Skip to comments.Australian General Gets Key US Army Post
Posted on 02/12/2013 7:38:22 AM PST by DeaconBenjamin
Maj. Gen. Richard Burr salutes with his palm facing out, like he's shielding his eyes from the sun. He wears a wide-brimmed felt "slouch hat" with a brown and green camouflage uniform.
The two-star general in the Australian Defence Force stands out amid the American soldiers donning berets and green and beige fatigues at the U.S. Army's headquarters for the Pacific. But he's responsible for directing their training and exercises as U.S. Army Pacific's deputy commander for operations. The Army is also making Burr their liaison to New Zealand, his homeland Australia and countries in Southeast Asia.
Burr's appointment it's the first time a non-American has served in such a high-ranking position at a command like this symbolizes the Army's push to connect more with allies and friendly nations in the Pacific.
Burr said his presence in Hawaii tells others the U.S. Army is open to broadening its relationships.
"I think it sends a very positive message to all countries in the region not just our two countries that stronger partnerships is really the way to go," Burr said in an interview Wednesday. "And building from bilateral to multilateral partnerships is the key to a stronger, more stable region."
The position reflects a deepening of an already close relationship between the U.S. and Australia, two nations who fought together in World War II and whose alliance was formalized by treaty in 1951.
More recently, Australia sent troops to fight alongside the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq, even when those decisions were unpopular with voters at home.
Burr was among the deployed. He commanded Australian troops in Afghanistan in 2002 and during the invasion of Iraq the following year. In 2008, he commanded all coalition special forces including Americans in Afghanistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Nothing bad can come from this I am sure.
All the Australian military folks I’ve met couldn’t possibly be more awesome or cool. I wouldn’t be worried.
Doing the work American generals won’t do?
But who else will our men be put under the command of?
I hate to say it, but Obama.
American military forces were under British command routinely in World War II; wasn’t always the best relationship but the world didn’t end.
Foreign commanders over our men aren’t exactly a good thing.
Nor are they common.
With the current admin, we may see such illustrious countries as Venezuela providing officers for such posts.
That’s what I am getting at.
Because obviously there were no qualified American officers, he’s only doing another job Americans don’t want to do anyways...
[American military forces were under British command routinely in World War II; wasnt always the best relationship but the world didnt end.]
True but I seem to have missed that recent war declaration. Did World War III start already? Can’t believe FR missed that war dec.
Wrong and wrong. Go re-check your history of World War II, Korea, etc.
FYI, US troops and naval forces served under foreign command during the Boxer Rebellion, World War I, the Russian Revolution, World War II, routinely in NATO, in the Gulf War, in Afghanistan, etc. That’s how coalitions work.
This is all well and good, but is the General a practicing homosexual?
The cancer in the White Hut has edicted that all the stops be pulled out to facilitate homosexuals being appointed to prominent positions.
How many foreign commanders do we currently have in typically US officer slots?
The slot mentioned in this article is typically a US slot.
And how long until we have a Venezuelan officer commanding some of our men?
Oboama DOES have a sweet tooth for the Venezuelan regime.
In case you haven’t noticed, no not wrong as you don’t understand what I am saying.
And no, it is NOT common to have foreign troops serving in a US slot.
Yes, our troops did serve in WWII under British command.. but there weren’t brits in US officer slots.
It is one thing for US troops to be under foreign command in a given theater of military operations during a war. It is something else for a non-American to be given a high-ranking post within the US Army.
“It is something else for a non-American to be given a high-ranking post within the US Army.”
And it seems that two people in this thread don’t understand what the article is about.
Some time ago I responded to a similar story in a questioning kind of way,expressing surprise that a foreign officer could be given direct command authority over members of the US Armed Forces.In response to my post two Aussie military officers,named above,schooled me in how things often work within the "Anglosphere's" militaries...that this kind of thing isn't uncommon.Both told of how they had been subject to an American officer's command and how they had had command authority over American uniformed personnel.The explanation,after consideration,made sense to me particularly given the very close alliance the US and Australian militaries (and governments) have had for many,many decades.I've also been made aware that similar arrangements exist between the US and Canadian Armed Forces which,to me,certainly makes sense given our joint responsibility to defend North America. The Australian Armed Forces have consistently proven themselves to be highly skilled,courageous and dedicated and as a result I have no problem at all with such a setup.
But your dad answered to an american officer in his unit who was under British command.
This article is about an Australian who is in a US army officer slot.
THAT is unusual.
Sorry...the two Aussies I referred to are “naturalman1975” and “dundee”.
It is uncommon if it is a US officer slot.
Even people we respect, such as the Aussie's, will they use us for the dirty jobs while giving easy duty for others? Putting Americans through meat grinders has happened before.
Having been a personnel specialist in a hospital unit who rose to the lofty rank of SP5 my understanding of the workings of top military command (and even mid-level command) is very,very limited.Add to that the fact that my stellar (LOL) military career ended almost 40 years ago and you've got someone who can't comment with any credibility on such issues.It may be uncommon but might it be,in this case at least,worthwhile?
That may well be the truth. The flag ranks have been undergoing a purge for 3 years or more (just as they did under Clinton and Carter) and experienced capable officers are being retired or denied promotions (nearly the same thing) in favor of more "reliable" mostly bureaucratic officers. Sequestration and defunding are not the worst of the situation for the military. The worst is the flushing out of talent and experience in favor of political reliability. Iraq took so long to turn around because of Clinton's purge. It had to wait for the talent to bubble up through the ranks. Had the "surge" been done two years earlier it would not have accomplished anything because the battle capable commanders were not yet in place. With no surge there would still have been improvement on the ground because the experienced and capable commanders had finally come to the fore.
As long as it isn’t some commie scumbag and he respects the troops and our laws and our oaths of service, that’s one thing.
But if they start sticking foreign officers in US officer slots more and more often, and some of those officers come from third world hellholes there is a problem.
And I’m recalling Zero’s sweet tooth for a certain South American dictator whose oil production we are subsidizing currently.
Nothing wrong here.
Australia’s defense policy is straightforward - to be a loyal and participating ally of the United States.
They know that a nation the size of the USA with only 30 million people will need all the help it can get, especially with China and Indonesia over the horizon and huge resources being extracted from the adjacent waters.
Australia has been opening up its territory even more, with forwrd positioning of US troops in the Northern Territories and long-established listening posts around Alice Springs.
Remember, as few people do, that Australia has been with us in every war - every war - in the last 100 years. Even Vietnam, along with Korea, Iraq, Desert Storm, Afghanistan.
So, yes, Australia should have a role in the command structure of the Pacific alliances. They’ve earned it.
Yes,that's all true.Valid points to be sure,particularly with Osama Obama as Community Organizer-In-Chief.But that's not the issue at hand here.Having read much about Australia and her people...as well as having had contact with many Aussies...I seriously doubt that *they* would fit into any of your fears.
yup, and Australian forces were under US command (MacAuthor) during all of WW2. Personally I total confidence in Australian commanders.
I’m surprised it didn’t go to a Chinese general.
We’ll have to wait and see whether or not the administration starts using officers from countries with less commonly held mores.
It isn’t that I have something against Aussies on this, it’s that this administration is all about ‘precedent’ and now that they’ve set a ‘precedent’ they will start shoving it to the extreme.
My understanding of Australia's Armed Forces strongly suggest to me that over many,many decades they've never been afraid of doing their share...if not *more* than their share...of the "heavy lifting" in battle.
I was suprised the Zero admin didn’t stick a Venezuelan officer in there.
May be to strengthen ties more. We have Marines training in Darwin.
While the feud between Eisenhower and Montgomery is famous. Wilson in WWI promoted J.J.”Black Jack” Pershing to a six star general,I think the title is General of the Armies to be on equal with his French and English counter parts. He was the only only general till that time beside Washington to hold that distinction and I believe since then including WWII. So even Wilson was cognezant of having an American commanding American troops.
Fraternization may be slightly off topic but is also a result of being stationed on foreign friendly lands. Iceland and New Zealand both wanted US out because of fraternization. In fact it was a subject of a famous movie forgot the name,and there was another about airborne/commando training in the UK which brought it up.
Maj. Gen. Richard Burr is not a “two star general”
Ho hum. Let’s get some facts on the table and then let the discussion go where it will. This is quite common, it just hasn’t been done in the Pacific. In Europe, we’ve had integrated commands for years, sometimes in NATO billets, sometimes in U.S. billets. We were certainly going to be operating under NATO commanders if the balloon had ever gone up. We had Brits in U.S. billets in both Iraq and Afghanistan, usually as the Deputy Commander. NORAD has been an integrated command with the U.S. and Canada since jump street. The Deputy Commander of III Corps at Ft. Hood has usually been a Canadian general and this has been going on for years. U.S. Forces in Korea operate with a combined staff of U.S. and Korean officers, and a Korean general is always in the deputy position. 70 years ago today, General Eisenhower was promoted to fours stars and made commander in chief of all allied forces in Africa. His deputies for ground forces, naval forces, and air forces were all Brits and all U.S. forces in North Africa served under these Brit generals.
We’ve done it for years, and it’s quite routine. I think that a better question is why did it take us so long to get around to doing it in the Pacific. I think that the answer has nothing to do with the U.S. Post Vietnam, Australia was a little bit stand offish with the U.S. because of public opinion down under. New Zealand went off the deep end and declared themselves a nuclear free zone. Cooler heads have now prevailed and both countries realize that we all need to stand together against very real threats from China and Indonesia (Muslim country BTW). Obama has had nothing to do with any of this, he’s too busy playing golf and place nice with Islamic extremists.
“Obama has had nothing to do with any of this, hes too busy playing golf and place nice with Islamic extremists.”
In between firing Generals and telling troops to stand down while our diplomats die.
Third Corp in the Army has traditionally had a Canadian deputy commander for many years.
I would give anything to be able to discuss this with Dad, but why is this thought to be “a US Army officer slot”? It looks an awful lot like a staff position in a unified command.
The article sure makes it sound like a US Officer slot, which WOULD change the entire thing outright if true.
If a regional joint command, that is something else.
But I would NOT put it past the admin to pull a fast one and stick foreign officers in US officer slots.
We are, in that respect, talking about an administration that said “Stand Down” and went to bed while our people died in Benghazi.
I admit, I’m not Pac command savvy as I am “US East Coast” National Guard.
So I don’t know if that IS a unified joint command or not.
We don’t deal with foreign officers except to see them in a trade swap training deal at military installations like Fort Sill or West Point.
And even then they aren’t in command of US troops.
And that would have what to do with an Australian General being assigned to USARPAC?
The same thing that the part of your post I quoted had.
I forgot to add to my post ‘waste time to fake skeet shooting images for PR stunts’.
That could be part of the problem. USARPAC is a U.S. Army Command, it's the Army Component Command of PACOM, the U.S. combatant command for the Pacific region. Our defense strategy is putting renewed emphasis on the Pacific and is working to establish closer ties with Australia among other countries. The Army just announced that LTG Vincent Brooks is being nominated for a 4th star and will be assigned to command USARPAC. This has traditionally been a 3-star billet but is being upgraded in line with the new policy.
We dont deal with foreign officers except to see them in a trade swap training deal at military installations like Fort Sill or West Point. And even then they arent in command of US troops.
Not true, as I have previously pointed out in the case of the Deputy Commander of III Corps at Ft. Hood (not East Coast) who is a Canadian Brigadier General named Dean Milner. His picture can be seen on the III Corps Web Page under the Command Group.
Of course, he is. He’s from down under!
Never been to Fort Hood Texas.
But I have ben to Fort Sill Oklahoma where the situation is as I have described.
Anyone know if the position of the article actually IS in a joint command or if the article writer just was sloppy and made it sound like a US officer slot instead?