Tag Archives: Taiwan

Current Events

A Messiah Awaits

8 Comments

Are his comments not a breath of fresh air, and trust me they are not hot.  I am a Floridan, and if there is one thing you can count on from Ron, he means what he says and does what he says. Broward County and Disney learned that the hard way. 

 

From the Wall Street Journal                                          Thursday, 20 July 2023

Next Target for Ron DeSantis: the Military

Ron DeSantis is gradually laying out his presidential agenda, and on Tuesday he unveiled a plan to build a “Mission First” U.S. military. The Florida Governor has several worthy ideas to restore American confidence in the armed forces, though fighting the culture wars isn’t a substitute for preventing an actual war.

“We need a military that is focused on being lethal, being ready and being capable,” Gov. De-Santis said in South Carolina. The U.S. military is suffering from institutional drift, as senior officers rush to associate themselves with progressive causes. One example: Space Force Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt in a June speech unleashed a political broadside against elected state legislatures for considering what she styled as “anti-LGBTQ+” measures.

One good priority is reviving American military education. Gov. DeSantis is right that the service academies ought to be “narrowly focused” on disciplines such as engineering or military history and leadership. Civilian academics have taken over most military educational institutions such as war colleges, and the instruction is often, as Gov. DeSantis says, “substandard.”

The Governor, a Navy veteran, also says he would review the performance of every four-star flag officer and remove those who aren’t focused on lethality. There is reason to wonder if the services are producing the war fighting talent the country needs by picking leaders on the merits. More aggressive civilian oversight would help.

Case in point: In 2021 a Navy admiral suggested the service should bring back photos as part of promotion boards to achieve more diversity. Gov. DeSantis said he’d ban “race and gender quotas in military recruiting and promotions.”

The perception that the military is a political institution may be hurting enlistment, and the Army looks likely to come up at least 10,000 soldiers short this year. Gov. DeSantis says he will “restore national pride” in the armed forces, to include a school program explaining that the U.S. military “ has been a force for justice and good in the world,” which is at least a start. But an under-appreciated reason the services are struggling to recruit is that the force is too small and ill-equipped to fulfill its current missions. This wears out troops. President Trump boasts that he rebuilt the U.S. military, but he offered a one-time increase that only started to rebuild the readiness burned in President Obama’s two terms.

The defense industrial base also continued to erode on Mr. Trump’s watch. Contractors are now recalling retired engineers in their 70s to teach new workers how to build Stinger antiaircraft missiles that haven’t been in production for decades.

Gov. DeSantis’s special operation against wokeness will thrill his base, and he has correctly identified China as the top threat to U.S. security. His harder task will be building public support for a larger and more capable U.S. military that can deter the Communist Party from a terrible mistake such as invading Taiwan.

That will require convincing skeptical Republicans to increase defense spending—for example, building two attack submarines a year for the U.S. Navy, up from 1.2 now. Or speeding up the new Air Force strategic bomber. Or building a long-range missile inventory that can last more than three nights of fighting in the Taiwan Strait.

An aide to the campaign says Gov. DeSantis still plans to offer a broader defense agenda. But on U.S. support for Ukraine he’s too often catered to the isolationist right that would, in Ronald Reagan’s words, play innocents abroad in a world that’s not innocent.

Still, the Pentagon’s growing preoccupation with identity politics is corrosive to an institution built on cohesion and self-sacrifice. The country would be better prepared for a fight if a new President started to right the ship.

Has he nailed the problems or what? “. . . review the performance of every four-star flag officer and remove those who aren’t focused on lethality.” Wow, that would sure open up the promotions for three stars, albeit he should look at all flag officers, not just the four-stars.

Increase defense budget bother you? He’ll find other areas to reduce the funding e.g., all the woke shit, welfare, immigrant benefits, and many more. Ron is not a big spender, just ask a Floridan. Trump hasn’t talked about any of thee issues, because he is too busy calling people names.

My dream team would be Ron and  SC Senator Tim Scott. What a team that would make. Sorry guys but if you didn’t already know it, I am no longer a Trumper. He simply will not shut the hell up!

Originally posted 2023-07-20 09:26:59.

Current Events

Finally!

4 Comments

FINALLY!  Generals from all services are beginning to speak out against what CMC is doing to the Marine Corps. Many have met with him, but state, he took notes, asked no questions, and changed nothing. This first article is from a Marine I know very well. I was his Company GySgt for a short while, until I was commissioned and  stayed in the same company; he was a Capt at the time. I served with him again when he was a Colonel and  G-1 of the 2d Marine Division. Then again when I had 2/6 and was going to become 2/8, he was my regimental CO. Then yet again when he was a fresh caught  BG at LFTCLant. So, I know him fairly well.

I and several others pegged him as a future general when he was nothing but a captain at 8th & I. The smartest, most capable Marine officer I ever met throughout my career. When he made four star he was assigned as  Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic and Commander in Chief, U.S. Atlantic Command. Consider the significance of that assignment. The first time ever that a non-naval officer was assigned to that billet. He controlled all the  forces, including the navy ships throughout the Atlantic!

General Jack knows his stuff, so I am heartened by the fact he has finally come to life. Someone had  best listen to him, specifically another four star named Berger!

Wasteful Spending, a Shrinking Force and the Marine Corps’s Big Bet

The Marines may be “the only branch adapting fast for the future” (“U.S. Defense After Ukraine,” Review & Outlook, March 8), but what future and how wisely? The military’s poor record of predicting the next war urges maintaining flexibility. This has long been a strength of the Marine Corps, which maintained itself for decades as a combined-arms force in readiness, rapidly deployable, balanced and able to organize for any mission. This has proved its worth to the nation at all levels of crisis and conflict.

Yet today the Marine Corps is betting all on a conflict with China in the Western Pacific, to the neglect of other contingencies, creating littoral regiments to be scattered in small units across island chains to engage Chinese ships with missiles as part of a campaign for sea control. To pay the bill for this new vision of war, the Marine Corps has already got rid of all its tanks. It is reducing cannon artillery from 21 to five active batteries, eliminating three infantry battalions and reducing those remaining by a third in manpower, and reducing air power and other combat support commensurately. The war in Ukraine shows the folly of this. Or should someone tell the Russians and Ukrainians these systems are all obsolete?

These initiatives risk turning the Marine Corps into a niche force optimized for one conflict that is unlikely to occur, while hobbling its ability to meet security challenges that are certain. This is not what the nation needs or expects from its Marine Corps.

Gen. J.J. (Jack) Sheehan, USMC (Ret.)

Alexandria, Va.

Mr. Sheehan was NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (1994-97). How dare the WSJ refer to this Marine as “Mr.”

Another general speaks out in the same WSJ article.

The editorial board has been right on its defense analysis for months. Now it is correct about our defense-budget outlook, especially the relationship between the creeping inefficiencies that have plagued the Pentagon and our need to modernize.

If Vladimir Putin is successful, he will not stop at Ukraine. Nor will Xi Jinping stop at Taiwan. America must be ready to combat these threats and adjust to the end of the post-Cold War order. That will require more defense spending—a reality that our NATO allies are coming to grasp as well. But if we don’t get more bang for the buck, these spending increases won’t yield the capabilities we need to defend our freedoms, which are at risk.

Though we spend more today in constant dollars than we did at the peak of the Reagan buildup, we have a smaller force by all measures. The largest drivers of this ever-shrinking fighting force are a broken acquisition system that costs more, takes longer and produces less; the excessive amount of money tied up in the Pentagon’s massive, layered overhead and support functions; and the fully burdened and life-cycle costs of the all-volunteer force, with its outdated personnel management, compensation and retirement programs.

Without reforms, we will not improve our capabilities in either the quality or quantity necessary. The Pentagon and Congress need to establish performance goals that ensure we are better, faster and cheaper than our adversaries. The focus needs to be on outputs, not only inputs.

Congress should also fund the government through a regular process instead of the insanity of never-ending continuing resolutions, which already cost the Defense Department close to $40 billion in purchasing power in this fiscal year. The Pentagon and defense-industrial base need steady, predictable funding. Budget chaos is no way to deter our adversaries.

Maj. Gen. Arnold Punaro, USMC (Ret.)

McLean, Va.

Mr. Punaro is author of “The Ever-Shrinking Fighting Force.”

Your editorial observes that President Jimmy Carter “did a 180-degree turn . . . and began a defense buildup.” This is a bit generous. Alarmed by the enormous Soviet military program and the overthrow of the shah, NATO countries agreed to each undertake a 3% increase in real defense spending. Yet when Mr. Carter offered his budget for fiscal year 1980, his defense numbers were closer to half that, which his spokesmen rationalized with the fatuous claim that the part relevant to NATO had met the target.

In the face of this foot-dragging, two “defense Democrats,” Sens. Ernest Hollings and Sam Nunn, took matters into their own hands, introducing an amendment to raise the overall number by 3%, as pledged, and by 5% the next year. The Carter administration lobbied strenuously against this, yet it passed 55-42. This began the buildup that was carried much further by the Reagan administration, contributing to victory in the Cold War.

Joshua Muravchik

Wheaton, Md.

Mr. Muravchik was executive director of the Coalition for a Democratic Majority (1977-79).

STRENGTH    RESPECTS    STRENGTH. Always has, always will, Amen

Originally posted 2022-03-12 10:09:43.

Current Events, Recent Posts

Strength Respects Strength

3 Comments
And as Greg points out, power has always respected power. Its been that way since Adam and Eve. Putin is no different than anyone who has a left and right brain that are somehow connected, which rules out Biden and his gang of idiots.

 

A Putinized disaster

By: G. Maresca

 

Vladimir Putin never accepted defeat in the Cold War. The former KGB agent stated how the dissolution of the Soviet Union was one of the greatest tragedies in world history.

Given their strategic location, rich natural resources and fertile farmland, an old Russian proverb says there is no Russian Empire without Ukraine. Since the 1772 Partitions of Poland Agreement, Ukraine had been part of Russia until 1991.

For over 30-years, Ukrainians have realized greater economic freedom and opportunities that they never experienced as a satellite of the former Soviet Union. Such successes intimidate Putin. Economically, Russia has been stagnant fueled by a declining population. To offset any further demographic and economic slide, Putin hopes to return those old Soviet republics to the Russian fold.

Ironic how Russia did not invade Ukraine when they had a “Russian asset” in the White House. According to Biden, the borders of Ukraine are sacrosanct and must be protected. The American border not so much.

Rewind to 2014, when Ukraine lost the Crimean Peninsula after President Obama’s chemical weapons “red line” in Syria disappeared and Hillary Clinton’s “re-set” was outright dismissed prompting Putin to make his move. Fast forward eight years, and Obama’s vice president has the top job and tells Putin at their initial meeting that “the adults are back in charge.”

Those adults alongside Biden are Harris, Pelosi, Kerry, Trudeau, and Macron. Kerry’s response to Putin’s invasion would be comical if it wasn’t so pathetic: “I hope President Putin will help us to stay on track with respect to what we need to do for the climate.” Watching our Woke powder puff team of generals grossly mismanage our withdrawal from Afghanistan was no help.

The West’s superlative six are nothing but appeasement, global elitists more concerned about wokeness, gender pronouns, defunding the police, open borders, and handcuffing America’s gas and oil resources.

Since assuming office, Biden went to war with American energy production by canceling the Keystone Pipeline that would have prolonged our energy independence. It would have kept world oil and gas prices in check and limit a major source of Russian revenue, while easing American inflation. Moreover, sustaining sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline under the Baltic Sea would have denied Putin additional income and political leverage.

Barring new Alaskan production and exploration in the lower 48 states only handcuffs American energy independence and potential. This not only hurts Americans at the pump, but our allies, too, while the high price of oil pays for Russia’s invasion.

Biden’s irrational energy policy underscores another Vlad, this one named Lenin and his infamous wisecrack about how the “capitalists will sell us the rope by which we hang them.”

How pathetic is it when a Canadian waitress who donated $50 to the freedom truckers suffered more financially than Putin when Trudeau locked down her bank account?

The Russian invasion of Ukraine highlights just how fundamentally inept the UN is.

During the 2012 presidential campaign, Mitt Romney was spot-on saying how Russia was foe number one but was mocked by Obama and Biden who believed Putin to be an equitable geopolitical partner.

Like all despots, Putin understands, and values strength and he certainly empathizes with the legacy of the Romanov Tsars and their successors in the Kremlin. Negotiating with Putin, China, and the ayatollahs of Iran only comprehends dynamism, defiance, and dominion. The results are playing out in real time in Ukraine with the Baltic states lying in the balance.

Don’t dismiss the Chinese desire to reunify Taiwan with the mainland, and who could forget our favorite ayatollahs in Tehran finally obtaining their nuclear warhead and those North Koreans forever aiming south. Power only respects power. It has been that way since the dawn of civilization, yet the West fails to comprehend its lesson.

Civilians throughout Ukraine are battling back in what the New York Times calls, “a massive grass-roots movement” that must be giving Democrats heartburn. The next time you hear leftists threatening to take away your guns and ammo think about our friends in Ukraine fighting to keep their freedom.

May God bless, guide and protect the Ukrainian people whose courageous resolve reminds us how precious freedom is that many take for granted.

So where does the U.S. fall in this power and strength struggle for respect? Well, let’s look at the current status of the foundation of  our power and strength – the military establishment.

From the Free Beacon

 • March 1, 2022 5:00 am

As Russia Wages War, US Army Trains Officers on Gender Identity. Mandatory military training program pushes soldiers to undergo gender reassignment surgery

While Russia wages a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. Army is putting its soldiers through training on gender pronouns and coaching officers on when to offer soldiers gender transition surgery, according to an official military presentation on the subject obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The mandatory presentation, “Policy on the Military Service of Transgender Persons and Persons with Gender Dysphoria,” was given to officers earlier this month along with instructions for them to train their subordinates on the material. Portions of the presentation were provided to the Free Beacon by a whistleblower who was ordered to undergo the training as a high-ranking officer in the Army Special Forces.

An Army spokesman confirmed to the Free Beacon that the slides in question are part of “mandatory training” and come from an official program “used to train Army personnel on the recent changes to the DoD and Army transgender service policy.” All Army personnel, from soldiers to commanders and supervisors, are required to participate in the training by Sept. 30, 2022, according to the spokesman.

The transgender presentation follows on a June 2021 announcement by the Army altering its policies so that transgender soldiers can openly serve. The shift in policy is part of a larger push by the Biden administration to make the military more welcoming to transgender people. These efforts have prompted pushback from Republicans in Congress and some within the military who view the policy changes as an effort to promote “woke” propaganda within the service. As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatens to spark a larger conflict, military experts and insiders say they are concerned America’s fighting force is prioritizing woke culture over protecting the American people.

“The Army allows transgender soldiers to serve openly,” states the presentation, which is tailored for Army commanders and leaders. “An otherwise qualified soldier shall not be involuntarily separated, discharged, or denied reenlistment or continuation of service on the basis of gender identity.”

The presentation offers several hypothetical scenarios for how soldiers should be treated if they are transgender or in some stage of transitioning to another gender.

In one situation, a “soldier who was assigned male at birth says he identifies as a female,” “lives as a female in his off-duty hours,” and “is not requesting to be treated as a female while on duty.” In that case, the soldier should be treated with dignity and respect and no further action is required.

If the transgender soldier, however, “later requests to be identified as a female during duty hours and/or experiences increased distress relating to his gender identity,” the officer in charge must “inform [the] soldier of the Army’s transgender policy and recommend that he sees a military medical provider.”

“Gender transition in the Army,” the presentation states, “begins when a soldier receives a diagnosis from a military medical provider indicating that gender transition is medically necessary.”

In another scenario included in the presentation, a “soldier is assigned female at birth. She tells her first sergeant that she identifies as male and would like to be treated as a male. She has not yet seen a military medical provider.”

In this situation, Army leaders are ordered to “inform [the] soldier that the Army recognizes a soldier’s gender by the soldier’s gender marking in DEERs,” or the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System, a massive database that tracks military members. The soldier, according to the presentation, will be expected to meet the uniform, grooming, and physical readiness standards associated with their recognized gender.

The soldier will then be sent to a military medical provider who can determine whether “gender transition is medically necessary.”

Damn, don’t those kind of reports make you feel warm and fuzzy? I suspect reports like this  has Putin shaking in his KGB boots, ya think? I’ve made no secret on here that I am somewhat of a Putin fan. I shall pray for the people of Ukraine, but that’s as far as I will go. I have tired of us being the caretaker of the world only to lose men and women to useless political wars where we have no interests whatsoever. How dare we lose one American soldier, Marine, sailor, or airman fighting in Ukraine while our own country is going to the dogs and fast becoming a Third World Shithole. I’ve discussed Putin with some of my peers about how bad Putin is and what he’s doing. I make no apologies, while I may not agree with what he is doing, I do respect the man’s fortitude and determination to do what he considers necessary for the good of his country.  That’s a lot more than I can say about our nation’s leader.

Meanwhile, thanks to that person in our oval office, WTI crude opened this a.m. at $111.37/bbl and Brent crude opened at $114.43/bbl. And to think that on Trump’s last day in office WTI was $52.87/bbl, and before COVID hit Trump had it down to $3.32/bbl, and we were paying less for gas than we had paid in 30 years. Two years ago we were an oil exporter and  energy independent. Putin’s getting rich; we are paying for his actions in Ukraine at the gas pump.

Guys, we have major problems right here within our own borders e.g., CPI at 7.1% in January, literally 1,000s storming our borders every month, spending out of control, rising prices for everything especially the necessities for life, a military training to become warm and fuzzy powder puffs, Marines changing their entire force structure, and the list goes on. We are no longer the powerful nation to be respected like we were two years ago. We need to stay out of Ukraine , and let Europe stand on their own two feet for a change.

Originally posted 2022-03-04 11:23:00.

Current Events

Ms. Milley’s Worried?

2 Comments

Sorry for the lack of posts gang. I wonder what keeps a so-called retired Marine of 80 so damn busy all the time? When I figure it out I’ll let you know. Anyway, sort of tiring writing about Joe the idiot and all his clowns, it actually gets boring after a while. I mean no one knows what they will do next. I’m done with him and his puppet handlers. This particular post intrigued me because it talks about Ms. Milley, who as we all know does not have a clue what he is supposed to be doing as CJCS. Now he is attempting to show concern for China, but can’t get his arms around it since he is to wrapped up in more important things like diversity, and ridding the military of extremists, which we all know I am one of them. What a flaming idiot this guy is.

And of course he is supposed to be the military advisor to the bigger idiot, Sleepy Joe, who also does not have a clue even where he is at anytime. Oh dear, I can just imagine how hard the world is laughing at us dumb ass Americans.

Pentagon Rattled by Chinese Military Push on Multiple Fronts

Air Force Gen. John Hyten, outgoing commander of US Strategic Command, speaks during a change of command ceremony at Offutt AFB in Nebraska, Monday, Nov. 18, 2019. (AP Photo/Nati Harnik, File)

1 Nov 2021

Associated Press | By Robert Burns

WASHINGTON — China’s growing military muscle and its drive to end America predominance in the Asia-Pacific is rattling the U.S. defense establishment. American officials see trouble quickly accumulating on multiple fronts — Beijing’s expanding nuclear arsenal, its advances in space, cyber and missile technologies, and threats to Taiwan.

“The pace at which China is moving is stunning,” says Gen. John Hyten, the No. 2-ranking U.S. military officer, who previously commanded U.S. nuclear forces and oversaw Air Force space operations.

At stake is a potential shift in the global balance of power that has favored the United States for decades. A realignment more favorable to China does not pose a direct threat to the United States but could complicate U.S. alliances in Asia. New signs of how the Pentagon intends to deal with the China challenge may emerge in coming weeks from Biden administration policy reviews on nuclear weapons, global troop basing and overall defense strategy.

For now, officials marvel at how Beijing is marshaling the resources, technology and political will to make rapid gains — so rapid that the Biden administration is attempting to reorient all aspects of U.S. foreign and defense policy.

The latest example of surprising speed was China’s test of a hypersonic weapon capable of partially orbiting Earth before reentering the atmosphere and gliding on a maneuverable path to its target. The weapon system’s design is meant to evade U.S. missile defenses, and although Beijing insisted it was testing a reusable space vehicle, not a missile, the test appeared to have startled U.S. officials.

Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the test was “very close” to being a Sputnik moment, akin to the 1957 launching by the Soviet Union of the world’s first space satellite, which caught the world by surprise and fed fears the United States had fallen behind technologically. What followed was a nuclear arms and space race that ultimately bankrupted the Soviet Union.

Milley and other U.S. officials have declined to discuss details of the Chinese test, saying they are secret. He called it “very concerning” for the United States but added that problems posed by China’s military modernization run far deeper.

“That’s just one weapon system,” he said in a Bloomberg Television interview. “The Chinese military capabilities are much greater than that. They’re expanding rapidly in space, in cyber and then in the traditional domains of land, sea and air.” Meanwhile you have other more important eggs to fry dealing with diversity, transgenders, gays, and of course getting rid of all those mean, bad constitutionalists in the military.

On the nuclear front, private satellite imagery in recent months has revealed large additions of launch silos that suggest the possibility that China plans to increase its fleet of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs.

Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, says China appears to have about 250 ICBM silos under construction, which he says is more than 10 times the number in operation today. The U.S. military, by comparison, has 400 active ICBM silos and 50 in reserve.

Pentagon officials and defense hawks on Capitol Hill point to China’s modernization as a key justification for rebuilding the U.S. nuclear arsenal, a project expected to cost more than $1 billion over 30 years, including sustainment costs.

Fiona Cunningham, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania and a specialist in Chinese military strategy, says a key driver of Beijing’s nuclear push is its concerns about U.S. intentions. Really? Oh Okay that suits Ms. Milley as she can go back to the really important stuff.

“I don’t think China’s nuclear modernization is giving it a capability to pre-emptively strike the U.S. nuclear arsenal, and that was a really important generator of competition during the Cold War,” Cunningham said in an online forum sponsored by Georgetown University. “But what it does do is to limit the effectiveness of U.S. attempts to pre-emptively strike the Chinese arsenal.”

Some analysts fear Washington will worry its way into an arms race with Beijing, frustrated at being unable to draw the Chinese into security talks. Congress also is increasingly focused on China and supports a spending boost for space and cyber operations and hypersonic technologies. There is a push, for example, to put money in the next defense budget to arm guided-missile submarines with hypersonic weapons, a plan initiated by the Trump administration.

For decades, the United States tracked China’s increased defense investment and worried that Beijing was aiming to become a global power. But for at least the last 20 years, Washington was focused more on countering al-Qaida and other terrorist threats in Iraq and Afghanistan. That began to change during the Trump administration, which in 2018 formally elevated China to the top of the list of defense priorities, along with Russia, replacing terrorism as the No. 1 threat.

For now, Russia remains a bigger strategic threat to the United States because its nuclear arsenal far outnumbers China’s. But Milley and others say Beijing is a bigger long-term worry because its economic strength far exceeds that of Russia, and it is rapidly pouring resources into military modernization.

At the current pace of China’s military investment and achievement, Beijing “will surpass Russia and the United States” in overall military power in coming years “if we don’t do something to change it,” said Hyten, who is retiring in November after two years as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “It will happen.” Yessiree!

The Biden administration says it is determined to compete effectively with China, banking on a network of allies in Asia and beyond that are a potential source of strength that Beijing cannot match. That was central to the reasoning behind a Biden decision to share highly sensitive nuclear propulsion technologies with Australia, enabling it to acquire a fleet of conventionally armed submarines to counter China. Although this was a boost for Australia, it was a devastating blow to Washington’s oldest ally, France, (What, our oldest ally? LOL, that’s a joke.) which saw its $66 billion submarine sale to Australia scuttled in the process.

Taiwan is another big worry. Senior U.S. military officers have been warning this year that China is probably accelerating its timetable for capturing control of Taiwan, the island democracy widely seen as the most likely trigger for a potentially catastrophic U.S.-China war.

The United States has long pledged to help Taiwan defend itself, but it has deliberately left unclear how far it would go in response to a Chinese attack. President Joe Biden appeared to abandon that ambiguity when he said Oct. 21 that America would come to Taiwan’s defense if it were attacked by China.

“We have a commitment to do that,” Biden said. The White House later said he was not changing U.S. policy, which does not support Taiwanese independence but is committed to providing defensive arms.

Okay, guys, there you have the rea; scoop straight from all the pseudo sophomoric idiots who have all the answers. But what about helping the  transgender’s, gays, diversity,  etc. in the military, better get them first.? And Lordy be, got to get rid of those extremists who keep touting the constitution!

Originally posted 2021-11-02 12:47:20.