Tag Archives: Trump

Why Has he Not been Fired?

I have been remiss in posting anything on here for quite some time. I have been in the hospital with some plumbing issues. I reckon that comes about with some of us old codgers from time to time. But, other than feeling a tad weak and lightheaded at times, I believe I am on the mend. 

Anyway, I, along with a hell of a lot of other retired Marines, am wondering what is taking Trump so long to fire the fellow. He should have been the very first service chief to get the finger wave from Trump. In case you have not been privy to it, here is a very well-written piece by Gary Anderson, Col, USMC (Ret)

The Case Against the Marine Corps                                                    Commandant

The imminent early retirement of Air Force Chief of Staff General David Allen will leave one more Biden-era leftover military chief to be purged. That is General Eric Smith, the commandant of the Marine Corps. Actually, it is the opinion of many current and former Marines that Smith should have been the first to go.

If forcibly retired, Smith would join Allen, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Charles Q. Brown, former Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Lisa Franchetti, and the ex-Commandant of the Coast Guard Linda Fagan as casualties of the rot that permeated the defense establishment during the Biden era. This list does not include the Chief of Staff of the Army, who has so far flown beneath Hegseth’s radar as the Army has made significant innovative inroads on the China front. (RELATED: The Feather Merchants: Senior Leaders Subverted the Marine Corps)

Brown was too woke, and Allen was accused of not doing enough to counter China in the aerospace area. Franchetti and Fagan were seen as DEI hires not qualified for the job. The indictment against Smith has several counts; all more serious than the other four.  (RELATED: Some Generals Should Be Fired. Start With Eric Smith.)

First, he has stubbornly persisted in implementing his predecessor’s poorly conceived and badly executed Force Design strategy which abandoned the Marine Corps’ traditional focus on amphibious warfare and its role as the nation’s world-wide general purpose force in readiness in favor of a China-oriented missile heavy force that duplicates capabilities already exercised by the other services with missiles more capable of accomplishing the mission than what the Corps is buying. (RELATED: Getting the Marine Corps Out of the Chinese Finger Cuffs

Despite mounting evidence that Force Design is logistically unsustainable, is ignored by the Chinese, and is not wanted or needed by the theater commander or by the regional allies, Smith has stubbornly doubled down on it. General David Berger obviously chose Smith over several more competent and qualified general officers because he was a loyal acolyte who had helped Berger circumvent the Marine Corps’ time-tested Combat Development Process (CDP) to implement Berger’s “genius breakthrough.” The CDP was not perfect, but it was designed to prevent really bad ideas, such as Force Design, from becoming reality. (RELATED: The Marine Corps Has Gone Off the Rails)

A second charge is perhaps more serious than the first. In January of this year, General Smith made a false official statement to a group of reporters when he told them that the Marine Corps had never embraced DEI as official policy. (RELATED: Marine Corps Commandant Tells a Whopper)

He did this while his staff was desperately trying to purge its websites of all evidence to the contrary. This either showed poor judgment or abysmal ignorance of the fact that anything that goes out on the Internet stays there forever. Either of which should disqualify him from the office of commandant.

Any public statement by a Marine Corps commandant to the press is, by nature, an official statement. A false official statement is an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. If I had been caught making a false official statement while a serving Marine Corps officer, I would have been relieved of my position and subject to an Article 32 hearing (the equivalent of a civilian Grand Jury) and likely hauled before a general court-martial. Smith still sits in the commandant’s chair. Some pigs are more equal than others in Smith’s Marine Corps.

Third, Smith has contributed to the suppression of professional military expression and discussion in the Marine Corps, begun by General Berger, who made it plain that Force Design was a done deal and that honest discussion and criticism were neither wanted nor would be tolerated. On numerous occasions, members of the faculty at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College invited retired senior Marine Corps officers to debate the merits of Force Design. In each case, the sitting president of the Marine Corps University (MCU) cancelled the invitation. In one instance, a former MCU president was told that he lacked the expertise to discuss the topic.

As noted military theorist William Lind has pointed out, a particularly egregious example of the anti-intellectual bent of the Berger/Smith era: Not long ago, a German naval aviator spent some time at the Basic School, the school for all Marine lieutenants.  Because the German officer had a rank above lieutenant, TBS put some lieutenants under him.  He ran his small units German style, according to what maneuver warfare recommends.  The Marine lieutenants loved it.  The German officer was called in by other faculty who said to him, “You are teaching Marines to think.  We don’t want them to think.  We want them just to follow orders.”

Before Berger/Smith, the old trope about Marines being dumb was an urban legend. The senior Marine Corps leadership actively encouraged informed professional debate among Marines at all levels. No more.

The current president of MCU actively encourages spying on officers to uncover thinking that he deems inappropriate.

Come on, President Trump, what is it with this fellow? It seems to be either you like him, or you are simply not paying attention to what he and his predecessor have done to your Corps. Do you realize that you do not have a 911 call left?

Today’s Potpourri by Choice

Wow, there is so much “stuff” going on in our world today, most of which is taking us away from the important items that we Americans  really care about, or perhaps I should reword that and say that I as an American really worry about. e.g., immigration, inflation, election credibility, demise of our 911 Force, lies and treachery by all our elected officials, especially in the intelligence community, and so much more.

I make no apologies for my not worrying at all about Ukraine vs Russia. Let them slug it out and may the best and strongest win. I am concerned more about China than Russia, but that’s just me.

Much of the BS going on I cannot do a damn thing about, so at my age and station in life, I simply ignore it, albeit I will say some of it does bother me. For example:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2022/03/30/complete-list-of-military-items-named-for-confederacy-is-more-than-750-long/

Or what about the criminals of criminals, Bill and Hillary, having to pay fines that amount to squat considering how much they squandered, But then they are the Clinton’s

FEC fines DNC and Clinton for Trump dossier hoax

What about Trump? Is he back on the attack? Wayne Root thinks so.

WAYNE ROOT: I Just Returned from Mar-a-Lago…and I Have Bad News for Democrats, America Haters and the Media: “TRUMP IS BACK!”

Oh, let’s not forget about our one-time mighty military force. What happened to it?

Read the Article ›

Finally, you hear the MSM pundits talk about our national debt and pontificate how it may be paid off someday. Have you any idea exactly what that big number equates to per American taxpayer? How about $242,500.00. Got that much hanging around in you bank accounts to help pay that off? Do any of you believe our current national debt  will ever be paid off? If you do, you my friend, are smoking some strong stuff. As an Economist, I side with  the group that laughs at that question and says no only no, buy “Hell no, it’s impossible; it will never be paid off even in your great, great grandchild’s lifetime.” Check out this website, browse around, it is filled with interesting data; go to it often and watch how it changes.

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

Other than that. all is going  swimmingly well in the deep bowels of Washington, D.C.

PS. Today laws are made not for justice, but for justification.

Have a great day! Sgt B

 

Originally posted 2022-03-31 11:10:59.

We Are Screwed!

First it was gays and lesbians,, then it was the transgenders, and now the nonbinary. Had to stop and think about that one . I mean I knew , or at least I thought I knew, what binary meant, but just in case I went to old Man Webster. He says the noun binary means: ” a system of two stars that revolve around each other under their mutual gravitation.” Got that? 

Pentagon Quietly Looking into How Nonbinary Troops Could Serve Openly

The Defense Department has quietly begun looking into how it can allow troops whose gender identity is nonbinary to serve openly in the military, three advocates familiar with the situation told Military.com.

The Pentagon has asked the Institute for Defense Analyses, or IDA, which operates federally funded research centers, to study the issue, said the advocates, one of whom requested anonymity to disclose a sensitive topic.

Someone who is nonbinary identifies as neither male nor female, often using “they” and “them” as their pronouns and marking their gender as “X” on forms that have that option.

It is unclear exactly how long the research has been going on, but SPARTA, an advocacy group for transgender troops, put researchers in touch with several nonbinary service members this month.

SPARTA President Bree Fram, an Air Force lieutenant colonel, likened the effort to the study the Pentagon asked Rand Corp. to conduct in 2015 before lifting the ban on transgender people serving in the military. Bet this LtCol was fun to work for.

“Speaking with non-binary troops and defense officials to understand what regulation changes may be necessary is a great first step,” Fram said in a statement to Military.com. “We are hopeful this will allow non-binary individuals to serve authentically and realize their full potential in the military.” Why should they, do we need them? 

Jennifer Dane, executive director of LGBTQ military advocacy group Modern Military Association of America, said members of her organization have also spoken with IDA and believes initial conversations about open service by nonbinary troops began last year.

Asked for comment, IDA referred Military.com to the Pentagon, which declined to comment “at this time as we do not provide information that may or may not be part of the Department’s research efforts.”

There is no explicit ban on nonbinary service members, but there is also no official recognition of their existence or guidance about how they should adhere to gendered policies, such as what uniform to wear or where to shower.

Advocates say policies allowing transgender troops to serve openly have made it somewhat easier for nonbinary service members, but add they still face hurdles because there is no official recognition of nonbinary gender identities.

If policies are changed to allow nonbinary troops to serve openly, it would be the latest move to make the military more inclusive for LGBTQ people. Again, why? Do we need them or do they need us to forward their agenda?

It’s been just over a decade since the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the law that banned open service by gay, lesbian and bisexual troops.

In 2016, the Obama administration lifted a ban on transgender troops. Former President Donald Trump reinstated the ban in 2019, but President Joe Biden lifted it last year shortly after taking office.

Dane said she is hopeful the research on nonbinary troops will lead to policy changes, but expressed concern that “there’s going to be a lot of hurdles, more so than transgender, I think, because there’s no binary on it.”

But as more people in younger generations identify as nonbinary, including in official documentation such as passports and driver’s licenses, Dane said an open service policy will be crucial to recruitment and retention. A 2021 study by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law found about 1.2 million U.S. adults identify as nonbinary 76% of whom are under age 29. Don’t you just love it when they spout figures like this? How did they determine these numbers? Certainly one has to trust them, I mean look from where they came. Ha!

“To get the talent, obviously, you’ve got to kind of get with the times,” Dane said. What talent are we talking about. You mean men and women to find, close with, and destroy the enemy?

Dane also pointed to a recent Air Force decision to allow email signatures to include someone’s pronouns, including they and them, as “opening the door to further conversation” about nonbinary troops. “Aim High”

The Biden administration has taken steps to be inclusive to nonbinary people at agencies besides the Pentagon.

The State Department last year issued a passport with an “X” gender marker for the first time.

The Department of Veterans Affairs also recently announced that transgender and nonbinary veterans can identify as such in their official department medical records.

While stressing that he could not speak to the military’s current research efforts, Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, which researches issues of gender and sexuality in the military, said he believes there are three categories of policies the military might have to consider as it looks into open nonbinary service.

The first are policies that likely won’t need to change at all, such as nondiscrimination policies that already ban discrimination based on gender identity.

The second are policies that could be made gender neutral, such as some uniform standards – changes Belkin said would benefit not just nonbinary troops but also female troops.

The third category are policies the military can’t or won’t make gender neutral, such as where to shower. In those cases, Belkin said, commanders could consult with the individual nonbinary service member about which gender’s standards would be more appropriate to follow. Oh, that’s nice, As a Nonbinary I get to choose with whom I shower.

“The opponents to nonbinary service, just like they did for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and just like they did for Obama’s transgender policy, they’re going to insist that implementation is so complicated and so hard, in fact it’s so complicated that it can’t be done. That’s complete bull—-,” Belkin said. “Implementation is not complicated. Period, full stop. The military could easily pull this off tomorrow. It would not be a big deal.”

Aaron Belkin himself. Of course it would not be a big deal says Belkin. He knows this as a fact because he has experience in what military service? NONE!

 

Finally, you MUST watch this short video as it deals with the reality of the question, what is the DOD doing. Preparing the militaries for war or developing a national social club for the minority groups? Surely that will help with recruitments and retention. Watch and you decide. I believe we’re screwed.

Yes, I believe we are certainly screwed folks.

Originally posted 2022-01-19 10:40:04.

Ms. Milley’s Worried?

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

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.

Parents Beware!

From one of the few newspapers that tell it like it is — the Wall Street Journal. Make no mistake about it parents and grandparents, your children are at risk

Merrick Garland Has a List, and You’re Probably on It

By Gerard Baker

Merrick Garland’s got a little list.

The attorney general is compiling a steadily lengthening register of “society offenders who might well be underground and who never would be missed,” as Ko-Ko, the hypervigilant lord high executioner, sings in Gilbert and Sullivan’s “The Mikado.”

Mr. Garland’s list of society offenders is compendious. At the top are right-wing extremists who’ve been officially designated the greatest domestic threat to U.S. security, but whose ranks seem, in the eyes of the nation’s top lawyer, to include some less obviously malevolent characters, including perhaps anyone who protested the results of the 2020 election. Then there are police departments not compliant with Biden administration law-enforcement dicta, Republican-run states seeking to regularize their voting laws after last year’s pandemic-palooza of an electoral process, and state legislatures that pass strict pro-life legislation.

They’d none of them be missed.

Oddly, the list doesn’t seem to extend to the hundreds of thousands of people who have crossed the southern border so far this year and are now presumably at large somewhere in the U.S. without a legal right to be in the country. Nor to those benevolent folk who have reduced several of the nation’s urban centers to crime-infested wastelands.

Which is presumably why the latest names on his roll are those parents who have had the temerity to challenge local school boards about the mandates they are imposing on their pandemic-ready classes and what the children are learning.

That wasn’t how the attorney general presented it when he announced the news. Citing a “disturbing trend” in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school-board members, teachers and other school employees, he declared that he was directing the Federal Bureau of Investigation to work with local and state law enforcement to develop “strategies” for dealing with the problem.

The announcement looked as though it had been carefully coordinated with the National School Boards Association (NSBA), which had asked the Biden administration to do exactly this.

Decent people everywhere acknowledge that violence is intolerable—whether perpetrated by Black Lives Matter agitators torching buildings, Trump supporters smashing federal property, or parents who throw projectiles at school board members.

But the letter from the NSBA contained barely any evidence of actual violence. It cited mostly antisocial behavior and threats, and some of the offenses referenced—such as a parent making a mock Nazi salute to a school board—are, however offensive, constitutionally protected speech.

And, as has been widely noted, when acts of violence occur, they can and have been dealt with by local or state law enforcement. There is no federal interest in any of these infractions.

All this merely underscores what the real objective of the attorney general’s action was—and we don’t need to engage in speculation because it was recently spelled out to us by another leading member of President Biden’s party, Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic candidate for governor of Virginia.

In a rare moment of honesty from a politician, Mr. McAuliffe made clear, in a television debate with Republican Glenn Youngkin, the Democrats’ conception of the role that parents should have in their children’s education: none whatever.

“I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

Aside from the jaw-dropping disdain for families, Mr. McAuliffe’s prescription is at odds with Article 26.3 of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the sort of grand multilateral pronouncement the Democrats usually fetishize, which states: “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.”

This flagrant attempt to intimidate parents into handing their children over to the mercies of the state is as sinister as anything the modern progressives who now control the Democratic Party have done.

The message is clear, and it has been the character of education in totalitarianism systems through history: These are not your children; they are wards of the state, and the state (in this case through the teachers unions that fund the Democratic Party) will determine what they learn and how.

Democrats like Mr. McAuliffe insist that pernicious racial doctrines teaching the ubiquity of white supremacism and the inherent racism of American society and encourage racial segregation aren’t actually taught in schools. But this is laughable. The same Democrats have spent the last year insisting on racial “equity” as the defining objective of their social program. Why would they leave it out of the schools they mostly control?

Mr. Garland’s brazen attempt to intimidate will likely backfire as more parents—including many who aren’t especially conservative—become alarmed by what they see and hear in their children’s schools. By placing them on his little list, he may have done us all a favor.

Originally posted 2021-10-12 15:01:23.