Posted on 02/12/2014 2:10:53 PM PST by drypowder
The fraud in the WH who is in control of the US military is rumored to be a Muslim. His military dictates demonstrate without question that he cares more about any Muslim than he does for any Americans.
Only al Qaeda inside the White House (by undocumented
fraud) could get the PENTAGON to arm the armies
that attacked it (al Qaeda for those not paying attention).
History will show that the Pentagon PROTECTED Hasan
more than the Ambassador.
It's not all Hussein's fault. The ROE under Bush was pretty bad as well. All of our leaders (and Obama) will sacrifice as many Americans as uit takes to appease the PC Gods.
I’ll say this much-the left has surely put our military in a “damned if they do/damned if they don’t” spot. For just one instance-this would be a great time for all those “socially engineered” military members to step up to the combat plate, but it would also put the only people who could really fight the enemy if their hands weren’t tied, in jeopardy. White males could stop joining, but then our military is useless. All the women who say they want to be in combat (for promotion, is the true reason) could go fight, but they’d endanger already endangered troops.
To create a force which is good for the main purpose-to turn against future unarmed American citizens.
Plus they have lawyers(Jag political officers) looking at them real time..just like the USSR. From safe positions they are pulling the strings.
For those readers who served in Vietnam - there is nothing new to be read here.
The man on the front lines who is risking everything is controlled by a thing in the rear that is risking nothing.
The worse thing a warrior can ever see is another warrior who has changed because of his promotion and become a REMF of a perfumed prince and is making decisions for his personal promotion vice keeping is ex-superiors and ex-subordinates alive.
And, unfortunately this track was entirely predictable from the outset.
If I were king, everyone who desires to write the rules of engagement, military or civilian, male or female, would get to field test his proposed rules for six months as the point man. But then, that would clear out too many REMFs/perfumed princes and how would the military bureaucratic empires ever survive?
The JCS should have resigned long ago. That would have started the dominoes tumbling that would have brought this administration down. Too late now. The general staff is full of 0-appoinred wimps and careerists. Even CMC is a worthless punk.
They’ve got a point, IMHO. The U.S. military is being Benghazied.
Do you guys think that this would be a good time to remove the President (current and future) from position of Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces? We’ve regrettably had nothing but bureaucrats in a position of absolute authority over the military and we need professionals.
You can't have a strategy without a goal. What's the goal in Afghanistan? Secure the minerals for Red China? Keep the opium flowing?
And, so far, without any consequences from the military. Obama has spent serious time and resources remaking the US military into a force that is loyal to him. Has he succeeded is an open question. Will they follow him, no matter what the orders?
“Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.” — Henry Kissinger
When I was in the military, I never met one, not one, Veteran who enlisted to fight for Socialism.
I agree.
(PS: it’s ‘BOHICA’)
Obama has had neither the political gonads or the moral decency to have admitted that any continued sacrifice of American lives in Afghanistan would be, and has been dishonorable once he quit caring about any true success there.
His half-hearted commitment to a surge there was just that, half-hearted, forcing politics in the Pentagon to please him to accept less of a ommitment than they knew was needed. As his half-hearted commitment proved it was not going to succeed, it became CYA time for the PR machines at the Pentagon and the WH, just until they could pull out and call defeat - returng the Taliban to the position of ascendent power in Afghanistan - a “victory”.
Like Eastwood said, Obama is a hoax.
I say all this because had Obama had the moral clarity to take the political hits from ending - immediately, any pretense that he was committed to any real victory in Afghanistan, it would have bumped him up a few notches in stature. Instead, he fulfilled my expectations of him, which were very low.
Was any of our wartime successes in the past inevitable? No. They succeeded when our commitment knew no bounds. In WWII we succeded because we were committed enough to winning that we chose to throw everything we could into doing that. Any “superior tactics” or equipment were a result of that commitment, a response to that committment, without which many of them would never have arisen. I have firmly believed that only such a committment was going to clean house in Afghanistan, but neither administration wanted to or believed they would succeed at asking for it. So they made a good “coaltion of the willing” show of it, but, in my mind, have seldom been fully committed to it - at least not as much as their PR machines would have us believe.
“It almost seems the our military is purposely being demoralized.
But to what end?”
“My task—the Party’s task—was to organize defeat. From defeat would spring the Revolution”
Yevgrav Zhivago
Our military is attempting to be defeated-by someone, and by Valerie Jarrett.
I’m curious. Have we spent more ensuring Hasan has a fair trial than we did ensuring Stevens had proper security.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.