Military being weakened by design

[SharonL]

You can only shut your eyes to facts just so long and then it becomes overwhelming. If you disagree with the Obama regime - you will be gone. Military being weakened by design.

Blaze Sources: Obama Purging Military Commanders | TheBlaze.com

 

[dogs4thewin]

While this is concerning it really depends on what is meant by disagrees with him.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

So the US government will be getting weaker.

This can only be a good thing.

 

[dogs4thewin]

So the US government will be getting weaker.

This can only be a good thing.

How will they be getting weaker by default?

 

[RDKirk]

A. There are nearly a thousand generals in the military. That's about one general for every 1500 troops. That's more than a general for every medium/small/large military base and major ship...an absurd number. And "The Blaze" presents us with only nine that have been released for reasons having nothing to do with Obama. Nine generals out of nearly 1,000 does not a purge make.

B. A couple of those noted by "The Blaze" are--with just a bit of Googling--easily found to be bogus reporting.

For instance, the information on Charles Gaouette about the Benghazi incident is just a flat lie. At the time of the attack, his carrier was making a port call in Malasia. There is no way whatsoever they could have launched planes from Maylasia to Libya without an extreme amount of coordination with Air Force tankers enroute--which would have to have been pre-deployed to other locations en route and assigned to the task.

"The Blaze" got its information about Carter Hamm from the Russian GRU (the successor to the KBG)--which "The Blaze" admitted when it first reported it months ago. In fact, "The Blaze" gets quite a bit of its information from Russian intelligence. "The Blaze" is full of Russian garbage.

C. "A Pentagon official who asked to remain nameless because they were not authorized to speak on the matter said even “young officers, down through the ranks have been told not to talk about Obama or the politics of the White House. They are purging everyone and if you want to keep your job — just keep your mouth shut."

You're darned right--and it has always been that way. Only a few years ago, many senior officers were so deliberately agnostic in their politics that they didn't even vote. They certainly never let anyone outside their own circle of personal friends know their political parties. For instance, nobody knew Colin Powell was a Republican until he retired.

No officer has any business talking politics outside his own circle of personal friends. That's not changed at all.

 

[keith99]

A. There are nearly a thousand generals in the military. That's about one general for every 1500 troops. That's more than a general for every medium/small/large military base and major ship...an absurd number. And "The Blaze" presents us with only nine that have been released for reasons having nothing to do with Obama. Nine generals out of nearly 1,000 does not a purge make.

B. A couple of those noted by "The Blaze" are--with just a bit of Googling--easily found to be bogus reporting.

For instance, the information on Charles Gaouette about the Benghazi incident is just a flat lie. At the time of the attack, his carrier was making a port call in Malasia. There is no way whatsoever they could have launched planes from Maylasia to Libya without an extreme amount of coordination with Air Force tankers enroute--which would have to have been pre-deployed to other locations en route and assigned to the task.

"The Blaze" got its information about Carter Hamm from the Russian GRU (the successor to the KBG)--which "The Blaze" admitted when it first reported it months ago. In fact, "The Blaze" gets quite a bit of its information from Russian intelligence. "The Blaze" is full of Russian garbage.

C. "A Pentagon official who asked to remain nameless because they were not authorized to speak on the matter said even “young officers, down through the ranks have been told not to talk about Obama or the politics of the White House. They are purging everyone and if you want to keep your job — just keep your mouth shut."

You're darned right--and it has always been that way. Only a few years ago, many senior officers were so deliberately agnostic in their politics that they didn't even vote. They certainly never let anyone outside their own circle of personal friends know their political parties. For instance, nobody knew Colin Powell was a Republican until he retired.

No officer has any business talking politics outside his own circle of personal friends. That's not changed at all.

I'm 99% sure you have READ (not watched the film related by name only) Starship Troopers by R. Heinlein.

In that fictional work one only got the vote after 2 years of service (not military service). But if one opted for military service they only got the vote after retirement, even if they served for 20 years plus.

Heinlein did not come up with that idea out of thin air.

Retired generals run for office and often win, not serving generals.

There are reasons we need not fear a military coup, and most of them are military traditions that the OP seems to dislike.

 

[BostonTzar]

Odd. Obama gets rid of a few people opposed to his politics and not surprisingly gets a pass from the left and the media (why I still seperate 2 these things is beyond me). Bush got rid of a 93 attorneys opposed to his politics and there was crying and gnashing of teeth on the left. Funny.

 

[cow451]

Unfortunately the Blaze seems to be devolving into just another Right-wing rag.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Unfortunately the Blaze seems to be devolving into just another Right-wing rag.

What is this supposed to mean?

 

[RDKirk]

I'm 99% sure you have READ (not watched the film related by name only) Starship Troopers by R. Heinlein.

Yes, I have--numerous times. Heinlein, as you know, had been a Naval officer himself.

More significantly, "Starship Troopers" has been on the professional reading lists of the US military services practically since its first publication.

The three US Marine colonels I worked for at Pearl Harbor all had copies of it on their office bookshelves. Bottom line: Many military officers were also quite aware, as was the military establishment, of the "political agnosticism" expected of officers.

A military officer publicly expressing a military opinoin has a chilling effect on all junior personnel because of the extreme authority he wields over their lives.

If anyone thinks Obama is "purging" the ranks of generals for political reasons, they have not given sufficient thought to what a general could do to the soldiers under his command, given freedom to operate according to his politics.

Yes, that's why the US is not in danger of a military coup. At this point, military officers still will not align themselves politically, and will not comfortably accomodate any who do.

 

[RDKirk]

Odd. Obama gets rid of a few people opposed to his politics and not surprisingly gets a pass from the left and the media (why I still seperate 2 these things is beyond me). Bush got rid of a 93 attorneys opposed to his politics and there was crying and gnashing of teeth on the left. Funny.

There is no evidence (except a couple of Russian GRU reports) that any US generals have been relieved because having anti-Obama politics.

An officer can be relieved, however, for publicly espousing any politics to a degree that the military cannot ignore (the phrase is, "Keep that stuff far from the flagpole"). Politics in the military had always been DADT. That got a bit looser after 9/11, but it's a good thing to reel it back in.

And that's how it should be.

 

[BostonTzar]

There is no evidence (except a couple of Russian GRU reports) that any US generals have been relieved because having anti-Obama politics.

An officer can be relieved, however, for publicly espousing any politics to a degree that the military cannot ignore (the phrase is, "Keep that stuff far from the flagpole"). Politics in the military had always been DADT. That got a bit looser after 9/11, but it's a good thing to reel it back in.

And that's how it should be.

I served pre-911 and have to say politics was one of the most common topics of conversation with enlisted and NCO's, then again we didn't socialize much with commisioned officers.

 

[Billnew]

I bet other presidents have cleaned house of outspoken Generals.
The higher up, the more noticable the decent is noticed by the President and Chiefs of staff.
The president is Comander in Chief, so every word against him, must be carefully worded, as a voter, not a military man.
Sorry, all officiers must learn tact and diplomacy, the higher you go the more you have to watch. Its all politics after a point.

The military is sworn to protect the Constitution against all enemies foriegn and domestic, without regard to politics. There is no overt threat to the Constitution by our government, so the generals must follow the president (Ie all legal orders)until he oversteps, is removed legally by Congress, if needed physically by law enforcement or the military.

We must keep control on all military members from E-1 to top officers. If they are blinded by any activity, they must be removed for the good of the country, be it liberal or conservative, or any other matter.

 

[GarfieldJL]

I bet other presidents have cleaned house of outspoken Generals.
The higher up, the more noticable the decent is noticed by the President and Chiefs of staff.
The president is Comander in Chief, so every word against him, must be carefully worded, as a voter, not a military man.
Sorry, all officiers must learn tact and diplomacy, the higher you go the more you have to watch. Its all politics after a point.

The military is sworn to protect the Constitution against all enemies foriegn and domestic, without regard to politics. There is no overt threat to the Constitution by our government, so the generals must follow the president (Ie all legal orders)until he oversteps, is removed legally by Congress, if needed physically by law enforcement or the military.

We must keep control on all military members from E-1 to top officers. If they are blinded by any activity, they must be removed for the good of the country, be it liberal or conservative, or any other matter.

Other Presidents didn't end up with situations of the military facing multiple potential lawsuits for targetting Evangelical Christian groups as terrorists...

 

[RDKirk]

Other Presidents didn't end up with situations of the military facing multiple potential lawsuits for targetting Evangelical Christian groups as terrorists...

The military has had all kinds of screwball lawsuits from all kinds of screwballs, such as NORML and various tin-hatters and groups on both fringes for decades. Nothing new.

The military has certainly not "targeted" any Evangelical Christian group--name a specific group. If the military had targeted them, there would be some smoking craters to show for it.

 

[GarfieldJL]

The military has had all kinds of screwball lawsuits from all kinds of screwballs, such as NORML and various tin-hatters and groups on both fringes for decades. Nothing new.

The military has certainly not "targeted" any Evangelical Christian group--name a specific group. If the military had targeted them, there would be some smoking craters to show for it.

The Pentagon has admitted that information used in an Army briefing that labeled the American Family Association (AFA) as a domestic hate group was not acquired from official sources and does not reflect Army doctrine.

Meanwhile, the president of the well-respected Christian ministry says his organization may file a defamation lawsuit against the military.

“We are probably going to be taking legal action,” said Tim Wildmon, president of one of the nation’s most prominent Christian ministries. “The Army has smeared us. They’ve defamed the American Family Association.”
Pentagon admits Christian ministry not a 'hate group,' says label does not reflect official doctrine | Fox News
​

Btw, before you try to say that this article can't be trusted because it is from Fox News and it is an opinion piece, I actually first heard about this from American Family Radio and they were talking about filing a lawsuit, so the odds of this being factually inaccurate are rather low.

 

[keith99]

Yes, I have--numerous times. Heinlein, as you know, had been a Naval officer himself.

More significantly, "Starship Troopers" has been on the professional reading lists of the US military services practically since its first publication.

The three US Marine colonels I worked for at Pearl Harbor all had copies of it on their office bookshelves. Bottom line: Many military officers were also quite aware, as was the military establishment, of the "political agnosticism" expected of officers.

A military officer publicly expressing a military opinoin has a chilling effect on all junior personnel because of the extreme authority he wields over their lives.

If anyone thinks Obama is "purging" the ranks of generals for political reasons, they have not given sufficient thought to what a general could do to the soldiers under his command, given freedom to operate according to his politics.

Yes, that's why the US is not in danger of a military coup. At this point, military officers still will not align themselves politically, and will not comfortably accomodate any who do.

If Obama is purging the Colonel Towers types then for once he has my support.

I don't want to have to bet in the real world that there will be a Johnny Ezra Dahlquist when and where we need him.

And yes I do expect you will get the reference. Without referring to Johnny I'd expect most likely not.

EDIT: I just realized part of the story I missed. In addition to many other things, like just what Heinlein considers a Hero, it is also a cautionary tale about even having bull sessions about politics in the military. If Johnny had been more involved or outspoken in such he would have ended up like his CO. Well technically he did anyway, but it was after he became a hero.

 

[abdAlSalam]

The Pentagon has admitted that information used in an Army briefing that labeled the American Family Association (AFA) as a domestic hate group was not acquired from official sources and does not reflect Army doctrine.

​

This right here is all you need to know about this little farce. If this is tantamount to targeting American Christians, consider yourselves lucky.

 

[Illuminaughty]

AFA is an anti-gay hate group. They were seriously calling for the arrest of gay rights leaders on Sodomy charges and claiming that the holocaust was perpetrated by homosexuals. They are also listed as a hate group on the Southern Poverty Law Center webpage. The military probably got some information from them or some similar watch dog organization about hate groups and distributed it at a meeting or something.

They also promote bizarre tin foil hat conspiracies, want to bring back corporal punishment in schools, and praise Putin as a "Lion of Christianity". Obama is going to turn the US military against Christians! If we don't end abortion soon there will be another civil war! God is going to punish Maine with natural disasters because they accept gay marriage! Gay Marriage will literally cause America to collapse! According the AFA leader Bryan Fischer " the Left" will soon start forcing Christians to wear identifying patches and do to them exactly what the Nazis did to the Jews.

 

[RDKirk]

More information is here:

http://www.clarionledger.com/articl...beling-American-Family-Association-hate-group

This was a briefing put together by the Mississippi National Guard public affairs NCO at Camp Shelby, MS. I would point out that this particular Army unit is not that far from the AFA headquarters--also in MS.

It's not unusual for local politically oriented organizations to do their own proselytizing near military bases, not unusual for young troops to get sucked into unauthorized political activities, and not unusual for local base officials to give special warnings about them.

If the military were really "targeting" the AFA, the information would have been disseminated through all units all over the world, instead appearing only at the location that had immediate exposure.