Historical disgrace: the U.S. military mutiny forced Obama to retreat (Translation)

Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten ^

[kronos77]

U.S. President Barack Obama had a huge blow for mutiny in the U.S. military leadership planned military strike against Syria apparently. The soldiers could not see any strategy of the President - and expressed grave concerns against the action. Never before has a president so openly refused to follow by the the soldiers in America.

U.S. President Barack Obama had planned military strike against Syria apparently The surprising over from U.S. President Barack Obama of his plans Syria is apparently due to a massive mutiny in the U.S. Army.

The Washington Post reports that up to the ordinary soldiers could hardly see the benefit of one promoted by Obama military action of the four-star generals.

The Post reports that the soldiers especially lacking a clear strategy, because what would happen after the planned military strikes. Many U.S. soldiers have had bad experiences with the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. First of them heroic goals were promised. But no sooner were the interventions in transition, the troops were sent into always new adventures. In both cases there was no exit strategy. The announcements to withdraw from the battle zones were contradictory and retreated to the length.

In the case of Syria, it is not Obama managed to convince the military sense of a military operation.

So far, the U.S. military has always publicly silent and obey the orders of the military-political leadership. The basis for most applications, it was the president managed to convince the soldiers believe that the particular use of "national security" serve. Blow off because of a massive mutiny in the U.S. military leadership. The soldiers could not see any strategy of the President - and expressed grave concerns against the action. Never before has a president so openly refused to follow the soldiers in America.

[NoCmpromiz]

“just following orders” is not an excuse.

Worked so well at Nuremberg..

[Retain Mike]

If this is accurate in regard to his failure to listen to his top military, here is a link to a similar case involving a different war and a different set of recommendations. As junior officers they had gone into harms way for their men. In this case they could have resigned, put on civilain clothes, and given a press conference stating their reasons using news sound bites. It would have only cost them some retirement instead of their lives which they put in the line in WWII.

I read this in a Naval Institute Proceedinh Article.

Vietnam 1965: The Day It Became the Longest War
http://extendedremarks.blogspot.com/2006/12/vietnam-1965-day-it-became-longest-war.html

[Retain Mike]

If this is accurate in regard to his failure to listen to his top military, here is a link to a similar case involving a different war and a different set of recommendations. As junior officers they had gone into harms way for their men. In this case they could have resigned, put on civilain clothes, and given a press conference stating their reasons using news sound bites. It would have only cost them some retirement instead of their lives which they put in the line in WWII.

I read this in a Naval Institute Proceedinh Article.

Vietnam 1965: The Day It Became the Longest War
http://extendedremarks.blogspot.com/2006/12/vietnam-1965-day-it-became-longest-war.html

[SkyPilot]

There wasn't any "mutiny" by the military, in either the top or lower ranks.

This is what Obama and his minions now face because of his own rush to war, then inaction, then dithering, then weakness:

In Syria, Anger and Mockery as Obama Delays Plan

Anger, Mockery........and that is from the "rebels" who area really Muslim Brotherhoods and Al Qaeda operatives.

The videos of Biden saying he would impeach Bush if he had not sought Congressional approval for Iraq were looped all over the radio and television, and it was an "end game" for liberals. Even the MSM could not hide the debacle, because this was the world stage, and the world media was exposing the hypocrisy of Obama, Biden, and the Democrats.

So what does Obama and his slaves do now?

Blame the Military for Insubordination and a "Mutiny!"

Well, it's par for the course: he had destroyed the military with his cuts ($330 Billion in 2009, $487 Billion in 2011, $650 Billion in 2013). All those cuts were supposed to be over ten years, and now they have all overlapped one another. The military is already a hollow force, 6 months after Sequestration.

Pathetic. Obama spit on the military in the playground and threw a rock at it's head when it's back was turned, and now Obama can now go sprint home and lock himself in his Mommy's bathroom.

[SkyPilot]

The caveats to 1) and 2) are that you don’t do it in uniform or in an official military capacity. Individuals can have and express opinions. If I get on the news in uniform and do it, then there’s a real problem there.

Correct, but it also depends on the double standards of the day. I mean, without Double Standards, liberals would have no standards at all.

Pentagon To Allow Service Members To March In Uniform In Gay Pride Parade

Pentagon: Service members now allowed to wear uniforms in gay pride parades The Pentagon on Thursday issued a military-wide directive saying it was making an exception to its policy that generally bars troops from marching in uniform in parades.

[HiTech RedNeck]

An exception... for this alone...

Man, the buggery bunch has been leading America around by the je ne sais quoi.

[SkyPilot]

An exception... for this alone...

There was some Republican protest for this CLEAR violation of military law and policy that gave "super rights" to homosexuals, but the few Republicans who did voice outrage fell on deaf ears.

Republicans blast Pentagon for allowing military uniforms in gay pride parade

Two senior Republicans on the House and Senate Armed Services committees said Tuesday that the Pentagon was out of line to grant the one-time exemption that allowed military uniforms in the parade. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) said the Pentagon made a “dangerous exception” to its policy of not allowing military uniforms in parades. In a statement, the Armed Forces Readiness subcommittee chairman said that the decision was made to advance the Obama administration’s social agenda. “I am calling on the DOD to halt these dangerous exceptions to policy for political purposes. This decision was an outrageous and blatantly political determination issued solely to advance this administration’s social agenda,” Forbes said in a statement Tuesday. “Sadly, this is yet another violation in what has become a pattern of this administration’s assault on the longstanding history of the Department of Defense as a nonpolitical organization,” he said.

______________________________________________________________________

But, we will stand firm in the knowledge that our Lord is in charge.

Romans 8:28 says, “For those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.”

[HiTech RedNeck]

Yep, He is.

And some crazy theologians aside, God isn’t even there to begrudge the “gays” a blessing. If they step off of their insane spiritual platform onto His love, the Cross does its thing for them just as well as it does its thing for us. Sometimes a great shaking is needed to get them to the point where they can see the choice available.

The gospel is needed even more now than ever before.

[Future Snake Eater]

He just said (pretty much) if you're smart, you'll just keep your opinions to yourself.

Guess I've never been too smart, then.

[Future Snake Eater]

That’s true, I didn’t account for politically protected classes. How nice for them. Maybe if I was in uniform for a Tea Party rally...?

[livius]

Something new -- you do not speak about political issues....Kept saying it was a new approach. Kept saying that some people disagreed with it. Kept saying that it was started by the current administration.

That's very disturbing. I agree that military shouldn't (and generally never have) go about disparaging the President or anybody else in leadership. I was referring to the fact that Bush - and, so far as I can see, just about every other US President - consulted them for their opinion on pending military moves and actually sought out their professional advice and often accepted it, even if they disagreed.

But perhaps your second point explains this. Now even disagreeing with or having reservations about current government strategy is considered political and no longer the product of expert military opinion and analysis, but instead is considered a dangerous rejection of Obama. And with the new climate of political fear, even the suggestion of this is probably enough to end a career, at best, or possibly even set oneself up for some kind of worse reprisal.

I've just started reading Rob Smith's Agent 6, the final book in his trilogy set in Stalinist Russia. One of the characters is a Soviet secret policeman whose particular focus is finding and reading people's diaries to see if there is any hint of criticism of Stalin in them.

The book begins this way:

The safest way to write a diary was to imagine Stalin reading every word.

While we haven't gotten to that point openly yet, the feeling is definitely in the air, and I'm sure this is especially true for people in the military.

[bert]

-———This sounds like open insubordination——

Perhaps prelude to the Caliguan end game similar to Egypt but with more intense cleansing of the problem people

[Liz]

"And when Joe hums "That O' Black Magic Has
Me In Its Spell," in my ear, man I'm up for a-n-ything."

[Lazamataz]

This is encouraging, in a way, because if Obama orders US troops to fire on US, that is likely going to be countermanded.

Looks like Obama will be only a would-be dictator.

Ya bast'd.

[Lazamataz]

Hey Liz. I hear what you are saying, but in the present environment, I’ll take what I can get.

[TEXOKIE]

bttt

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks. McNamara was what I think of as criminally negligent when waging that war. He was an utter fool. Johnson was another fool. He has his top military advisers there, and instead of listening to their reasoning, he dismisses them as if they were juniors in high school, not even entered into the military academies yet.

A wise man could have said that their concerns were his concerns, but that he had to put more weight on the possible actions of China or Russia, then explain how he had to go a different direction than they desired.

In this manner, you allow your momentary adversary to save face and later become close again when you need them.

Johnson’s policy of running the war from the Oval Office was unworkable. It was sophomoric, stupid, and dangerous.

The Left always thinks they’ve got the bases covered when it comes to military action, and matters of state. Then you get the ‘Bay of Pigs’, Vietnam, Iran, Libya, Benghazi, and now Syria. The Democrat party can’t handle anything right.

Thanks for the link. It was well written.

[skinkinthegrass]

!

[Paladin2]

Looks like he is “leaning forward”.

[Retain Mike]

Thank you.