_report_2.7_billion_intel_program "That's something that the Army has been stubbornly resistant to acknowledge, even though Palantir as a plug-in would solve the Army's problems and deliver soldiers a whole new set of capabilities that they have yet to acquire," he said. "From day one, the problems with DCGS have been apparent but so too has the solution."
So it's odd to completely avoid the subject. Hcobb ( talk) 22:37, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/blog-999-hunter-pushes-for-ied-software-connected-to-his-mentor.html
In 2012, Palantir employed three different lobbying firms at a cost of $120,000 per quarter. The most expensive of the lot is a Cassidy & Associates lobbyist named Terry Paul, who collects $80,000 per quarter from Palantir according to his 2012 disclosures.
...
And here's Paul passionately stumping for Duncan D. Hunter on the campaign trail:
Hcobb ( talk) 00:15, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
If the issue is that Hunter is a critic of DCGS and supports Palantir - which is well documented - then let's say so. That's a significant item for his biography, not the fact that he said he might oppose a nomination that hasn't even been made yet. How about something like this (and please don't add or delete anything in the article until we reach consensus here -no edit warring please!):
-- MelanieN ( talk) 03:28, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm striking "in his district"; sorry, thought I had read that. If we have to get into a bunch of detail about the respective merits of the two systems, it will become too much information for a biography. Two referenced sentences seems like about the right weight to me. -- MelanieN ( talk) 14:07, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Proposed text:
How about something like this?
-- MelanieN ( talk) 16:59, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
So cut this down to fit with Hunter.
Then DCGS-A article can include mention of Legere, using refs like this:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113484/how-pentagon-boondoggle-putting-soldiers-danger
Hcobb ( talk) 17:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Hunter has highlighted soldiers' concerns over the US Army's DCGS-A system and their requests that the products of California company Palantir Technologies should be used instead.
I do think, per suggestion above, that we should give some idea why he feels this way. That's why I inserted the "He says that..." sentence into my latest proposed version. To say "he says" doesn't imply that it isn't true, merely that this is why he is making an issue of it. This article is not the place to get into the pros and cons of the system, or who is right or wrong about it; maybe the DCGS-A article could use some of this information. People who are curious can click on that link. However, The New Republic is not a neutral publication, it is a "magazine of commentary"; and the article is not neutral, it is editorializing. If you are going to put stuff into that article about the recall of the original report and all that, you need a source that is less POV. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
This discussion seems to have died down so I went ahead and added the two sentences to the article. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/08/politics/jeh-johnson-duncan-hunter-isis/ "A high level source informed the congressman -- it was also said that DHS is actively discouraging any talk of IS on the border," Kasper said.
We're suppressing what the congressman says because he's an unreliable source? Hcobb ( talk) 13:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Oops! Ain't ISIL. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/09/us-usa-security-kurds-idUSKCN0HY2JP20141009?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews Hcobb ( talk) 22:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can see, this is a one-day story. If Hunter wants to keep pushing it so that it becomes a more notable issue, we can add something then. It's really up to him at this point. -- MelanieN ( talk) 22:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
What you say is true - on both points. It would be a huge deal. (It's also possible that he is neither correct nor brazenly lying - that he is simply misinformed, perhaps relying on rumors relayed to him by border patrol agents.) However, we can't go drawing conclusions on our own (per WP:OR) - or based on partisan sources like Maddow. If neutral mainstream sources pick up this story and keep it alive, and start pointing out things like this, then we can go with it. Right now it looks like the story has not lived past its 24 hour news cycle, except in partisan sources. BTW I reworded your addition to the article about Hunter voting against arming Syrian rebels; that source didn't mention Hunter's allegations about the border. -- MelanieN ( talk) 17:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Duncan D. Hunter. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 06:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Duncan D. Hunter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:17, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
This section reads like editorializing from someone who disagrees with the Congressman:
He voted against equal pay for equal work in 2009 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act).
The LL Fair Pay Act amends the statutes of limitations on when a suit can be brought for pay discrimination. The current way it is written overstates the effect of the act and does not sound neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OsirisMuhammad ( talk • contribs)
I am not familiar enough with Wiki guidelines to make an edit, but I would like to point out that in the Gender Issues section the line "In February 2013, Hunter voted in favor of renewing the Violence Against Women Act." is directly contradicted two sections later in the Immigration section with the line "He voted against renewing the Violence Against Women Act..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.74.121.54 ( talk) 00:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
The lead section gives significant weight to the 2017 "Campaign finance investigation". While it should be included in the lead in some form, there is zero weight given to entire other sections in this article, specifically the sections titled "Military service" & "U.S. House of Representatives".
As far as the body the Political positions is a new section compared to when I last edited this page in 2015; it can use more balance from sources, as some sections are entirely sourced to a source from only one side of the political spectrum.--
RightCowLeftCoast (
talk)
20:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I've seen online reports that the subject has been indicted. Can we confirm this? Bearian ( talk) 22:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
So how does one inherit a Congressional seat? I don't think they are inheritable. Hopefully someone can replace this sentence with more accurate language. MovingtoMontana ( talk) 22:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@ MelanieN: Given the politically charged nature of recent accusations made upon the subject of this article, and the father of the subject of the article considering that event a "last minute hit", perhaps it would be best to place this article under WP:ARBAPDS? -- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 06:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
It has been my observation that the name of the opponent of a politician in a recent race is common in the lead of an article of an active politician is not common. Therefore why has it been added to the lead of this article? To mention that the subject is under incitement is appropriate, that the subject is facing reelection is appropriate, but the opponents name, IMHO is not. Also the opponent does not meet WP:POLITICIAN, yet.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 06:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Right now the lead says "Hunter became nationally known for repeatedly attacking his Democratic opponent Ammar Campa-Najjar over his half-Palestinian heritage" citing https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/opinion/disaster-candidates-beyond-trump.html . But this is not true and not neutral point of view, citing an anti-Trump op-ed in the New York Times. Hunter is attacking not the Palestinians, but the fact that his opponent's grandfather was a terrorist. -- Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii ( talk) 21:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Given that the 2018 election is a minor part of the overall article, and although it did get national attention, it is not a significant part of the article thus per WP:LEAD I would argue it is given WP:UNDUE weight. The current indictment has due weight in the lead.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 05:43, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Several papers have noted that when Hunter couldn't arrange for a tour of a naval facility in Italy, he told his chief of staff to "tell the Navy to go fuck themselves". That was put into our article a few days ago, and I removed it as inflammatory and unnecessary detail. Now I see someone has restored it [1] so I think the proper thing to do is seek consensus whether to include it or not. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:28, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Snooganssnoogans and RightCowLeftCoast: RCLC removed paragraph about his attacks on his opponent’s ethnic background from the lead saying removed content per WP:LEAD, no other campaign information is in the lead giving the 2018 campaign undue weight, also WP:RECENTISM; also removed content per WP:BURDEN). [2] Snoogans restored it saying nope, this is what he's known for. running one of the most grotesquely racist campaigns in recent memory. added source. OK, let’s leave it in for now since it is longstanding content, but let’s talk about it. IMO I think it should be removed. It is highly unusual to include campaign claims, even controversial ones, in the lead of an article. IMO this is NOT what he is known for; he is best known for being indicted, which is already in the lead. I would say, Snoogans, that the reference you added does not support your claim that the attacks are what is is known for, merely that they were being made by him and others supporting him. If you Google his name, most of what comes up is about his indictment and upcoming trial. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
became nationally knownregarding these comments - Steve King might be nationally known for his comments, Duncan D. Hunter is not. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 00:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, where do we stand? RCLC and I favor removing the paragraph from the lead. Snoogans favors keeping it in. Anyone else have an opinion? power~enwiki? O3000? -- MelanieN ( talk) 21:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Favor keeping paragraph with the amplification that 2018 attack on opponent was based on Campa-Najjar being the grandson of Black September terrorist leader Muhammad Yousef Najjar, rather than generic ethnic origin. JSJB ( talk) 18:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
At the time of the 2018 election it was known that Hunter's opponent is the grandson of Black September terrorist leader Muhammad Yousef Najjar, who planned the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. This is a relevant fact for the campaign as it calls into question the claims that Hunter was merely attacking his opponents on racist lines. Suppressing this material fact degrades Wikipedia into a propaganda sheet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JSJB ( talk • contribs) 12:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
End of Term of Service
Has the subject retired from the Marine Corps Reserve? One source says yes, more than one source says no.
So which is it?-- RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 19:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
@ MelanieN and John from Idegon: an editor B P G PhD ( talk · contribs) has began to remove content from the article( 1, 2), and I see there was a WP:COI question brought up at the 2nd AfD for a related subject. Is this a concern?-- RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 19:54, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Under the law of armed conflict with principle of proportionality, military necessity, and the Rendulic Rule the incidental death of non-combatants as a part of military operations are ruled as permissible in many cases.. Hunter conceded in a interview that his Artillery Unit "probably killed hundreds" of civilians, and used it to defend Eddie Gallagher. This may sound bad, but the mere existence of civilian casualties does not mean that there was necessarily any legal wrongdoing. I reverted the most recent change to his blog which claimed that they were war crimes, there is simply not enough information to reach that conclusion. Thatwhichmay ( talk) 00:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
I've restored the deletion here, as it is highly relevant to that discussion, in that the furor was about whether the opponent was Moslem. -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:45BC:4AF1:1705:5CE9 ( talk) 01:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The following paragraph at < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_D._Hunter> needs editing. I do not understand it.
“Hunter is a United States Marine and veteran of both the Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan. He is one of only two members of the U.S. Congress, along with John Boccieri (D-OH), to have served in both conflicts and the only combat veteran of either serving in the Congress[1]”.
First it says Hunter is one of two members to have served in BOTH conflicts (NOTE: i.e., combat). Then it says “. . . and the only combat veteran serving in the Congress”. Those are mutually exclusive statements. Together, they don’t make sense.
Thanks, FES Jakarta, Indonesia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.166.73.124 ( talk) 07:16, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Based on this page, the Iraq Campaign Medal page, and the Afghanistan Campaign Medal page, there should be three stars on the ICM and one on the ACM. If wikipedia pages aren't good enough references, I can give better references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean118 ( talk • contribs) 00:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Apparently he has a list of 57 communists in the state department, er a list of defense cuts that target other congressional districts, but he's not ready to share it yet. When he does it should be worth a mention here, not least for being his first big fight. Hcobb ( talk) 23:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I have tagged the statement "...Obama policy of putting the Afghanistan army..." as failing verification. The reference used does not support the content. Only in the comment section does it mention President Obama. Therefore, without verification according to WP:BLP it could theoretically be removed.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 07:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
So do we put in Hunter's direct quote?
"Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether they can do this, but they are."
Is that any clearer? Hcobb ( talk) 21:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
After visiting Afghanistan in October 2012, Hunter said "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether they [Afghan forces] can do this, but they are."
In 2011, Hunter wrote in ''[[Politico]]'' that he is opposed to a complete withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, and was concerned of the challenge of an "unreliable Afghan leadership".<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> After a visit to Afghanistan in October 2012, Hunter returned with a more upbeat assessment, stating "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
In 2011, Hunter wrote of his doubts about the Obama administration plans for Afghanistan, which he perceived to be a complete American withdrawal and a handover to an "unreliable Afghan leadership".<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> Hunter returned from his October 2012 visit to Afghanistan with a more upbeat assessment, stating "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
Then let's go with:
In 2011, Hunter wrote of his doubts about the clarity of the Obama administration's plans for Afghanistan and of a handover to an "unreliable Afghan leadership".
Okay? Hcobb ( talk) 22:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
In 2011, Hunter opposed a complete withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, citing an "unreliable Afghan leadership" and calling on the Obama administration to "stop echoing a misshapen worldview that puts American interests last."<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> However, Hunter changed his position after visiting the country in October 2012: "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
In 2011, Hunter opposed a complete withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, citing the concern of an "unreliable Afghan leadership" and called upon the [[Obama Administration]] to "stop echoing a misshapen worldview that puts American interests last."<ref>{{cite news |title=How to handle Afghanistan |author=Duncan D. Hunter |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56116.html |newspaper=Politico |date=3 June 2011 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref> In October 2012, Hunter returned from his visit to Afghanistan, as part of a [[congressional delegation]], with a more upbeat assessment stating "Frankly I was very skeptical last year when I went last and have been on whether [the Afghans] can do this, but they are."<ref>{{cite news |title=Hunter reports progress in Afghan war effort |author=Gretel C. Kovach |url=http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/20/hunter-reports-progress-in-afghan-war-effort/ |newspaper=San Diego Union Tribune |date=20 October 2013 |accessdate=26 January 2013}}</ref>
Why delete any mention of what exactly the man is complaining about? Hcobb ( talk) 13:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Congressman Hunter; First let me thank you for both you military service and you civil service to our nation. I had the honor of hearing you speak a couple of years ago and I agree with your approach to solutions for many our national problems. I want to ask for your help in investigating a procedure being used by ICE or "border patrol", forgive me for not using the correct terms but it is difficult to keep up with the changing organizational structures. Each day I drive I15 from Temecula to San Diego. Over the past year or so I notice that Ice or border patrol vehicles park with their vehicle lights shining across the freeway lanes I never see any activity such as apprehensions which presumably would be the intent of this activity. Instead, I believe this activity is nothing more that a ruse to make travelers believe that something is in fact being. I am uncomfortable seeing my tax dollars flowing out the exhaust pipe of vehicle that are not performing any legitimate function. I would most appreciate if you could look into this apparently useless activity and report what the intent of it is. I would pursue this under FOIA but I'm sure it would be fruitless to do so.
Once again thank you for all you do in support of our nation and our way of life.
D USN retired — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.85.89 ( talk) 04:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
The congressman served on Active Duty from 2001 - 2005. He was recalled to Active Duty for an additional deployment to Afghanistan in 2007. Once he returned he returned back to the Reserves. In total his years of service should be from 2001 to current NOT 2001-2007.
Hunter has questioned the qualifications of Mary A. Legere to lead the Defense Intelligence Agency, given her involvement with the DCGS-A, which competes with the products of Palantir Technologies, which is based in the state he represents. [1]
Not supported? Which part? Quoting at length from the given source...
So what part is not supported? Hcobb ( talk) 00:44, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
But if you want additional sourcing, please read
Etc. Hcobb ( talk) 00:55, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
DCGS-A is a special interest of Hunter's.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/18/exclusive_pentagon_withholds_report_2.7_billion_intel_program "That's something that the Army has been stubbornly resistant to acknowledge, even though Palantir as a plug-in would solve the Army's problems and deliver soldiers a whole new set of capabilities that they have yet to acquire," he said. "From day one, the problems with DCGS have been apparent but so too has the solution."
So it's odd to completely avoid the subject. Hcobb ( talk) 22:37, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/blog-999-hunter-pushes-for-ied-software-connected-to-his-mentor.html
In 2012, Palantir employed three different lobbying firms at a cost of $120,000 per quarter. The most expensive of the lot is a Cassidy & Associates lobbyist named Terry Paul, who collects $80,000 per quarter from Palantir according to his 2012 disclosures.
...
And here's Paul passionately stumping for Duncan D. Hunter on the campaign trail:
Hcobb ( talk) 00:15, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
If the issue is that Hunter is a critic of DCGS and supports Palantir - which is well documented - then let's say so. That's a significant item for his biography, not the fact that he said he might oppose a nomination that hasn't even been made yet. How about something like this (and please don't add or delete anything in the article until we reach consensus here -no edit warring please!):
-- MelanieN ( talk) 03:28, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm striking "in his district"; sorry, thought I had read that. If we have to get into a bunch of detail about the respective merits of the two systems, it will become too much information for a biography. Two referenced sentences seems like about the right weight to me. -- MelanieN ( talk) 14:07, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Proposed text:
How about something like this?
-- MelanieN ( talk) 16:59, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
So cut this down to fit with Hunter.
Then DCGS-A article can include mention of Legere, using refs like this:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113484/how-pentagon-boondoggle-putting-soldiers-danger
Hcobb ( talk) 17:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Hunter has highlighted soldiers' concerns over the US Army's DCGS-A system and their requests that the products of California company Palantir Technologies should be used instead.
I do think, per suggestion above, that we should give some idea why he feels this way. That's why I inserted the "He says that..." sentence into my latest proposed version. To say "he says" doesn't imply that it isn't true, merely that this is why he is making an issue of it. This article is not the place to get into the pros and cons of the system, or who is right or wrong about it; maybe the DCGS-A article could use some of this information. People who are curious can click on that link. However, The New Republic is not a neutral publication, it is a "magazine of commentary"; and the article is not neutral, it is editorializing. If you are going to put stuff into that article about the recall of the original report and all that, you need a source that is less POV. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
This discussion seems to have died down so I went ahead and added the two sentences to the article. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/08/politics/jeh-johnson-duncan-hunter-isis/ "A high level source informed the congressman -- it was also said that DHS is actively discouraging any talk of IS on the border," Kasper said.
We're suppressing what the congressman says because he's an unreliable source? Hcobb ( talk) 13:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Oops! Ain't ISIL. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/09/us-usa-security-kurds-idUSKCN0HY2JP20141009?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews Hcobb ( talk) 22:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can see, this is a one-day story. If Hunter wants to keep pushing it so that it becomes a more notable issue, we can add something then. It's really up to him at this point. -- MelanieN ( talk) 22:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
What you say is true - on both points. It would be a huge deal. (It's also possible that he is neither correct nor brazenly lying - that he is simply misinformed, perhaps relying on rumors relayed to him by border patrol agents.) However, we can't go drawing conclusions on our own (per WP:OR) - or based on partisan sources like Maddow. If neutral mainstream sources pick up this story and keep it alive, and start pointing out things like this, then we can go with it. Right now it looks like the story has not lived past its 24 hour news cycle, except in partisan sources. BTW I reworded your addition to the article about Hunter voting against arming Syrian rebels; that source didn't mention Hunter's allegations about the border. -- MelanieN ( talk) 17:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Duncan D. Hunter. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 06:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Duncan D. Hunter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:17, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
This section reads like editorializing from someone who disagrees with the Congressman:
He voted against equal pay for equal work in 2009 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act).
The LL Fair Pay Act amends the statutes of limitations on when a suit can be brought for pay discrimination. The current way it is written overstates the effect of the act and does not sound neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OsirisMuhammad ( talk • contribs)
I am not familiar enough with Wiki guidelines to make an edit, but I would like to point out that in the Gender Issues section the line "In February 2013, Hunter voted in favor of renewing the Violence Against Women Act." is directly contradicted two sections later in the Immigration section with the line "He voted against renewing the Violence Against Women Act..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.74.121.54 ( talk) 00:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
The lead section gives significant weight to the 2017 "Campaign finance investigation". While it should be included in the lead in some form, there is zero weight given to entire other sections in this article, specifically the sections titled "Military service" & "U.S. House of Representatives".
As far as the body the Political positions is a new section compared to when I last edited this page in 2015; it can use more balance from sources, as some sections are entirely sourced to a source from only one side of the political spectrum.--
RightCowLeftCoast (
talk)
20:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I've seen online reports that the subject has been indicted. Can we confirm this? Bearian ( talk) 22:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
So how does one inherit a Congressional seat? I don't think they are inheritable. Hopefully someone can replace this sentence with more accurate language. MovingtoMontana ( talk) 22:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@ MelanieN: Given the politically charged nature of recent accusations made upon the subject of this article, and the father of the subject of the article considering that event a "last minute hit", perhaps it would be best to place this article under WP:ARBAPDS? -- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 06:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
It has been my observation that the name of the opponent of a politician in a recent race is common in the lead of an article of an active politician is not common. Therefore why has it been added to the lead of this article? To mention that the subject is under incitement is appropriate, that the subject is facing reelection is appropriate, but the opponents name, IMHO is not. Also the opponent does not meet WP:POLITICIAN, yet.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 06:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Right now the lead says "Hunter became nationally known for repeatedly attacking his Democratic opponent Ammar Campa-Najjar over his half-Palestinian heritage" citing https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/opinion/disaster-candidates-beyond-trump.html . But this is not true and not neutral point of view, citing an anti-Trump op-ed in the New York Times. Hunter is attacking not the Palestinians, but the fact that his opponent's grandfather was a terrorist. -- Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii ( talk) 21:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Given that the 2018 election is a minor part of the overall article, and although it did get national attention, it is not a significant part of the article thus per WP:LEAD I would argue it is given WP:UNDUE weight. The current indictment has due weight in the lead.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 05:43, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Several papers have noted that when Hunter couldn't arrange for a tour of a naval facility in Italy, he told his chief of staff to "tell the Navy to go fuck themselves". That was put into our article a few days ago, and I removed it as inflammatory and unnecessary detail. Now I see someone has restored it [1] so I think the proper thing to do is seek consensus whether to include it or not. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:28, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Snooganssnoogans and RightCowLeftCoast: RCLC removed paragraph about his attacks on his opponent’s ethnic background from the lead saying removed content per WP:LEAD, no other campaign information is in the lead giving the 2018 campaign undue weight, also WP:RECENTISM; also removed content per WP:BURDEN). [2] Snoogans restored it saying nope, this is what he's known for. running one of the most grotesquely racist campaigns in recent memory. added source. OK, let’s leave it in for now since it is longstanding content, but let’s talk about it. IMO I think it should be removed. It is highly unusual to include campaign claims, even controversial ones, in the lead of an article. IMO this is NOT what he is known for; he is best known for being indicted, which is already in the lead. I would say, Snoogans, that the reference you added does not support your claim that the attacks are what is is known for, merely that they were being made by him and others supporting him. If you Google his name, most of what comes up is about his indictment and upcoming trial. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
became nationally knownregarding these comments - Steve King might be nationally known for his comments, Duncan D. Hunter is not. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 00:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, where do we stand? RCLC and I favor removing the paragraph from the lead. Snoogans favors keeping it in. Anyone else have an opinion? power~enwiki? O3000? -- MelanieN ( talk) 21:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Favor keeping paragraph with the amplification that 2018 attack on opponent was based on Campa-Najjar being the grandson of Black September terrorist leader Muhammad Yousef Najjar, rather than generic ethnic origin. JSJB ( talk) 18:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
At the time of the 2018 election it was known that Hunter's opponent is the grandson of Black September terrorist leader Muhammad Yousef Najjar, who planned the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. This is a relevant fact for the campaign as it calls into question the claims that Hunter was merely attacking his opponents on racist lines. Suppressing this material fact degrades Wikipedia into a propaganda sheet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JSJB ( talk • contribs) 12:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
End of Term of Service
Has the subject retired from the Marine Corps Reserve? One source says yes, more than one source says no.
So which is it?-- RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 19:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
@ MelanieN and John from Idegon: an editor B P G PhD ( talk · contribs) has began to remove content from the article( 1, 2), and I see there was a WP:COI question brought up at the 2nd AfD for a related subject. Is this a concern?-- RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 19:54, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Under the law of armed conflict with principle of proportionality, military necessity, and the Rendulic Rule the incidental death of non-combatants as a part of military operations are ruled as permissible in many cases.. Hunter conceded in a interview that his Artillery Unit "probably killed hundreds" of civilians, and used it to defend Eddie Gallagher. This may sound bad, but the mere existence of civilian casualties does not mean that there was necessarily any legal wrongdoing. I reverted the most recent change to his blog which claimed that they were war crimes, there is simply not enough information to reach that conclusion. Thatwhichmay ( talk) 00:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
I've restored the deletion here, as it is highly relevant to that discussion, in that the furor was about whether the opponent was Moslem. -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:45BC:4AF1:1705:5CE9 ( talk) 01:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)