Should Obama declare war with Islamic Terrorists?

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 01:16:42 -0400

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jul 15 at 2016 1:18 AM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 01:18:53 -0400

"A theme of President Barack Obama's counterterrorism policy has been a relentless narrowing of focus. Under his watch, the U.S. has not been at war with terror or radical Islam. It has been in discrete conflicts with al-Qaida's core leadership and its affiliate in Yemen and the Islamic State. And while Obama's war has waxed and waned, he has never explained its disparate parts as a whole the way his predecessor did.

Michael Flynn, who served as Obama's second Defense Intelligence Agency director, takes the opposite view. "Field of Fight," a new book Flynn co-wrote with historian Michael Ledeen, argues that America is up against a global alliance between radical jihadis and anti-American nation states like Russia, Cuba and North Korea. They say this war will last at least a generation. And they say it will require outside ground forces to go after al-Qaida and the Islamic State as well as a sustained information campaign to discredit the ideology of radical Islam.

One might think a big war is a quaint throwback to the era after 9/11 when George W. Bush delivered his speech about the "axis of evil." But Flynn is very much a man of the moment. Over the weekend, The Washington Post reported this former special operations officer and three-star general was Donald Trump's leading choice for vice president. At the very least he has the real-estate mogul's ear when it comes to national security."

Source: Eli Lake USA Today

And I agree 100% with Lt General Flynn who is calling for a declaration of war with Islamic Terrorism and a plan to defeat it before we have more attacks on our homeland

Response by Capt Chris McVeigh made Jul 15 at 2016 4:02 AM

Capt Chris McVeigh — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 04:02:29 -0400

The president cannot declare war, that is a function of congress.

Response by PO3 David Fries made Jul 15 at 2016 4:59 AM

PO3 David Fries — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 04:59:18 -0400

Unless I'm mistaken, we are still mired in the GWOT. ISIS are terrorists, hence we they should fall under that umbrella.

Response by COL Korey Jackson made Jul 15 at 2016 6:39 AM

COL Korey Jackson — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 06:39:04 -0400

One issue: in January, the Senate deliberately refused to act on President Obama's request for authorization for the use of force under the War Powers Act to explicitly fight ISIS.
Instead, the existing US authorization for its current use of force is based on a broad interpretation of the 2003 authorization - 13 years ago.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jul 15 at 2016 7:16 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 07:16:35 -0400

Let congress decide, he shouldn't to do an end run around them.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 15 at 2016 8:15 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:15:41 -0400

Terrorism is much more abstract than people think. It has no borders, no centralized government, no uniforms, and no clear target, which make is difficult to fight. In many ways you are fighting an ideology, and a mindset; there is no diplomatic route to resolution, so there has to be another way.

In regions where a lot of terrorists come from there are generations of hate towards the US or the West in general, and that breeds what we are seeing all too often today. What a lot of people don't see or understand (or don't want to) is that Bombing, war, destruction is not the only way to stabilizing relations in that region, but the humanitarian efforts that we are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, possibly will help pave the way towards some sort of peace between us. This is playing the 'long game' and while the 'short game' will deal more immediate results it will do nothing to ease the resentment they have towards us, it will instead continue to fuel their resolve

Response by PO2 Kevin LaCroix made Jul 15 at 2016 8:38 AM

PO2 Kevin LaCroix — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:38:17 -0400

The president cannot declare war on anything.

Response by Elizabeth Smythe made Jul 15 at 2016 8:53 AM

Elizabeth Smythe — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:53:32 -0400

Absolutely, but he won't because he sympathizes with them.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Jul 15 at 2016 8:59 AM

SrA Edward Vong — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:59:12 -0400

The president cannot declare war, only congress can. If we were to declare war on ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, it means we would acknowledge them as a nation. If we were to declare anything, it would be to remain vigilante in our own soil, as well as combating further threats in their own. This would require to combined efforts of many nations working together.

Response by SPC James Harsh made Jul 15 at 2016 8:59 AM

SPC James Harsh — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:59:55 -0400

Was it in 2012 I saw on the news the coverage of Syria. Journalists and independent footage surface of the people pleading for the USA to help them, meanwhile we helped Libya. I don't know those people but images of civilians getting stacked up like sandbags as Clint would say, had me thinking I'd go -we should do something. As it unraveled over the next few years we have what we see today. President Obama drew a "line" it was also said that China and Russia would condemn US involvement. It has been handled so ugly by the Obama administration, at least on it's face, we shouldn't give President Obama anything for the remainder of his term.