US Military has Doubts about Syria Strike (will they refuse strike orders?)

What exactly would be the targets of a missile strike? Syria is not relying on sofisticated command and control facilities in the first place. It would take a massive bombing campaign to influence the war on the ground, close air support on an army considerably larger than what went after Benghazis and the like in Lybia.

I wonder what some of you would have said about an article like this when it came to the Iraq war? You would say lock up anyone disobeying Bush. Now since its the devil Obama, we want the military brass to take Obama to the woodshed? So you want the chain of command to be thrown out? The ramifications are ridiculous. If the joint chiefs can do it, then the generals can do it. If the generals can do it, then... And so on and so on.

No one in the joint chiefs is going to disobey Obama. Period. The chain of command supersedes this nonsense.

And no, I do not agree with Obama on this decision at all. I'm sick of war. I was sick of war back in 2003 as well...

I think the military should refuse this order! I also think the president and any representatives, republican or democrat, who supports this strike should be held accountable.

Merinda
What exactly would be the targets of a missile strike?

FOX actually had a map of Syria up on their website yesterday. It had the targets up. There were dozens of them all over Syria. I don't have a screen shot of it but trust me ... it wasn't just a handful. There were bunches .... supposed chemical sites and chemical transport sites.

reply to post by bknapple32


The difference between Iraq and Syria

- Saddam murdered millions and used chemical weapons against the Kurds in an attempt at Genocide.

- Saddam was expanding outside of Iraq and taking over Kuwait, an ally of ours.

- Saddam broke multiple UN resolutions that he agreed to when he lost Gulf War I.

- The American people backed war in Iraq. The American people do not back war in Syria.

- Syria is a CIVIL WAR and not a war of aggression to expand into countries that are allies of ours.

There are differences.

bknapple32
No one in the joint chiefs is going to disobey Obama. Period. The chain of command supersedes this nonsense.

It used to. I never thought that it would even be a consideration. Now, I'm not so sure.

FlyersFan
reply to post by bknapple32

 

The difference between Iraq and Syria

- Saddam murdered millions and used chemical weapons against the Kurds in an attempt at Genocide.

- Saddam was expanding outside of Iraq and taking over Kuwait, an ally of ours.

- Saddam broke multiple UN resolutions that he agreed to when he lost Gulf War I.

- The American people backed war in Iraq. The American people do not back war in Syria.

- Syria is a CIVIL WAR and not a war of aggression to expand into countries that are allies of ours.

There are differences.

The American people backed the war in Iraq, true, but not for any of the reasons you listed above. They backed a war that was supposedly stopping something " in the form of a mushroom cloud". And then the bait and switch of, oh they had something to do with 9/11.

reply to post by bknapple32


I think it is funny how the people who made the point of the unlawful and unjust causes for war with Iraq are the very same people who have turned 180 degrees on the matter- and that the people who DID make the mistake are the only ones who have learned from mistakes from the past.

You would think that it would be the opposite?????

Common Good
reply to post by bknapple32

 

I think it is funny how the people who made the point of the unlawful and unjust causes for war with Iraq are the very same people who have turned 180 degrees on the matter- and that the people who DID make the mistake are the only ones who have learned from mistakes from the past.

You would think that it would be the opposite?????

See my post above. The lies are the difference. The boots on the ground are the difference.

reply to post by bknapple32


My point was .. Americans widely backed Iraq and so did the military, and so did our allies. (for whatever reason) But with Syria, Americans want no part of it and neither do a lot of the brass in the military, and our allies aren't there. It's a different situation, something this country hasn't seen before. I'm just wondering if the brass will school Obama behind closed doors ....

Originally posted by bknapple32
The boots on the ground are the difference.

I have absolutely no doubt that, if we strike Syria, we WILL have boots on the ground before long. If we strike Syria then the elements at war over there will include us in their 'hit plans' because we will have injected ourselves. And then the next thing you know, there will be 'terrorist attacks' against our interests and His Majesty Obama will have our troops (covert or otherwise) out on missions to take out the bad guys who are hitting us with 'terrorist attacks'.

This can only get bigger ... and the bombings will accomplish nothing except to make us a target.

reply to post by bknapple32


Nope- we are just lobbing missles over there. No big deal right? Not like we are sending guys in with M-16s right?

If you think for a second that lobbing missles into Syria wont cause major retaliations- you are sadly mistaken.


The President shouldnt have the ability to seal the fate for the entire world all by his lonesome. If he does this- damn straight people are going to react to it.
As of now- its a civil war.
After we lob missles- its a global war.

reply to post by FlyersFan


If we put boots on the ground, Obama better get the approval from Congress or I'll be right there with you on impeaching him.


As of now, I see nothing illegal about what will transpire over the weekend. Therefore no one will be disobeying the orders. Boots on the ground? Different story,

reply to post by thesaneone

The Military is just a small part of the org and depts that protect him. And they sure wont ever arrest him....the man's got protection to cover him FROM the military, and they answer to wholly different leaders.

Just sayin.........

Originally posted by bknapple32
If we put boots on the ground, Obama better get the approval from Congress or I'll be right there with you on impeaching him.

I didn't bring up impeaching him .... but last I saw Obama needs approval from Congress to bomb a foreign country if there is no immediate threat to America. And it's pretty clear that there is no immediate threat to America.

Or did I get that wrong? (which is possible) I'm pretty sure the talking heads all said that.

As of now, I see nothing illegal about what will transpire over the weekend. Therefore no one will be disobeying the orders. Boots on the ground? Different story,

It'll lead to boots on the ground. No question. Interjecting ourselves into a civil war like this makes us a target. And then Obama will say that we need to stop the 'bad guys' from hitting us ... so the boots will be on the ground.

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

As of now, I see nothing illegal about what will transpire over the weekend. Therefore no one will be disobeying the orders. Boots on the ground? Different story,

Wow, Really?!?

I assume you mean "officially" right champ?

If you seriously think there aren't any US "boots on the ground" right this very second, then you are simply naive.

The way I see it, America is now standing at a crossroad. It can take the right path, or it can continue down the wrong path.

Intervention in Syria, and this is not forgetting the victims of the chemical attack, would be wrong and it would be disastrous in terms of terrorist retaliation. Let's not forget what Assad may well do? Do you not think he would use what he may be about to lose, or if he suspects that America will try to take him out, he will seek to set fire to the whole Middle East? He will most certainly attack the American fleet, and he will have every right to do so.

Obama made the greatest error by drawing a red line. He will now feel he has no option but to embroil his fellow countrymen and women in another conflict. He will not be allowed to strike from afar and walk away, he will divert the conflict from a constrained civil war and bring it upon the heads of Americans. Syria is a poisoned chalice, and you drink from it at your peril.

reply to post by Rosinitiate


If you have solid proof we have a ground effort going on in Syria right now, I'd love to see it... Until thin I guess I'll continue to not hold my breath.

Originally posted by elysiumfire
Syria is a poisoned chalice, and you drink from it at your peril.

You speak truth in your posts entirety but the words quoted above, amen brother, amen.

Originally posted by Rosinitiate

I assume you mean "officially" right champ?

If you seriously think there aren't any US "boots on the ground" right this very second, then you are simply naive.

It's quite sad watching all the Obama loving mentally ill people coming out of the wood work to support this war their king is starting.. Lets hope this voter block gets a clue and realizes Obama is more a war monger then they thought.