Sir,
if you going to use your posture as a “vet” to lecture on guns, you might want to actually have done something other then logistics your whole military carrier.
When your create a deliberate false premise about your military background at the start of your article, it destroys any intellectually credibility it might have had.
“...you might want to actually have done something other then logistics your whole military carrier.
When your create a deliberate false premise about your military background at the start of your article, it destroys any intellectually credibility it might have had.”
Couldn’t find the word “logistics” anywhere in the linked NBC News article.
The final line described author Michael Diamond as an intel officer who spent seven years in the Army Reserves.
None of which qualifies him, nor disqualifies him.
More than 24 years on active duty convinced me that it’s possible to find fantastic, aware, insightful, talented, committed people in any technical specialty. The other side of the coin: it’s possible to find wrongheaded morons and petty tyrants anywhere also. Being a trained trigger-puller is no guarantee of a sensible understanding nor greater awareness of what’s going on. And the same holds, for combat veterans, jarringly enough.
And members of the military can be all over the map politically: I met political liberals who were far better at their jobs than political conservatives.
What Michael Diamond has done is to confuse the military with wider society: the military is a top-down, authoritarian organization that is necessarily run socialistically. Given the imperatives of command and control, unity of purpose, and centralized direction, it’s tough to see how any other sort of organizational structure could function effectively. The military serves the nation and the wider society, not the other way around.
Left/Progressive totalitarians commit a cardinal error when they conclude that what works for the military will work for the wider society.
What Michael Diamond has written here proves he is a dunce, not some professional with extra-powerful brains and penetrating insight. Which - unsurprisingly - has no impact on the mavens at NBC who are propping him up to pose as someone with special understanding of the problem, and thus higher credibility and authority.