Trump's Warrior Board

[wing2000]

Obama's Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years

Defense: What the president calls "my military" is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving... Read More

www.investors.com

Obama's Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years

Defense: What the president calls "my military" is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving the compliant and fearful.

We recognize President Obama is the commander-in-chief and that throughout history presidents from Lincoln to Truman have seen fit to remove military commanders they view as inadequate or insubordinate. Turnover in the military ranks is normal, and in these times of sequestration and budget cuts the numbers are expected to tick up as force levels shrink and missions change.

Yet what has happened to our officer corps since President Obama took office is viewed in many quarters as unprecedented, baffling and even harmful to our national security posture

....which proves nothing.

Are you ready to review each of the refrenced cases in this article?

No, I didn't think so. But thanks for the whataboutism google search. I guess you'll sleep better knowing Obama established a military loyalty board. He did not.

 

[wing2000]

Woke is DEI initiatives, promotion of military personnel based not on merit, but on skin color or gender and more.

Can you name one case where a military officer was promoted based on the color of his or her skin?
Or is this another one of your "beliefs"?

 

[wing2000]

Sure they obey orders. So leave political ideology out of their training. Don't divide the soldiers when they are trying to be unified. Thats what wokism does. The black, Hispanic, female, lgbt are not victims. They are soldiers. And soldiers have to be a cohesive unit and not looking at each other like the oppressed and oppressors.

I certaintly don't recall such training in boot camp.

 

[wing2000]

There's nothing historically unusual about this. But since it's Trump, it has to be about setting up a constitution breaking dictatorship. The media of course plans on cashing in big time on the paranoia it has generated.

Wrong.

No incoming adminstration has proposed an officer loyalty board.

 

[wing2000]

I can tell people who have been in the military and those who have not. You obey the orders of your ranking officer. The President is the Commander in Chief. He is not asking for your opinions or making suggestions. He is the General's General. Do what he commands, or you will be out. If you cannot carry out his orders, leave before you get yourself in a position where you must be removed with possible charges.

If an officer, including the POTUS, issues an unlawful order, I, as a military member, can lawfully disobey it.

 

[wing2000]

The creation of a separate review process reporting directly to Trump that is outside of the existing job performance system could impose a chilling loyalty test -- not to the Constitution or military code, but to a president known for prioritizing personal loyalty, currently serving generals and defense officials interviewed say.

One two-star Army general noted that the administration's stance could instill fear around hiring minority or LGBTQ staff, with promotions of soldiers from certain backgrounds potentially facing heightened scrutiny. This atmosphere of suspicion, the official warned, risks stifling diversity within the ranks and creating a hierarchy where personal backgrounds become a factor in career advancement -- a stark departure from the military's commitment to merit-based progression.

"I think moving forward, if someone is moved into a position and they don't have a certain ... let's say ... look, there could be hesitation," the major general said on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation. "Or people are going to ask, 'Hey, are we sure,' because it could bring unwanted attention from the White House."

'It Could Be Very Hard to Do Our Job': Top Military Officers Brace for Trump's Potential Loyalty Review Boards

The Wall Street Journal reported on a draft executive order that is under consideration by the Trump transition team that would establish a so-called "warrior board," to review top generals over whether they should continue service or not.

www.military.com

 

[Tinker Grey]

Well, if all your generals are loyal, you will have less trouble establishing your monarchy.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Sure they obey orders. So leave political ideology out of their training.

Can you point to some? From what I understand they get standard anti-harassment training. These things universally say that anyone can be a victim and anyone can be a perpetrator.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The opposite way was also tried. Trump supporters were the ones being "managed out" of the military.

A retired general expressing an opinion about soldier's views about Jan 6 is not a purge of Trump supporters.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

You remember how Trump insists on 100% loyalty from those beneath him? Well generals in an army (as mentioned) swear oaths to uphold the constitution.

How does Trump insistence on 100% loyalty affect their ability to uphold the Constitution?

Well clearly, those people are concerned that maybe Trump is not going to give constitutional lawful orders.

Also, don't know if you've noticed but Trump has the diplomacy of a drunk gorilla and has a propensity to admire despots. Perhaps generals don't trust his judgement.

Yes, I cannot imagine the moral distress many of them may be facing. We can count on Trump giving orders that serve him rather than the country and constitution. What would I do?

 

[rjs330]

I certaintly don't recall such training in boot camp.

When did you go to boot camp?

 

[rjs330]

The creation of a separate review process reporting directly to Trump that is outside of the existing job performance system could impose a chilling loyalty test -- not to the Constitution or military code, but to a president known for prioritizing personal loyalty, currently serving generals and defense officials interviewed say.

One two-star Army general noted that the administration's stance could instill fear around hiring minority or LGBTQ staff, with promotions of soldiers from certain backgrounds potentially facing heightened scrutiny. This atmosphere of suspicion, the official warned, risks stifling diversity within the ranks and creating a hierarchy where personal backgrounds become a factor in career advancement -- a stark departure from the military's commitment to merit-based progression.

"I think moving forward, if someone is moved into a position and they don't have a certain ... let's say ... look, there could be hesitation," the major general said on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation. "Or people are going to ask, 'Hey, are we sure,' because it could bring unwanted attention from the White House."

'It Could Be Very Hard to Do Our Job': Top Military Officers Brace for Trump's Potential Loyalty Review Boards

The Wall Street Journal reported on a draft executive order that is under consideration by the Trump transition team that would establish a so-called "warrior board," to review top generals over whether they should continue service or not.

www.military.com

Pearl clutching at its best. The President is the commander in chief. He has every right to choose the leaders who will serve under him. If they are directly opposed to him on policy, which has nothing to do with the constitutionality of his orders or the lawfuln3ss of his orders then they should be removed.

two-star Army general noted that the administration's stance could instill fear around hiring minority or LGBTQ staff, with promotions of soldiers from certain backgrounds potentially facing heightened scrutiny. This atmosphere of suspicion, the official warned, risks stifling diversity within the ranks

This is the problem. Trump is absolutely merit guy. And if an lgbt individual is the best candidate, there will be no issue. But if DEI is part of the process, then whomever is in charge of that shoild be worried. This general and whatever cronies he has that are DEI people should be worried.

There should be no fear if whomever you promote has earned it.

 

[rjs330]

Well, if all your generals are loyal, you will have less trouble establishing your monarchy.

I know right. All hail King Trump!

 

[rjs330]

Can you point to some? From what I understand they get standard anti-harassment training. These things universally say that anyone can be a victim and anyone can be a perpetrator.

Yeah it goes much deeper than that. DEI, Social Justice etc. In otherwords wokism.

US Army teaching officers at Fort Leavenworth that white people can't experience racism

The U.S. Army at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth is teaching officers in intermediate level education (ILE) that white people

americanmilitarynews.com

 

[essentialsaltes]

Yeah it goes much deeper than that. DEI, Social Justice etc.

Providing a correct definition of Social Justice is not teaching Social Justice, any more than providing a definition of [systemic] racism is teaching racism.

 

[rambot]

Yes, I cannot imagine the moral distress many of them may be facing. We can count on Trump giving orders that serve him rather than the country and constitution. What would I do?

What I see as more likely (though not to say your scenario is not), is that trump would try not to work against the constitution but instead would make policy or diplomacy decisions that are detrimental to good sense and it would be HARD for them to follow it.

 

[wing2000]

When did you go to boot camp?

1984.
Has anyone here gone through boot camp recently or have first hand experience?

 

[wing2000]

Pearl clutching at its best.

You dimiss current military officers opinion as "peral clutching"?

That's weak.

The President is the commander in chief. He has every right to choose the leaders who will serve under him. If they are directly opposed to him on policy, which has nothing to do with the constitutionality of his orders or the lawfuln3ss of his orders then they should be removed.

Military officers do carry out lawful orders. Policy has nothing to do with it.

two-star Army general noted that the administration's stance could instill fear around hiring minority or LGBTQ staff, with promotions of soldiers from certain backgrounds potentially facing heightened scrutiny. This atmosphere of suspicion, the official warned, risks stifling diversity within the ranks

This is the problem. Trump is absolutely merit guy. And if an lgbt individual is the best candidate, there will be no issue. But if DEI is part of the process, then whomever is in charge of that shoild be worried. This general and whatever cronies he has that are DEI people should be worried.

There should be no fear if whomever you promote has earned it.

Trump could only cares about loyalty to him.

 

[rjs330]

Providing a correct definition of Social Justice is not teaching Social Justice, any more than providing a definition of [systemic] racism is teaching racism.

Is that all the training is doing is providing definitions?

 

[Vambram]

I certaintly don't recall such training in boot camp.

How long ago was it when you were in boot camp.... 1984? Clearly, much has changed in the military and in American culture since 1984. Many of those changes are not good at all.