[The Anti-One]

Don't the Joint Chiefs have a responsibility to remove any threat to the US Constitution and the safety of our Country and doesn't this also include the possible removal from office the sitting president of the United States should that person choose to ignore the seriousness of their actions?

Is what I am saying making sense? I seem to remember that is in some oath our commanding officers take when they are promoted.

Enlighten me please.

[RummyChick]

“Keane, the Army Vice-Chief of Staff from 1999 to 2003, has ties to a network of active and retired four-star Army generals, and since Obama’s Jan. 21 order on the 16-month withdrawal plan, some of the retired four-star generals in that network have begun discussing a campaign to blame Obama’s troop withdrawal from Iraq for the ultimate collapse of the political “stability” that they expect to follow U.S. withdrawal, according to a military source familiar with the network’s plans. “

This guy was under Clinton. A lot of people not happy right now.

[pgyanke]

“... against all enemies, foreign and domestic...”

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Foreign and domestic comes to my mind.

[CaptRon]

While I don't beleive there is anything in the oath that would allow or require this, what you are proposing goes against everthing the country was founded on. Our military understands that it is under civil control, and that is the concept they swear to uphold.

For them to do as you suggest would make us no different from any South American dictatorship of the month.

[yldstrk]

no, the miltary is under civilian authority for a reason