• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban relea

Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

apdst said:
Neither his prerogative, nor his right.
Click to expand...
How so? Is he not in charge? Does he not hold the ultimate command authority? Last I checked constitutionally he being the commander in chief has no restrictions on how he may go about distributing orders and to whom in the military. They all be subordinate. They are his to use once congress unleashes him. If he wants to sack his commanders, I do believe he can. Is there something in the constitution that says otherwise? Taking your division commander example, say said president does that prior to sacking you, or he decides to reassign you elsewhere but wants to move the unit first? I honestly don't see were the president cant do these things unless there is something specific somewhere that says he cant. I am aware of nothing that does restrict the president in that capacity.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

Napoleon said:
Then maybe the military shouldn't have imprisoned hundreds of innocent people at Guantanamo and manipulated the tribunals until they got the results they wanted. The military hasn't exercised good judgement in its classification of who is dangerous and who isn't.
Click to expand...

I concur, the U.S. military should have followed international law and shot unlawful combatants on the battlefield when they were captured.

I suppose the Bush administration believed they could gather intelligence from these unlawful combatants ?
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

APACHERAT said:
There is a chain of command and the Incompetent CnC doesn't understand how the military chain of command works and has broken the chain of command or ignored the chain of command numerous times.

Obama has also ordered members of the military to violate standing military regulations more than a few times.

There's a process for changing military regulations and Obama doesn't know how the process works.
Click to expand...

As I asked APDST, where is that says he cant do those things. He is the CnC. Just because it was done one way before doesn't mean he is obligated to continue to do it that way now. Unless there is something somewhere that says otherwise.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

PirateMk1 said:
How so? Is he not in charge? Does he not hold the ultimate command authority? Last I checked constitutionally he being the commander in chief has no restrictions on how he may go about distributing orders and to whom in the military. .
Click to expand...

You're 100 % wrong. It's Congress who decides what the military chain of command is and how it must be followed not some community organizer.

You ever heard of the Goldwater–Nichols Act ?

Even the Joint Chiefs of Staff are no longer part of the military chain of command.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

PirateMk1 said:
How so? Is he not in charge? Does he not hold the ultimate command authority? Last I checked constitutionally he being the commander in chief has no restrictions on how he may go about distributing orders and to whom in the military. They all be subordinate. They are his to use once congress unleashes him. If he wants to sack his commanders, I do believe he can. Is there something in the constitution that says otherwise? Taking your division commander example, say said president does that prior to sacking you, or he decides to reassign you elsewhere but wants to move the unit first? I honestly don't see were the president cant do these things unless there is something specific somewhere that says he cant. I am aware of nothing that does restrict the president in that capacity.
Click to expand...

He has almost un-limited authority to issue orders, through the chain of command.
A unit commander, by law, is responsible for the whereabouts and conduct of the soldiers under his command, therefore, any orders issued to soldiers under his command have to go through him. That's why there are special operations unit created, that operate under a different chain of command.

The chain of command exists for the same reason there are three branches of government, to insure that a CIC doesn't attempt to excercise absolute power. A second lieutenant might be intimidated into executing an unlawful order, a general won't.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

apdst said:
He has almost un-limited authority to issue orders, through the chain of command.
A unit commander, by law, is responsible for the whereabouts and conduct of the soldiers under his command, therefore, any orders issued to soldiers under his command have to go through him. That's why there are special operations unit created, that operate under a different chain of command.

The chain of command exists for the same reason there are three branches of government, to insure that a CIC doesn't attempt to excercise absolute power. A second lieutenant might be intimidated into executing an unlawful order, a general won't.
Click to expand...

You keep writing about chain of command, but where is the law that says he must abide that chain? That's what I am looking for. I am ignorant in the finer points of military operations. So if the president has to follow the chain, what law is it that then restrains him.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

PirateMk1 said:
As I asked APDST, where is that says he cant do those things. He is the CnC. Just because it was done one way before doesn't mean he is obligated to continue to do it that way now. Unless there is something somewhere that says otherwise.
Click to expand...

Do you remember a thread on the DP Military Forum not to long ago, the topic was Obama's war against the generals ?

In the article they mentioned when Valerie Jarret Obama's # 1 head honcho called the CG of Space Systems Command I believe telling the general that CnC Obama is ordering that a imaging satellite to be repositioned some where over Earth.

The general said he couldn't do it, that Obama has to follow the chain of command.

Well Valerie Jarret got her socialist panties all wadded up and told the general "I thought the civilians ran the military." !!!

The general told Jarret she was right but she wasn't that civilian. :lamo
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

APACHERAT said:
I concur, the U.S. military should have followed international law and shot unlawful combatants on the battlefield when they were captured.
Click to expand...

The status of "unlawful combatant" is an invention of the Bush Administration. What international law does say is that combatants who are not prisoners of war are entitled to humane treatment and a fair trial.

APACHERAT said:
I suppose the Bush administration believed they could gather intelligence from these unlawful combatants ?
Click to expand...

US military victim referred to as detainee US9AF-00657DP. Name: Haji Faiz Mohammed. His detention file records him as a 70 year old man with Senile Dementia. It goes on to say that he was snatched while sleeping in a mosque by US Forces in April of 2002, was/is not affiliated in any way with Al Qaeda or the Taliban, and "there is no reason on the record for detainee being transferred to Guantanamo Bay detention facility." Just one example. In fact, almost none of the GITMO detainees were actually combatants of any kind or in any way affiliated with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. By the military's own admission, these innocent people were kept locked up there, some for over 7 years, to avoid a pr nightmare and for no other reason.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

APACHERAT said:
You're 100 % wrong. It's Congress who decides what the military chain of command is and how it must be followed not some community organizer.

You ever heard of the Goldwater–Nichols Act ?

Even the Joint Chiefs of Staff are no longer part of the military chain of command.
Click to expand...

Last I checked the president IS the executive branch and everyone in that branch serve at the pleasure of the president this includes those in the military. Does the Goldwater Nichols act restrict the president to chain of command? If so how?
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

APACHERAT said:
Do you remember a thread on the DP Military Forum not to long ago, the topic was Obama's war against the generals ?

In the article they mentioned when Valerie Jarret Obama's # 1 head honcho called the CG of Space Systems Command I believe telling the general that CnC Obama is ordering that a imaging satellite to be repositioned some where over Earth.

The general said he couldn't do it, that Obama has to follow the chain of command.

Well Valerie Jarret got her socialist panties all wadded up and told the general "I thought the civilians ran the military." !!!

The general told Jarret she was right but she wasn't that civilian. :lamo
Click to expand...

My question still stands if the president wishes to bypass the command, what stops him? What law?
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

Napoleon said:
The status of "unlawful combatant" is an invention of the Bush Administration. What international law does say is that combatants who are not prisoners of war are entitled to humane treatment and a fair trial.



US military victim referred to as detainee US9AF-00657DP. Name: Haji Faiz Mohammed. His detention file records him as a 70 year old man with Senile Dementia. It goes on to say that he was snatched while sleeping in a mosque by US Forces in April of 2002, was/is not affiliated in any way with Al Qaeda or the Taliban, and "there is no reason on the record for detainee being transferred to Guantanamo Bay detention facility." Just one example. In fact, almost none of the GITMO detainees were actually combatants of any kind or in any way affiliated with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. By the military's own admission, these innocent people were kept locked up there, some for over 7 years, to avoid a pr nightmare and for no other reason.
Click to expand...
The status a "unlawful combatant" is an invention of The Geneva Convention.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

apdst said:
The status a "unlawful combatant" is an invention of The Geneva Convention.
Click to expand...

The status "unlawful combatant" doesn't appear anywhere in the Geneva Convention.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

PirateMk1 said:
My question still stands if the president wishes to bypass the command, what stops him? What law?
Click to expand...

The same law that established the chain of command.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

apdst said:
The same law that established the chain of command.
Click to expand...

And that would be??
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

APACHERAT said:
Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban release:

Only comment is, who's surprised ? Even former Sec. of Defense Gates in his book says that the Obama administration refuses to listen to the military.

Obama and those with in his incompetent administration hate the military and Barack Obama is a national security risk.

>" The Obama administration sent a message for years to wary military and intelligence officials who believed the release of the Taliban Five would come back to haunt the U.S.: ‘Suck it up and salute.’


Mullah Mohammad Fazl, Mullah Norullah Noori, Abdul Haq Wasiq, Khairullah Khairkhwa and Mohammed Nabi Omari were all deemed in 2008 to be at “high risk” for returning to the battlefield if released, but that did not stop the White House from releasing them in exchange for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl over the weekend.


“Officials in the Pentagon and intelligence communities had successfully fought off release of the five men in the past,” Time reported Tuesday. “This [sudden release] was out of the norm,” he continued. “There was never [a] conversation.”

“Obama’s move was an ultimate victory for those at the White House and the State Department who had previously argued the military should ‘suck it up and salute,’ says the official familiar with the debate,” reported Time..."<



Read more: Obama admin. told wary military officials to 'suck it up and salute' on Taliban release, says Time - Washington Times
Foll
Click to expand...
Do tell us what these five were charged with and when was their release date under the provisions of the Patriot Act. They weren't, and next year.
Also tell us who in the Obama administration uttered the words "suck it up and salute". You can't, because no one did.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

Napoleon said:
The status of "unlawful combatant" is an invention of the Bush Administration. What international law does say is that combatants who are not prisoners of war are entitled to humane treatment and a fair trial.



US military victim referred to as detainee US9AF-00657DP. Name: Haji Faiz Mohammed. His detention file records him as a 70 year old man with Senile Dementia. It goes on to say that he was snatched while sleeping in a mosque by US Forces in April of 2002, was/is not affiliated in any way with Al Qaeda or the Taliban, and "there is no reason on the record for detainee being transferred to Guantanamo Bay detention facility." Just one example. In fact, almost none of the GITMO detainees were actually combatants of any kind or in any way affiliated with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. By the military's own admission, these innocent people were kept locked up there, some for over 7 years, to avoid a pr nightmare and for no other reason.
Click to expand...

https://www.fas.org/man/eprint/reid.pdf
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

apdst said:
You tell me...
Click to expand...

I have no idea. Your the expert. That's why I asked.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

Buck Ewer said:
Do tell us what these five were charged with and when was their release date under the provisions of the Patriot Act. They weren't, and next year.
Also tell us who in the Obama administration uttered the words "suck it up and salute". You can't, because no one did.
Click to expand...

Time magazine seems to to say diffrent.

Best of the Web Today: 'Suck It Up and Salute' - WSJ

Obama admin. told wary military officials to 'suck it up and salute' on Taliban release, says Time - Washington Times

TIME: Obama State Dept. Told Bergdahl Deal Detractors to 'Suck It Up and Salute'; Sen. Reid Had Early Heads Up | NewsBusters

Administration bypassed intel community to pursue Bergdahl trade, shelved ransom plan | Fox News
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

Why are you dodging his question?
apdst said:
You tell me...
Click to expand...
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

I have watched American forces operate and was lucky enough to serve alongside them in Iraq. I watched the video of the handover and have to say that is not the American military I know, they looked confused and almost apologetic. Embarrassing for the Pentagon and the white house.
 
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

APACHERAT said:
Time magazine seems to to say diffrent.

Best of the Web Today: 'Suck It Up and Salute' - WSJ

Obama admin. told wary military officials to 'suck it up and salute' on Taliban release, says Time - Washington Times

TIME: Obama State Dept. Told Bergdahl Deal Detractors to 'Suck It Up and Salute'; Sen. Reid Had Early Heads Up | NewsBusters

Administration bypassed intel community to pursue Bergdahl trade, shelved ransom plan | Fox News
Click to expand...
The whole administration said it in unison?...HA! It's a talking point ... no one said those words or you would have a quote.:lamo A made up phrase that one news service put out and every other news service repeated because it sells news.
It's a phrase administration detractors wish was said ...but was never actually uttered.
Pure images.jpgBS!
The five were never charged with anything and they would be released in less than a year anyway. Bergdahl will be charged and will have his day in court. Nothing should have been done differently and you know it.
This is just the slam the president with nothing d'jour:lamo
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama admin. told wary military officials to ‘suck it up and salute’ on Taliban r

apdst said:
Until he issues an un-lawful order, or violates the chain of command.
Click to expand...

How is that the case here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom