What's New
Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion

Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.

GOP Congressman Urges Generals To Resign In Protest To Obama's Foreign Policy

Webster

Retired Snark Master
Administrator
Joined
May 11, 2013
Posts
25,472
OT Bucks
69,105
Huffington Post: GOP Congressman Urges U.S. Generals To Resign In Protest Of Obama's Foreign Policy
As U.S.-led airstrikes continue Friday near the Syrian border with Iraq, it's hard to imagine what would make the situation worse than the military suddenly losing all its generals. But that is exactly what Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) told a group of voters he wants to see happen, the Colorado Independent reported.

"A lot of us are talking to the generals behind the scenes, saying, 'Hey, if you disagree with the policy that the White House has given you, let's have a resignation,'" Lamborn said Tuesday, adding that if generals resigned en masse in protest of President Barack Obama's Middle East policy, they would "go out in a blaze of glory."

Since Obama launched military operations against the Islamic State in mid-September, several reports have suggested that he may have a less than perfect relationship with his generals. Several high-ranking military officers and Pentagon officials have publicly voiced their disagreement with Obama's airstrikes-only approach in Syria. Former defense secretary Robert Gates said, "There will be boots on the ground if there's to be any hope of success."

Lamborn, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, has been an outspoken critic of Obama's military actions and his foreign policy as a whole. "After watching President Obama's rudderless foreign policy for the past five years, I have lost confidence in the president's ability to lead," Lamborn said in a statement earlier this month.

But military generals are unlikely to heed Lamborn's call to resign. When Gen. David Petraeus, then the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, openly criticized the administration's policies there, the White House reacted strongly, and some suggested Petraeus should resign. Petraeus decided against it, saying a resignation would hurt American interests. "Our troopers don't get to quit, and I don't think commanders should contemplate that, again, as any kind of idle action," Petraeus said.

Irv Halter, Lamborn's Democratic opponent, is himself a retired Air Force general. Halter objected to Lamborn's stance in an email to the Colorado Independent. “It is inappropriate for Congressman Lamborn to politicize our military for his own gain," he said. “Our elected officials should not be encouraging our military leaders to resign when they have a disagreement over policy. Congressman Lamborn’s statement shows his immaturity and lack of understanding of the American armed forces. Someone who serves on the House Armed Services Committee should know better.”

Lamborn's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

...there's a word for Rep. Lamborn's comments above and it's spelled S-E-D-I-T-I-O-N...thoughts?
 
DrLeftover said:
If he was telling them to disobey a direct presidential order, that would be 'sedition'.

And by asking them to resign in protest, that is exactly why I called it sedition...if there's one good thing about the American system of governance, Doc, it is that the generals don't get to make the decision on how our military's used; that decision goes to the Commander-in-Chief. If the generals' don't like the decisions made, they have two simple choices: they can either resign - which is their right, after all - or they can carry out their orders.

If Rep. Lamborn doesn't like Pres. Obama's foreign policy, there are things he can do...such as introduce resolutions or bills of law to restrict the president's foreign-policy decisions. What he doesn't get to do, Doc, is play armchair general.
 
Perhaps I need to brush up on the definition of the word.

Let's check with the dictionary people.

se·di·tion
noun \si-ˈdi-shən\

: the crime of saying, writing, or doing something that encourages people to disobey their government
Full Definition of SEDITION
: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sedition


Saying, in effect: "if you don't like it, either shut up about it or take a hike" is not sedition.
 
I would not complain if they got some balls and saw our Constitution is being obliterated and did a temporary over throw of our government to restore what our founders put in place.
 
TRUE LIBERTY said:
I would not complain if they got some balls and saw our Constitution is being obliterated and did a temporary over throw of our government to restore what our founders put in place.

Surely you're joking, right...or did you just come out in support of both sedition and treason?
 
Webster said:
TRUE LIBERTY said:
I would not complain if they got some balls and saw our Constitution is being obliterated and did a temporary over throw of our government to restore what our founders put in place.

Surely you're joking, right...or did you just come out in support of both sedition and treason?

No joke! If thats what it takes to restore our government let it begin.
 
TRUE LIBERTY said:
Webster said:
TRUE LIBERTY said:
I would not complain if they got some balls and saw our Constitution is being obliterated and did a temporary over throw of our government to restore what our founders put in place.

Surely you're joking, right...or did you just come out in support of both sedition and treason?

No joke! If thats what it takes to restore our government let it begin.

Then we will be on opposite sides there, my friend; my forebears - God bless their souls - fought to keep the Union together and I'd surely follow in their footsteps, Liberty, if the situation called for it once more...I may not like what America does at times but I'll be damned if I'm gonna' stand by and watch America gets ripped asunder just to make certain groups happy. :@:mad::@
 
Webster said:
TRUE LIBERTY said:
Webster said:
TRUE LIBERTY said:
I would not complain if they got some balls and saw our Constitution is being obliterated and did a temporary over throw of our government to restore what our founders put in place.

Surely you're joking, right...or did you just come out in support of both sedition and treason?

No joke! If thats what it takes to restore our government let it begin.

Then we will be on opposite sides there, my friend; my forebears - God bless their souls - fought to keep the Union together and I'd surely follow in their footsteps, Liberty, if the situation called for it once more...I may not like what America does at times but I'll be damned if I'm gonna' stand by and watch America gets ripped asunder just to make certain groups happy. :@:mad::@

Well do not think its going to come down that way in the future with a North South thing but yeah probably would be on opposite sides.
 
Back
Top Bottom