US military commander in Iraq and Syria rejects GOP pledges to 'carpet-bomb' Isis

[fredtoast]

(02-02-2016, 06:02 PM)McC Wrote: If we left the Middle East tomorrow and cut off all ties to Israel the next day, do you honestly believe the killing would stop?

You are missing the point.

If we stay they keep killing each other.

If we go they keep killing each other.

But if we leave then our troops are no longer getting killed; we are not giving the enemy propaganda to recruit more people to hate us; and we save billions of dollars.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-02-2016, 06:07 PM)McC Wrote: Honestly, though, in the real world, how often do orders get questioned?  I would venture to say not very often.

Because good leaders aren't in the habit of issuing illegal or immoral orders!

But, in the rare chance it happens it is your god damn DUTY disobey it if you can't advise them against the course of action.

Orders get questioned in private a lot more than you think, but not because they are illegal or immoral. 

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 06:17 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Because good leaders aren't in the habit of issuing illegal or immoral orders!

But, in the rare chance it happens it is your god damn DUTY disobey it if you can't advise them against the course of action.

Orders get questioned in private a lot more than you think, but not because they are illegal or immoral. 

That first thing is the key, for sure.

But if you have a soldier who has been trained that his duty is to obey orders, how likely is is that he even considers it his duty to disobey orders?

And i don't doubt orders get questioned.  But that's at a command level, right?

[Vas Deferens]

(02-02-2016, 06:02 PM)McC Wrote: Did you mention Jihadists killing civilians?  No.  Only Americans.  And every enemy we've ever fought has killed civilians.  Here you are again painting us as the only bad guys, like I said.

I wasn't speaking to the moral grounds of Jihadists.  I was speaking about OUR involvement in furthering their justification for said extremism.  And AGAIN, I didn't paint us as the only bad guys just because my comment was limited to OUR involvement.  

Quote:And why are we sending drones?  Because that is where the people who want you and me and all our families dead hide.  Do you not want to fight back?  Do you just want to stand around and take it?  

Sit back and take what?  I'm really not afraid of people with very limited capabilities in mud huts half way around the world.  What am I fighting back against?  9/11?  

Quote:You don't understand that this is an addiction to killing and the whole notion of a religious war is a bunch of crap?  

HAHAHAHAH.  This right after you said this:

Quote:Seems like they want all Christians off the face of the earth. 

You can't even keep your argument straight.  It would behoove you to slow down and contemplate the facts and what you really believe.

Quote:If we left the Middle East tomorrow and cut off all ties to Israel the next day, do you honestly believe the killing would stop?

'The killings'?  Which 'killings' are you so vaguely referring to? Of coarse i don't think the general sectarian violence would stop over night.  But that would be their problem to deal with, not our soldiers, not mine, not yours, not our tax dollars.  They don't have the capabilities to wage any sort of war here on US soil, so why are we helping to propagate their cause?

Unfortunately there is an ignorant slice of our populace that was duped into believing this is a just war by those that profit so greatly from it.  These types have so staunchly supported our efforts that, even upon coming to grips with reality, they are incapable of backing down even the slightest as they would have to accept they were wrong in the first place.  Sad, but true.

[fredtoast]

(02-02-2016, 06:23 PM)McC Wrote: And i don't doubt orders get questioned.  But that's at a command level, right?

Bradley Manning was just a private.

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 06:30 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I wasn't speaking to the moral grounds of Jihadists.  I was speaking about OUR involvement in furthering their justification for said extremism.  And AGAIN, I didn't paint us as the only bad guys just because my comment was limited to OUR involvement.  


Sit back and take what?  I'm really not afraid of people with very limited capabilities in mud huts half way around the world.  What am I fighting back against?  9/11?  



HAHAHAHAH.  This right after you said this:


You can't even keep your argument straight.  It would behoove you to slow down and contemplate the facts and what you really believe.


'The killings'?  Which 'killings' are you so vaguely referring to? Of coarse i don't think the general sectarian violence would stop over night.  But that would be their problem to deal with, not our soldiers, not mine, not yours, not our tax dollars.  They don't have the capabilities to wage any sort of war here on US soil, so why are we helping to propagate their cause?

Unfortunately there is an ignorant slice of our populace that was duped into believing this is a just war by those that profit so greatly from it.  These types have so staunchly supported our efforts that, even upon coming to grips with reality, they are incapable of backing down even the slightest as they would have to accept they were wrong in the first place.  Sad, but true.

There's no contradiction.  It's painted as a religious war--Jihad--but it has gone so far beyond that.  It's an addiction to killing.  They attack in Africa, in Europe and in the United States.  And us leaving the region will not stop that.

They will never call it off, no matter what we do.  In the Middle East, they have been killing for thousands of years.  It's what they do.  It most certainly predates us.

So what does that leave us?  To fight back.   The drones are an attempt to fight back without putting Americans at risk, for right or wrong.  We don't set out to kill civilians.  But if they die in the process, that's unfortunate but I'm not losing sleep over it.  They're not shedding a single tear for dead Americans or dead Frenchmen in a movie theater.  You can't really fight dogs with kid gloves.  You can't wallow in the mud but you have to get muddy sometimes.

What is the killing?  Seriously?  And as long as they are killing us, it will always be our problem.  Keep kidding yourself that leaving the Middle east will make it stop.

[Belsnickel]

(02-02-2016, 06:44 PM)McC Wrote: There's no contradiction.  It's painted as a religious war--Jihad--but it has gone so far beyond that.  It's an addiction to killing.  They attack in Africa, in Europe and in the United States.  And us leaving the region will not stop that.

They will never call it off, no matter what we do.  In the Middle East, they have been killing for thousands of years.  It's what they do.  It most certainly predates us.

So what does that leave us?  To fight back.   The drones are an attempt to fight back without putting Americans at risk, for right or wrong.  We don't set out to kill civilians.  But if they die in the process, that's unfortunate but I'm not losing sleep over it.  They're not shedding a single tear for dead Americans or dead Frenchmen in a movie theater.  You can't really fight dogs with kid gloves.  You can't wallow in the mud but you have to get muddy sometimes.

What is the killing?  Seriously?  And as long as they are killing us, it will always be our problem.  Keep kidding yourself that leaving the Middle east will make it stop.

Quick question for you, was there a case of a Jihadist attack against the U.S. before our intervention in the M.E.? We all agree this fight has been going on a long time, but were there attacks against the U.S. prior to our influence in the region growing?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-02-2016, 06:23 PM)McC Wrote: That first thing is the key, for sure.

But if you have a soldier who has been trained that his duty is to obey orders, how likely is is that he even considers it his duty to disobey orders?

And i don't doubt orders get questioned.  But that's at a command level, right?

In the Army, I was taught it was my duty to disobey an unlawful order at every leadership school. 


You can lead a horse to water, right?

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 06:50 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Quick question for you, was there a case of a Jihadist attack against the U.S. before our intervention in the M.E.? We all agree this fight has been going on a long time, but were there attacks against the U.S. prior to our influence in the region growing?

Not to my knowledge.  But there's no changing the past.  

Hey, I know our government has been doing shitty things for a long time.  Name a president, he's got his own list. 

The unfortunate side effect of that is that Joe Public, who probably never reaped the benefit, except maybe lower gas prices, is there to face the whirlwind.  That's how it works with governments.

What I'm saying is that there is no going back now.  There's no peace table to sit at because you can't negotiate with ghosts and shadows.  And they have no interest in seeing it end.   It's become an industry all its own.  So, you might as well be in closer proximity to the enemy.

Maybe we can start showing compassion for Muslim civilians when Muslim Jihadists do. 

There's no way I will ever take their side in any of this.  We've built more in less than 300 years than they've built in 5000.  That's the real problem.  

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 06:51 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: In the Army, I was taught it was my duty to disobey an unlawful order at every leadership school. 


You can lead a horse to water, right?

Then the question becomes what is an unlawful order and who is qualified to make that determination in the spur of the moment and in the heat of combat. 

And back to the OP, why is a general responding to campaign promises to begin with?

[Vas Deferens]

(02-02-2016, 06:44 PM)McC Wrote: There's no contradiction.  It's painted as a religious war--Jihad--but it has gone so far beyond that.  It's an addiction to killing.  They attack in Africa, in Europe and in the United States.  And us leaving the region will not stop that.

An addiction to killing?  Then why aren't we just putting prozac in their wells?  Come on.  Does this 'addiction' get spread from generation to generation?  When during this thousands of years did it get medically diagnosed and who was the doctor?  Blindly making things up is what got us into this war and apparently its a great tactic to continue justifying our involvement.  Addiction.  Give me a break.

Quote:They will never call it off, no matter what we do.  In the Middle East, they have been killing for thousands of years.  It's what they do.  It most certainly predates us.

The lies and deception our current involvement are predicated on have been exposed, yet we're still over there putting our soldiers at risk and wasting VAST amounts of capital fighting something that as you say, predates us and will never stop.  Only thing keeping us there now is fear of what these poor desperate boogiemen will do to us if we leave.  Wonder who's espousing that lie and what their motive is?  

Quote:So what does that leave us?  To fight back.   The drones are an attempt to fight back without putting Americans at risk, for right or wrong.  We don't set out to kill civilians.  But if they die in the process, that's unfortunate but I'm not losing sleep over it.  They're not shedding a single tear for dead Americans or dead Frenchmen in a movie theater.  You can't really fight dogs with kid gloves.  You can't wallow in the mud but you have to get muddy sometimes.

I'm not accusing you of any sort of compassion, believe me.  What you're trying to avoid in this pseudo conversation is the fact that our military presence / insertion into their daily lives / killing of civilians (pick one, any one) only generates more extremism and animosity towards the US.

Quote:What is the killing?  Seriously?  And as long as they are killing us, it will always be our problem.  Keep kidding yourself that leaving the Middle east will make it stop.

So you think if we left the region tomorrow and got out of bed with Isreal, the same number of Americans would be 'killed' the next day?  Keep kidding yourself.  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-02-2016, 07:05 PM)McC Wrote: Then the question becomes what is an unlawful order and who is qualified to make that determination in the spur of the moment and in the heat of combat. 

And back to the OP, why is a general responding to campaign promises to begin with?

An unlawful order is an order which would require you to do something illegal or immoral. Who decides?  Obviously, the person disobeying the order they consider to be unlawful because it would force them to do something illegal and immoral. At which point they have a legal or moral obligation to disobey what they consider to be an unlawful order. There will most likely be a courts martial (unless it is minor which might involve an Article 15 instead). Then a military judge would decide. 

Did you read what the General said?  He's sending a message, obviously. He's going on the record while he has a chance to do so publicly. Because it is unlawful to publicly criticize the chain of command or the Commander in Chief. He can say anything he wants about a candidate. 

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 07:43 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: An unlawful order is an order which would require you to do something illegal or immoral. Who decides?  Obviously, the person disobeying the order they consider to be unlawful because it would force them to do something illegal and immoral. At which point they have a legal or moral obligation to disobey what they consider to be an unlawful order. There will most likely be a courts martial (unless it is minor which might involve an Article 15 instead). Then a military judge would decide. 

Did you read what the General said?  He's sending a message, obviously. He's going on the record while he has a chance to do so publicly. Because it is unlawful to publicly criticize the chain of command or the Commander in Chief. He can say anything he wants about a candidate. 

What he's responding to is posturing and hyperbole more than anything else.  
it's just not something you see generals usually do, is it?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-02-2016, 07:46 PM)McC Wrote: What he's responding to is posturing and hyperbole more than anything else.  
it's just not something you see generals usually do, is it?

Posturing and hyperbole the lowest common denominator among us applauds.

How many times during you lifetime has a general been able to publicly address they posturing and hyperbole of his potential boss?  Four times?  The opportunity only presents itself once every 4 years so it doesn't happen very often.  But, it is nice to hear publicly what professional soldiers think privately.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-02-2016, 06:02 PM)McC Wrote: You don't understand that this is an addiction to killing and the whole notion of a religious war is a bunch of crap?  If we left the Middle East tomorrow and cut off all ties to Israel the next day, do you honestly believe the killing would stop?

Do you know what ISIS was before it was ISIS?  It was Al Qeada in Iraq.  There wasn't any Al Qeadin in Iraq until after we invaded Iraq and created an insurgency.  Along with terror tourism; foreign nationals flocking to Iraq for their chance to kill Americans who couldn't make it across our moats (the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.)  Do you know what prompted 9/11 and other Al Qeada terror attacks against America?  Our involvement over there.  Who originally bank rolled Osama Bin Laden and the mujahideen?  The CIA.

For every action there is a reaction.  Since we recognized Israel as a country, what have we done strategically in the Middle East to make us more secure?  Nothing.

Did you see the 1980s movie War Games?  What did the computer learn?  The only way to win is not to play the game.

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 08:49 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Do you know what ISIS was before it was ISIS?  It was Al Qeada in Iraq.  There wasn't any Al Qeadin in Iraq until after we invaded Iraq and created an insurgency.  Along with terror tourism; foreign nationals flocking to Iraq for their chance to kill Americans who couldn't make it across our moats (the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.)  Do you know what prompted 9/11 and other Al Qeada terror attacks against America?  Our involvement over there.  Who originally bank rolled Osama Bin Laden and the mujahideen?  The CIA.

For every action there is a reaction.  Since we recognized Israel as a country, what have we done strategically in the Middle East to make us more secure?  Nothing.

Did you see the 1980s movie War Games?  What did the computer learn?  The only way to win is not to play the game.

It was a war that should never have been fought, was begun under false pretenses.  Jr. wanted his war cuz Daddy had his and Americans wanted somebody to pay for 9/11. 

But you can't erase the past.  But you do have to figure out a future.  And leaving will not make the enemy stop.  So, if they're not gonna stop, you can't up and leave.  It's a lot easier to hunt them down if you're on the same continent.

We screwed up just walking away from Afghanistan after the Russians got chased out.  We could have won the hearts and minds by sticking around.   But, since we were never there, we couldn't stay.

That's what governments do.  They  make agenda based decisions.  And the people pay the price.  A country gets judged based on the actions of its government.  That's appropriate to a degree.  I say to a degree because what any government does is create ways to take power away from the people.  And it also doesn't tell nearly the whole story.

Just like you can't judge France if you've never lived among the French, you can't judge America if you haven't lived with Americans. 

I've met people from all over the world and they are all basically the same.  Not exactly the same, but basically the same.  They're all looking for better for their children.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-02-2016, 09:13 PM)McC Wrote: It was a war that should never have been fought, was begun under false pretenses.  Jr. wanted his war cuz Daddy had his and Americans wanted somebody to pay for 9/11. 

But you can't erase the past.  But you do have to figure out a future.  And leaving will not make the enemy stop.  So, if they're not gonna stop, you can't up and leave.  It's a lot easier to hunt them down if you're on the same continent.

We screwed up just walking away from Afghanistan after the Russians got chased out.  We could have won the hearts and minds by sticking around.   But, since we were never there, we couldn't stay.

That's what governments do.  They  make agenda based decisions.  And the people pay the price.  A country gets judged based on the actions of its government.  That's appropriate to a degree.  I say to a degree because what any government does is create ways to take power away from the people.  And it also doesn't tell nearly the whole story.

Just like you can't judge France if you've never lived among the French, you can't judge America if you haven't lived with Americans. 

I've met people from all over the world and they are all basically the same.  Not exactly the same, but basically the same.  They're all looking for better for their children.

How many terror attacks have there been since the US recognized Israel as a country?  How many were there before?

For every action there is a reaction. 

[StLucieBengal]

(02-02-2016, 09:25 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How many terror attacks have there been since the US recognized Israel as a country?  How many were there before?

For every action there is a reaction. 

Well we can trace that decision back to Woodrow Wilson .   He forced us into WW1 and that in turn demolished Germany instead of what would have happened had we stayed out.   Which was both sides go home and save some face.    Wilson forcing the Russians to stay in and then joining the fight.... This smashed Germany to the point that it enabled the Nazi's to come to power.     Which of course impacted the Jews and led to Israel.  

Wilson stays out of WW1 then we never see the Lenin, Stalin,  or hitler come to power.

[McC]

(02-02-2016, 09:25 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How many terror attacks have there been since the US recognized Israel as a country?  How many were there before?

For every action there is a reaction. 

Given that we're never gonna abandon Israel, what do we do about this thing now and in the future?  That's the real question.

[*bfine32*]

It appears the General is in favor of more Ground Troops instead of wider-range bombing.

Who can disagree with that?