Help fight the
liberal media

click title for home page
Be a subscriber

The complete history of Barack Obama's second term -- click Views/Repies for top stories

  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 15     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next   »

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #101 

Does the Pentagon know that assumptions can be deadly?


Ray Starmann says there's an old military maxim, which says, "Assumptions are the mother of all #$%& ups." That ancient adage, along with commons sense and moral courage has been tossed straight into a Pentagon dumpster.

Here are some assumptions that are wafting through the corridors of the Pentagon like a dense fog.

"Two bombs a day keeps ISIS away" -- Operation Inherent Resolve, the US led air campaign against ISIS has been going for over a year now and has been nothing but a dismal failure and a joke. No matter what the Pentagon says, two bombs a day, doesn't keep ISIS away.

"50 Special Forces guys can retake Syria" -- No doubt our Special Operations boys are top notch, but 50 guys aren't going to put out the ISIS wildfire. Sadly, some of these brave troopers will be sacrificed on the altar of Obama's incompetence and the Pentagon's go along, get along mood. Life is not a movie folks. Plus, Richard Crenna is dead and Stallone, Chuck Norris, Rutger Hauer and Arnold all have AARP cards.

"China is scared to death of our one ship!" -- You can just smell the fear in the air in the Chinese military as one, count ‘em, one US warship -- a destroyer -- traverses the South China Sea. With Captain Stubing, Isaac, Gopher and Julie on board. How can we ever lose? Be prepared for a Chinese response in tenfold.

"Guys who wear dresses make great soldiers." -- From the nation that hero worships a guy named Caitlyn, comes an army that lets transgenders serve in its ranks. Picture a whole battalion of men in Vera Wang wedding dresses charging an enemy position. In the new Army, Private Bob can be Private Barbara the next day and vice versa. Talk about the fog of war.

"Mommies can be Rangers too!" -- The Kool Aid salesmen down at Benning want us all to believe that a 37 year old woman and mother of two can hack it at a school that spits out 20 year old men with the speed of a hotel power flush. (More on this)

"Blimps are the wave of the future" -- A World War One aerial platform stuffed with $235 million of technology that a kid with a BB gun can shoot down. What could possibly go wrong there?

"Lactation support and readiness can be balanced" -- In a recent memorandum for record from His Majesty, Secretary of the Army, John McHugh, commanders are advised to "balance lactation support and readiness." Keep shaking your head, I am.

"Cultural Marxists are now experts at warfare" -- Forget about military service schools and generals. Want to know who really is calling the shots in the Pentagon? Look no further than Valerie Jarrett and a motley assortment of left-wingers who despise men, the military and the macho culture, but not necessarily in that order.

"Pentagon briefings tell the truth" -- The Pentagon has become so adept at cranking out ludicrous Power Point briefings, that they're starting to believe their own knee-deep lies. Turn off the smoke machine people. Reality is that a way, past the hall of mirrors.

"Combat in Iraq is really non-combat" -- Don't worry about those bullets being fired at you, Delta Force, you were never actually in combat, according to Ash Carter and Josh Earnest. The problem is that Carter and Earnest were never in combat and never will be.

"Diversity, creative thinking and technology win wars" -- Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, believes that any disadvantages of having women in the combat arms of the Marines and Navy can be substituted by diversity of thought, creative thinking and some cool technology. So, basically a room full of female screenwriters with I-Phones equals combat effectiveness.

"Men and women can bond together in the combat arms" -- Oh, they'll be bonding alright, but it won't be like an episode of "Band of Brothers." The porn industry is considering a move from the San Fernando Valley to Fort Hood.

"We don't need no stinkin' air support" -- Goodbye, cheap and old reliable A-10, hello over-priced, under-performing F-35.

"Whistleblowers are free to speak out" -- Of course they are! That's why the Ranger School instructors who told the truth to journalist Susan Keating are still in the shadows. The Obama administration has never gone after whistleblowers.

"This is the best Army we've ever had!" -- Uh…better than the Army of Northern Virginia? Better than the WWII Army? Better than the Desert Storm Army? Beset with readiness issues, equipment shortages, budget cuts, morale and social issues and worthless senior leaders? Things never looked bleaker.

"Women will love signing up for the draft" -- Once Secretary of Defense Ash Carter authorizes women to serve in the combat arms and special operations. It's almost a given that women, ages 18 -- 26, will have to register with the Selective Service. Do you hear that Miley Cyrus?

"The Great Social Experiment Army really will work!" -- We will make it work even if it can't work. Nevertheless, it will work, because we can pretend it's working, even though it's not, but people will think it's working, except for everyone who knows it's not working.

Don't worry America, the Great Pumpkin will soon be arriving at the Pentagon to right all wrongs…

It's really shocking to see what these progressive elitists have done to our military wrapped upo in one brief article.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #102 

U.S. will begin "direct action on the ground" in Iraq, Syria


Douglas Ernst is reporting that American ground troops pulled out of Iraq in 2011 by Obama are going back -- and this time some will deploy to Syria.

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter confirmed on Tuesday a decision by Obama to begin "direct action on the ground" as the U.S.-led coalition continues battling the Islamic State group known as ISIS or ISIL.

"We won't hold back from supporting capable partners in opportunistic attacks against ISIL, or conducting such missions directly whether by strikes from the air or direct action on the ground," Carter said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services committee, NBC News reported.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., responded by blasting Obama's "half-assed strategy at best," in Syria.

Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, admitted the "balance of forces" now favors the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The Obama administration's reversal comes after months of saying troops would not be used in such a role. Carter said during testimony that troops, "will be in harm's way, no question about it."

Reporters pushed White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz on Obama's decision Tuesday. He said there was, "no intention of long-term ground combat," the network reported.

Carter's announcement comes just days after the U.S. announced the death of Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler, 39, of Roland, Oklahoma, died during a special operations raid in Hawija, Iraq.

Wheeler and other special operators were with Kurdish forces last Thursday during a hostage rescue that saved roughly 70 people. The Pentagon said U.S. forces were only there in an advisory role when a firefight broke out.

"He ran to the sound of the guns and he stood up. All the indications are it was his actions and that of one of his teammates that protected those that were involved in breaching the compound and made the mission a success," Carter said in a news briefing Oct. 23, Reuters reported.

The Army awarded Wheeler, who was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, the Purple Heart after his death.

And so it begins.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #103 

Obama promises "refugees" $4.3 Billion -- but then does the unthinkable to veterans

It has been said by some that Barack Obama cares more for illegal immigrants and Muslim refugees than the veterans who fought and sacrificed for our country. It now appears that there is some evidence to support such a notion, unthinkable as it may be.

According to the Military Times, the Department of Veterans Affairs informed Congress this summer that it would be facing a $2.6 billion shortfall in its budget for the year.

Meanwhile, according to Breitbart, the Obama administration has agreed to spend roughly $419 million more on humanitarian aid for Syrian refugees.

Though the VA claimed the shortfall was due to "extraordinary efforts" to care for veterans, it's more likely due to poor planning, incompetence and a mismanaged, bloated bureaucracy.

"We are going to do the right thing for veterans and be good stewards of taxpayer dollars," VA Deputy Secretary Sloan Gibson told the House VA Committee. "But to succeed, we need the flexibility to use funds to meet veterans needs as they arise."

Sloan added that if the VA didn't get what they were asking for, "We will have to start denying care to some veterans," furlough workers and cancel programs.

Noticeably absent from the threatened victims of VA cuts were the salaries and bonuses enjoyed by VA administrators.

"I have come to expect a startling lack of transparency and accountability from VA over the last years," said committee chair Jeff Miller. "But failing to inform Congress of a multibillion-dollar funding deficit until this late in the fiscal year … is disturbing on an entirely different level."

White House spokesman Josh Earnest, meanwhile, stated that hundreds of millions of dollars were needed to provide refugees with health care, drinking water, food and shelter.

Earnest also said that the United States has now committed to spending more than $4.5 billion to provide aid and comfort to refugee camps around Syria and the broader region.

So while the VA is facing a budget shortfall of its own making and threatening to cut care for veterans if its demands for more money aren't met, the left hand of the administration is doling out cash to Syrian refugees halfway around the world.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #104 

U. S. military suffers under Obama


Allan Erickson is reporting that volunteer soldiers fight our enemies around the world, suffering injury and death to protect us, and to defend liberty. In the last seven years they have done their duty under the command of Barack Obama -- who is hostile to their mission. They have watched him cull the best commanders, cut funding, cut compensation, cut benefits, neglect VA reforms, and give aid and comfort to our enemies, acts of treason.

Volunteer soldiers have fought and died for a citizenry that largely ignores them. And if they come home suffering terrible wounds -- physical and psychological -- they continue being ignored, even by the government that promised them support and healthcare. Worse, they are mistreated.

The VA scandal is an ongoing disgrace.Verified reports show veterans so neglected, they die in substantial numbers, waiting to see a doctor, treatment withheld. Obama and others promised to solve the problem. That promise joins a long list of other promises broken.

In 2012, 6,500 former military personnel committed suicide. In 2012, 177 active duty individuals killed themselves, more than died in combat. It is conservatively estimated 22 vets commit suicide every day, about 8,000 per year. In the face of all this tragedy, Obama is silent, inactive, apparently unconcerned.

When Marines were gunned down in Tennessee recently, Obama was insincere in his expressions of sympathy. When Americans are beheaded, he heads for the links. When Americans were murdered in Benghazi, his priority was a fundraiser in Vegas followed by a criminal cover up.

When Major General Harold Greene was killed in Afghanistan in 2014, Obama declined attending his funeral, preferring the golf course. Greene was the first U.S. general to die in combat since Vietnam. Biden did not attend either.

Thanks to this administration, we are losing against ISIS, and after 14 years of war we are losing in Afghanistan against the Taliban, just as  Obama insured defeat in Iraq by failing to leave a security force in 2011. The Loser in chief is making America a loser nation, all on his own, through no fault of our military.

This administration is AWOL on many fronts, but especially so when it comes to our military, our national security and our ability to stem the rising tide of jihad around the world. Not only is this president responsible for putting our soldiers in harms way without a clear mission and without the proper support, he hinders them further with rules of engagement that account for increases in casualties. We lost six men in Afghanistan this month alone. Here is a list of the 2,271 killed there since 2001. Did you know that 75% of our casualties in Afghanistan have come during this administration? Far fewer were hurt and killed when we were winning under George W. Bush!

Imagine being ordered into combat with no clear objective, asked to risk your life fighting an enemy your commander refuses to name, hamstrung by rules of engagement that leave you a sitting duck, and when your buddies are killed or wounded, they are treated like dirt.

No wonder top brass is increasingly critical of Obama, saying he is derelict, claiming our military is largely demoralized. Electing Clinton, Biden or Sanders will only give us more of the same. Vets will be mistreated, more will commit suicide, and American influence will decline even further. At the very least, true patriots ought to rally and make sure a new administration restores our military, on every front, for the battle at home is every bit as important as the battle overseas.

And we haven’t even mentioned this administration handing the Bomb to Iran -- along with a $150 billion gift to fund terrorism.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #105 

U.S. pulls aircraft carrier -- central in fight against the Islamic State -- from Persian Gulf

Morgan Chalfant is reporting that the United States has pulled the USS Theodore Roosevelt, an aircraft carrier that has been central in the fight against the Islamic State, from the Persian Gulf, military officials said Thursday.

NBC News reported that the U.S. Navy now, for the first time since 2007, has no aircraft carrier in the sea. The aircraft carrier was taken out late Thursday so that it can undergo maintenance, but its temporary removal is also part of budget cuts.

The nuclear-powered USS Theodore Roosevelt, which houses approximately 5,000 troops and 65 combat planes, has played a large role in the Obama administration bomb campaign against Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS) since its conception in 2014.

Military officials previously warned of the aircraft carrier's removal and its negative impact on U.S. capabilities in the region.

"Without that carrier, there will be a detriment to our capability there," Adm. John Richardson, currently the chief of Naval Operations, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in July. While the USS Harry S. Truman will likely replace the carrier, it could be up to two months before that happens.

The removal comes just as the Obama administration on Friday ended its $500 million Pentagon program to train and arm Syrian rebels fighting IS in an acknowledgement of its failure.

At the same time, Russia has been boosting its military activity in the region over the last few weeks, sending military equipment and troops to Syria and starting to launch airstrikes in the country. Russia is also launching cruise missiles from ships in the Caspian Sea at targets in Syria and allegedly putting "volunteer" forces on the ground in the country.

Moscow has insisted that the goal of its military intervention in Syria is to help the Bashar al-Assad regime combat the Islamic State, but most of its airstrikes have targeted areas not controlled by the terrorist group. In fact, U.S. officials believe that Russia is deliberately targeting CIA-backed Syrian rebels with airstrikes in a direct challenge to the Obama administration Syria policy.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #106 

The world needs a strong America

Toon1.jpg Carolyn Elkins says there is a reason why the American military was always the best in the world. One thing being that it used to be the first thing learned was that your drill instructor is not your mama and it's not about you.

It's been said that a great team is greater than the sum of its parts. The U.S. military has always stressed the importance of team and each has their basic training techniques of tearing down the individual to build up a soldier, airman, sailor or Marine- all individual but of the same team mindset. In the military, one has autonomy and independence yet as one of the team means working with peers, not competitors. They rely on each other to get the job done.

Everyone has individual skills to add, yet being part of the team, each individual requires selflessness and an importance of holding high standards for everything from uniform dress code, character and behavior, to the demands of highly detailed missions.

Building the team mindset properly eliminates the individual mindset. It is the relationships, friendships and most importantly, the team trust built which save lives of our troops when they are facing combat and any other adverse situations. They are bound together not just as friends, but as brothers and sisters in arms, something which no civilian, no matter how knowledgeable about military operations can ever have. This strengthens the team because loyalty to each other is more important than individual wants and motivations. Team members know they can trust each other through any situation. Broken trust comes from putting individual before team which in turn destroys confidence. When a team has poor morale, it affects everyone and can get team members injured or killed.

While focus on team building and sacrifice of individual is replaced by social programs intent on dividing team into individuals, they no longer have a set team goal. Instead they are focused on individual wants, achievements and personal pride. United they stand, but divided, they will fall.

This is partly why so much of the past 8 years of a transformed America and Military is so detrimental not only to those who serve in our Armed Forces, but for our national security as well.

The problem with having more civilians in charge of our military has been a problem for longer than Obama has been commander in chief, yet under his watch, while America faces threats from multiple fronts, more qualified and trusted Generals and Commanders have been fired or let go. Placing civilians in top positions in our military has been the rule, not the exception.

The trickle-down effect of those in charge through the chain of command to the troops in the field have created a situation where many who are are constantly on the front lines don't have confidence that their leaders have their backs. Under Oba Under Obama, the military has been changing rules, allowing women into combat roles, into Special Forces operations, promoting homosexuality and transgenderism in all branches. More civilians in charge means those who fight, fight by rules made by people who have never fought.

With the latest news of Obama's pick for Secretary of the Army who is a civilian homosexual, focus has been taken from team to what LGBT organizations call a sign of hope and progress towards fairness and equality.

They talk about equality, and yet in the same breath, they claim that with Eric Fanning's appointment should he be confirmed sets " the tone at the top and provides an opportunity to bring better understanding about both the shared and the unique needs of LGBT individuals in the military and their families…"

Did you catch that? The "Shared and unique needs of LGBT individuals"…

Unique/jʊˈniːk/ Adjective  Unique means, something or someone is unlike anything or anyone else: very special or unusual: belonging to or connected with only one particular thing, place, or person; Different, exclusive, particular, rare, uncommon, individual, lone one, only, separate, single, solitary.

In other words, the total opposite of Team.

I don't think many people are arguing that homosexuals aren't able to fulfill duties should they serve openly. Seeing so many people treating appointments such as this as a type of victory however, is putting focus on individual wants and needs; a need to feel special, a need to feel accepted and a need to challenge old rules and glass ceilings. When one joins the military, it ought to be as for service instead of new glass ceilings to break. I don't think anyone is arguing that a civilian can't lead the military in certain areas either, yet one has to wonder why there never seems to be a more highly qualified military general or commander who already has trust of his troops who can handle the position.

Progressives may have a lot of people believing that there is nothing "unique" about our country, but the world needs a strong America. The American Military has always been the best. It remains the best because of those who serve, who put service and others over self which builds strength. We need a strong military in order to remain a strong America. We won't have that if our leaders keep allowing social experiments, gutting and cutting forces, and dismissal of seasoned and trusted leaders and weakening our troop's abilities during war.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #107 

New Army patch is eerily similar to the Muslim Brotherhood seal

Bare Naked Islam blog is reporting that U.S. Army Soldiers in Iraq will soon have a new shoulder sleeve patch (left) to signify their service in the fight "against" the Islamic State (ISIS). The new patch looks strikingly similar to the Muslim Brotherhood's seal (right):

PatchArmy.jpg      PatchBrotherhood.jpg

The Army's patch features crossed scimitars, a palm wreath and stars. The scimitars, short swords with curved blades, are meant to symbolize the twin goals of the U.S.-led (Operation Inherent Resolve) coalition -- to defeat the Islamic State, also referred to as ISIS, and to restore stability in the region, according to Army documents.

The Army Times reporting that there are about 3,335 troops in the region training Iraqi troops, providing security and conducing bombing missions on Islamic State targets in Iraq and neighboring Syria. (Which have done virtually nothing to stop the spread of the Islamic State)

How's that for "submission?"

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #108 

Army rejects appeal from Green Beret -- sides with Afghani child rapist

Fox News is reporting that even as the U.S. military denies reports that American troops were told to ignore Afghan child abusers, an 11-year Green Beret who was ordered discharged after he confronted an alleged rapist was informed Tuesday that the Army has denied his appeal.

Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland earlier this year was ordered discharged by Nov. 1. He has been fighting to stay in, but in an initial decision, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command told Martland that his appeal "does not meet the criteria" for an appeal.

"Consequently, your request for an appeal and continued service is disapproved," the office wrote in a memo to Martland.

The memo was shared with by the office of Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who has advocated for Martland's case. According to Hunter's office, Martland learned of the decision Tuesday.

The memo, dated Sept. 14, comes as the Defense Department comes under criticism amid reports that U.S. soldiers were instructed to look the other way when Afghan troops and officers were sexually abusing boys.

Gen. John F. Campbell, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said in a statement Tuesday that he is "absolutely confident that no such theater policy has ever existed here, and certainly, no such policy has existed throughout my tenure as commander."

He said he expects "any suspicions of sexual abuse will be immediately reported to the chain of command," and he has personally spoken with President Ashraf Ghani on the issue.

"I want to make absolutely clear that any sexual abuse or similar mistreatment of others, no matter the alleged perpetrator or victim, is completely unacceptable, and reprehensible," he said.

But Martland's case has raised questions about the military's handling of such allegations.

As first reported by Fox News, while deployed to Kunduz Province, Afghanistan, Martland and his team leader confronted a local police commander in 2011 accused of raping an Afghan boy and beating his mother. When the man laughed off the incident, they shoved him to the ground.

Martland and his team leader were later removed from the base, and eventually sent home from Afghanistan. The U.S. Army has not confirmed the specifics of Martland's separation from service citing privacy reasons, but a "memorandum of reprimand" from October 2011 obtained by Fox News makes clear that Martland was criticized by the brass for his intervention after the alleged rape. Asked for comment Tuesday on the latest decision memo, an Army spokesman reiterated, "the U.S. Army is unable to confirm the specifics of his separation due to the Privacy Act."

Hunter has asked for Secretary of Defense Ash Carter to get involved, and continues to do so after the Army's initial decision denying Martland's appeal. The latest memo strictly reflects the Army's decision, and not necessarily any review from Carter's office.

The memo to Martland said his appeal was rejected because appeals can only be considered for "cases with material error, newly discovered evidence" or removal of certain documents. The memo says that while the office's "decision is final," Martland can still appeal to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records.

Hunter spokesman Joe Kasper said Martland essentially was denied on a "technicality" because no new information was provided.

"The process has failed abysmally," he told on Tuesday, urging top officials to intervene.

"At this point, somebody's better judgment … has to prevail," he said.

As for the mounting controversy over the handling of child abuse cases, Kasper said this "sends a loud and clear message to all soldiers and military personnel that if you do intervene … because it's morally the right thing to do, it could be at the risk of your career."

Hunter on Tuesday sent a letter urging Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., to put the nomination of Obama's new Army secretary pick on hold until Martland's situation, and one other case, are resolved.

Before learning about the latest Martland memo, Hunter wrote another letter to Carter on Monday seeking information on DoD guidance regarding the reporting of child abuse. He said he was "gravely concerned" over reports that soldiers were advised to "look the other way."

"This is not only unconscionable – frankly, it's un-American," he wrote.

Obama's recently-appointed homosexual Secretary of the Army will do nothing to overturn this travesty.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #109 
the amazing thing is the sodomite has no military experience... go figure

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #110 

Everybody into the showers -- Obama nominates first openly gay service secretary to lead the Army

Image89.jpg Greg Jaffe is reporting that Barack Obama, in a historic first for the Pentagon, has chosen to nominate Eric Fanning to lead the Army, a move that would make him the first openly gay civilian secretary of one of the military services.

Fanning, 47, has been a specialist on national security issues for more than two decades and has played a key role overseeing some of the Pentagon's biggest shipbuilding and fighter jet programs. Now he will oversee an Army that has been battered by the longest stretch of continuous combat in U.S. history and is facing potentially severe budget cuts. It's also an Army that after a long stretch of patrolling Iraqi and Afghan villages is searching for its postwar role in protecting the nation.

Fanning's nomination, which must go to the Senate for confirmation, reflects a major shift for the Pentagon, which only four years ago prevented openly gay troops from serving in the military. The policy didn't extend to civilian leaders, such as Fanning.

His long tenure in the Pentagon and his breadth of experience in shepherding some of the department's most complex and sensitive weapons programs was a key factor in his nomination for the Army's top job, administration officials said.

"Eric brings many years of proven experience and exceptional leadership to this new role," Obama said in a statement.

Fanning's rise to one of the Pentagon's toughest and most prominent jobs also reflects the Obama's commitment to diversity at the highest levels of his administration. During his time in office, Obama has overhauled internal policies to provide federal benefits to same-sex partners, appointed gay men and lesbians to the executive branch and the federal courts and ended the 18-year ban on gays serving openly in the military.

As Army secretary, Fanning will be teamed with Gen. Mark Milley, who took over in August as the Army's top general, the chief of staff. The two men will assume responsibility for the Pentagon's largest and most troubled service.

The Army, which swelled to about 570,000 active-duty troops during the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has shed about 80,000 soldiers in recent years and plans to cut 40,000 more over the next few years. The planned cuts would shrink the service to its smallest size of the post-World War II era.

Continue reading here -- if you can stand it . . .

The first homo continues his fundamental transformation of the United States of America.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #111 

US spy chief's "highly unusual" contact with military official raises concerns

Spencer Ackerman is reporting that Barack Obama's intelligence chief is said to be in frequent and unusual contact with a military intelligence officer at the center of a growing scandal over rosy portrayals of the war against the Islamic State, the Guardian has learned.

James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, is said to talk nearly every day with the head of US Central Command's intelligence wing, Army Major General Steven Grove -- "which is highly, highly unusual," according to a former intelligence official.

Grove is said to be implicated in a Pentagon inquiry into manipulated war intelligence.

In communications, Clapper, who is far more senior than Grove, is said to tell Grove how the war looks from his vantage point, and question Grove about Central Command's assessments. Such a situation could place inherent pressure on a subordinate, sources said.

Knowledgeable former officials are doubtful that Clapper directly intends to manipulate intelligence, and they do not say that the director of national intelligence -- who apologized to his Senate overseers in 2013 for publicly misleading Congress on the scope of domestic surveillance -- ordered Grove or anyone else to change the command's assessment of the war.

But one former intelligence official said Clapper "has to be careful of the Cheney effect, going over to the CIA and how does that affect people" -- a reference to pressure felt by CIA analysts before the 2003 Iraq invasion to portray Saddam Hussein as posing a more dire threat than he actually did, following then Vice-President Dick Cheney's direct interaction with far more junior analysts and officials.

"He can be manipulative," a former senior defense official said of Clapper. For Clapper as a senior US intelligence officer with access to assessments across the 16 US intelligence agencies to query Grove, the Central Command intelligence chief, the ex-official said, "something's wrong".

Clapper's calls, knowledgeable sources speaking on condition of anonymity said, placed Grove in a difficult bureaucratic position: between the nominal leader of the entire US intelligence apparatus and his lower-level analysts, several of whom consider the year-long war against Isis to be in dire straits.

Grove and his civilian deputy, Greg Ryckman, are said to be the sources of dissatisfaction among analysts within Central Command, where an internal controversy about integrity in intelligence has now sparked an official inquiry by the Pentagon inspector general.

More than 50 intelligence analysts, both those within Central Command and their seconded Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) colleagues, have registered complaints about manipulated or skewed data, the Daily Beast reported on Wednesday. Analysts object to internal portrayals, said to come ultimately from Grove and Ryckman, of a war proceeding better than Isis's persistent hold over large swaths of Iraq and Syria suggests. The existence of the Pentagon inquiry was first reported last month by the New York Times.

Some of those skewed and upbeat assessments have reportedly been delivered to Barack Obama. The White House has frequently defended its "Iraq first" strategy; one source interviewed by the Guardian said Obama aides were not receptive to hearing "the narrative that Isis is winning".

A senior intelligence official who requested anonymity said that Clapper only spoke with Grove by videoconference in the presence of representatives of the Pentagon's joint staff responsible for intelligence. The official said that Central Command played no role in the briefing process for the president, though its input was routed through the Defense Intelligence Agency.

"All updates provided by the Command are strictly limited to tactical developments such as what happened on the ground overnight regarding issues affecting US personnel and allied forces. They are not broad or strategic assessments," the official said.

"The intelligence community has a well-earned reputation for analytic objectivity and our assessments are not always in full agreement with Centcom and other commands around the world. These competing views are valuable to senior policymakers and are indeed expected."

Ryckman is said to have been responsible for revising assessments of the war's progress he considers pessimistic. Sources said the analysts are not shown data to contradict their understanding of the war, resulting in the frustration that led some to seek the Pentagon inquiry.

"The command environment within Central Command is toxic," said one former US intelligence official.

The role of General Lloyd Austin, the Central Command chief, in the alleged intelligence manipulation is unclear. But the former defense official said: "At the end of the day, he's responsible for his staff."

Austin has made questionable public assertions about the war. In March, he told a congressional panel that Shia militia groups supported by Iran had left the battlefield of Tikrit, even as those Shia militiamen escorted a Guardian reporter into the city.

To the consternation of Senate hawks, Austin has thus far declined to permit US troops in Iraq to spot for airstrikes, a factor inhibiting their accuracy. Last year, Austin defended the wisdom of the US focusing on "Iraq first" in the anti-Isis fight and portrayed a looming battle to reclaim Iraq's second city, Mosul, as potentially decisive. A map distributed by the Pentagon in April purported to show Isis losing ground in Iraq.

Since then, Isis has overrun Iraqi forces in Ramadi, increasing its hold over the country's Sunni heartland, and moved into Palmyra in Syria, destroyed the 2,000-year-old Temple of Bel. A flood of refugees from Syria fleeing both Isis and dictator Bashar Assad has thrown Europe into crisis.

Colonel Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for US Central Command, confirmed that Grove and Ryckman remained in their jobs.

Without providing information on an ongoing inquiry, Ryder said that Central Command welcomed the inspector-general investigation and defended the integrity of the command's war analysis. "The multi-source nature of the assessment process purposely guards against any single report or opinion unduly influencing leaders and decision-makers," Ryder said.

Congress created the job of the director of national intelligence, held by Clapper since 2010, in part to bolster and protect the integrity of US intelligence after the failures to prevent the 9/11 attacks and the misassessment of Saddam Hussein's nonexistent stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

Clapper's reputation suffered a blow after a March 2013 Senate hearing in which he testified that the NSA was "not wittingly" collecting records on millions of Americans, a claim he had to apologize for making after whistleblower Edward Snowden disproved it. Republican senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul called for Clapper and Snowden to share a jail cell.

Peter Cook, the Pentagon press secretary, told reporters on Thursday that the defense secretary, Ashton Carter, expected "unvarnished, transparent intelligence", while defending the war strategy.

Marine General Vincent Stewart, the director of the defense intelligence agency, said on Thursday that the inspector general's investigation "will play itself out" to determine if his agency "did anything wrong".

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #112 

What tempers the steel of an infantry unit

"For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack."
    -- Rudyard Kipling, The Law of the Jungle, The Jungle Book.

Gregory Newbold says it is artificial to constrain the debate about women in the infantry to physical capabilities. This doesn't address what holds an infantry unit together in the worst conditions humanity has to offer.

The current debate about women in the infantry takes place in an artificial context, because it nearly always self-limits the discussion to physical capabilities. Within these incomplete parameters, the argument is then set, and the preamble is that physical standards and performance are measurable and what is not measurable is subjective and probably unfair.

Once physical quantifications are set as the only requirement that matters, it then stands to reason that if you can define infantry requirements in terms of, for example, a number of pull-ups, a hike with 60 to 80 pounds of extra weight, or carrying a 180-pound simulated casualty to safety, then you can assess whether females are suited to infantry units.

Honest and informed observers will acknowledge that medical science indicates that, in the physical domain, the two genders are an unequal match. Even a very fit woman is not generally the equal of a fit man. The competition is no competition in aerobic capacity, load bearing, reach, body fat percentage, and other germane measures of combat fitness. But (the informed argument proceeds), even if it is only the top 5 percent of women who can replace the bottom 5 percent of men, why not allow the 5 percent to integrate and thereby improve the combat efficiency of the unit? For example, it has been argued Ronda Rousey -- the accomplished and undoubtedly tough mixed martial artist -- could be an excellent addition to an infantry unit.

The falsity of this debate is found in its restriction of analysis to its physical context (as most recently demonstrated in an article published yesterday at War on the Rocks). Why is the debate limited to physical capabilities? For two reasons. First, supporters of full integration will not accept what cannot be irrefutably proven (and sometimes not even then). Second, practitioners of infantry warfare have great difficulty describing the alchemy that produces an effective infantry unit, much as it is difficult for those of faith to explain their conviction to an atheist. Try that by quantitative analysis. But allow me a poor effort to explain what tempers the steel of an infantry unit and therefore serves as the basis of its combat power.

The public understands that individuals who have engaged in brutal combat seldom want to talk about their experiences, and it is broadly thought that this is because of the horrors evoked by these memories. More generally, though, this reticence is due to an inability for one side to convey, and the other to understand, not only horrors, but the context of the fight. Saying that "It was hot" is a futile way to describe the 23rd consecutive day of temperatures over 100 degrees and flesh-soaking humidity, but the description does an even poorer job of conveying the exacerbating details -- the burden of 30 to 80 pounds of personal equipment, mind-bending physical exertion, energy-sapping adrenaline highs, or the fact that the threadbare clothes you wore were unchanged for over three weeks and may have been "scented" by everything from food, to blood, dysentery, and whatever was in the dirt that constituted your bed. And don't forget insects of legendary proportion and number. More importantly, a story thus told cannot explain that the fellow soldier or Marine who you tried desperately to put back together was the same one who shared the duties of clearing the urinals, the pleasures of a several nights of hilarious debauchery, and multiple near-death experiences -- a comrade in arms who has heard more about your personal thoughts than your most intimate friends or family. So veterans of the true horrors of combat don't talk about it. Please understand, then, that it is equally difficult to describe the ingredients of an efficient ground fighting machine, because the ingredients are intangible, decidedly not quantitative, and proudly subjective.

An infantryman's lot is to endure what we think is unendurable, to participate in the inhumane, and to thrive in misery. Normal humans do not deliberately expose themselves to confront a machine gun that is firing at them over 10 rounds a second. "Smart" humans do not run toward the sound of gunfire. Logic does not tell you to lay down your life in the hope that you can recover an already dead comrade. And normal organizations do not strive, as their first priority, to evoke fear. For you see, the characteristics that produce uncommon valor as a common virtue are not physical at all, but are derived from the mysterious chemistry that forms in an infantry unit that revels in the most crude and profane existence so that they may be more effective killers than their foe. Members of such units deliberately reduce the individual and collective level of humanity and avoid all distractions so that its actions are fundamental, instinctive, and coldly efficient. Polite company, private hygiene, and weakness all step aside. These are the men who can confront the Islamic State, North Korean automatons, or Putin's Spetsnaz and win every time. Believe me, you will need them, and we don't get to choose when that will be.

In this direct ground combat environment, you do not fight for an ideal, a just cause, America, or Mom and apple pie. You endure the inhumanity and sacrifices of direct ground combat because, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." This selflessness is derived from bonding, and bonding from shared events and the unquestioning subordination of self for the good of the team. But what destroys this alchemy -- and, therefore, combat effectiveness -- are pettiness, rumor-mongering, suspicion, and jealousy. And when fighting spirit is lessoned, death is the outcome. So "fairness" is an obscenity. Fairness is about individuals. It's selfish. And selfishness can kill.

Nineteen-year-old males everywhere are from Mars. They, and their early twenty-something brethren, are overloaded with testosterone, supremely confident about their invincibility, and prone to illogical antics. This sometimes produces intemperate behavior in everyday America, but the same traits are, by the way, nearly ideal for direct ground combat. The same youthful ingredients produce unacceptable behavior in the pristine and low pressure environments of boarding schools, academic institutions, and cubicle farms. Truth be told, in later stages of life these traits also lead to humiliating interactions on Capitol Hill or in the White House. Why, then, do we suppose that sexual dynamics -- or mere perceptions thereof -- among the most libido laden age cohort in humans, in the basest of environs, will not degrade the nearly spiritual glue that enables the infantry to achieve the illogical and endure the unendurable?

Two women just graduated from the Army's very, very difficult Ranger School. The surprise of that is that it surprised anyone. There unquestionably are women who can pass any physical challenge the military may require. We should celebrate those who succeed and encourage others. They are worthy role models, and certainly not just to women. But the issue we're now debating has to include a recognition of cohesion and the cost of sexual dynamics in a bare-knuckled brawl, amidst primeival mayhem, in which we expect the collective entity to persevere because it has a greater will and fighting spirit, and not because it is bigger, faster, or more agile. The championship team in virtually any professional sport may only coincidentally be the most physically talented, but it most assuredly will be the most cohesive. Why not appreciate the same ingredients in infantry units?

Finally, you may bet your future earnings that the current effort to integrate the infantry will not cease with a few extraordinary females, but will eventually accommodate a social engineering goal by changing standards. Think I am wrong? It's already happening. Read the words and understand the goals of the current Secretary of the Navy (an arsonist in the fire department) and the Secretary of the Air Force, and examine what we now call "the Dempsey Rule."

If I'm wrong, the cost may be denied opportunity to strong and impressive young women. If you're wrong, our national security is shaken and there is a butcher's bill to pay. Make your choice. The line forms on the left.

Lieutenant General Gregory Newbold (U.S. Marine Corps, ret.) is a former infantryman, having commanded units from the platoon through the 1st Marine Division. His last assignment was as Director of Operations, the Joint Staff.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #113 

Cooking the books


The New York Post editors say an open revolt is under way within the US intelligence establishment, with more than 50 veteran analysts charging their reports on ISIS were systematically changed to reflect the White House line.

Word broke two weeks ago that the Pentagon inspector general is investigating allegations of intelligence manipulation.

But a new report Wednesday detailed the startling extent of the wholesale editing -- all of it aimed at bolstering the Obama administration's claims it's winning the battle against extremism.

One defense official told the Daily Beast this deception is a "cancer within the senior level of the intelligence command."

The blatant politicization was based in the US Central Command and reportedly involved outright changing of reports. A written complaint to the IG described the atmosphere as "Stalinist."

Some analysts said they saw negative reports ignored or discarded; others felt the need to self-censor for fear of losing their jobs. Yet others simply left -- after being "urged" to retire when they complained.

All of this served to cover Obama's back when he and other top officials publicly crowed that ISIS is losing.

Ah, the irony: Democrats accused George W. Bush & Co. of cherry-picking and falsifying intelligence to support the invasion of Iraq. In fact, that intelligence matched what every other major power believed about Iraq's weapons programs.

Yet the outrage went on for years, with a few in Congress actually calling to impeach President Bush. Will any of those critics speak up about what the Obama team stands accused of doing?

The nation can hope US intelligence has improved since 2003. Too bad the politicization of intelligence has grown far worse.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #114 

50 military intelligence analysts say ISIS intelligence was cooked

It’s being called a "revolt" by intelligence pros who are paid to give their honest assessment of the ISIS war -- but are instead seeing their reports turned into happy talk.

The Daily Beast is reporting that more than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military's Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned.

The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.

"The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command," one defense official said.

Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.

That complaint was supported by 50 other analysts, some of whom have complained about politicizing of intelligence reports for months. That’s according to 11 individuals who are knowledgeable about the details of the report and who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity.

The accusations suggest that a large number of people tracking the inner workings of the terror groups think that their reports are being manipulated to fit a public narrative. The allegations echoed charges that political appointees and senior officials cherry-picked intelligence about Iraq’s supposed weapons program in 2002 and 2003.

The two signatories to the complaint were described as the ones formally lodging it, and the additional analysts are willing and able to back up the substance of the allegations with concrete examples.

One person who knows the contents of the complaint said it used the word "Stalinist" to describe the tone set by officials overseeing the military’s analysis.

Some of those CENTCOM analysts described the sizeable cadre of protesting analysts as a "revolt" by intelligence professionals who are paid to give their honest assessment, based on facts, and not to be influenced by national-level policy. The analysts have accused senior-level leaders, including the director of intelligence and his deputy in CENTCOM, of changing their analyses to be more in line with the Obama administration’s public contention that the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda is making progress. The analysts take a more pessimistic view about how military efforts to destroy the groups are going.

The large number of analysts who complained to the Pentagon inspector general hasn’t been previously reported. Some of them are assigned to work at CENTCOM, the U.S. military's command for the Middle East and Central Asia, but are officially employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency.

The complaints allege that in some cases key elements of intelligence reports were removed, resulting in a document that didn’t accurately capture the analysts’ conclusions, sources familiar with the protest said. But the complaint also goes beyond alleged altering of reports and accuses some senior leaders at CENTCOM of creating an unprofessional work environment. One person who knows the contents of the written complaint sent to the inspector general said it used the word "Stalinist" to describe the tone set by officials overseeing CENTCOM’s analysis.

Many described a climate in which analysts felt they could not give a candid assessment of the situation in Iraq and Syria. Some felt it was a product of commanders protecting their career advancement by putting the best spin on the war.

Some reports crafted by the analysts that were too negative in their assessment of the war were sent back down the chain of the command or not shared up the chain, several analysts said. Still others, feeling the climate around them, self-censored so their reports affirmed already-held beliefs. Air Force Col. Patrick Ryder, U.S. CENTCOM spokesman, said:

"While we cannot comment on the specific investigation cited in the article, we can speak to the process. The Intelligence Community routinely provides a wide range of subjective assessments related to the current security environment. These products and the analysis that they present are absolutely vital to our efforts, particularly given the incredibly complex nature of the multi-front fights that are ongoing now in Iraq and Syria. Senior civilian and military leadership consider these assessments during planning and decision-making, along with information gained from various other sources, to include the insights provided by commanders on the ground and other key advisors, intelligence collection assets, and previous experience."

Two of the officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said that analysts began airing their complaints in October in an effort to address the issue internally and only went to the inspector general when that effort failed. Some of those who complained were urged to retire, one official familiar with the report told The Daily Beast. Some agreed to leave.

In recent months, members of the Obama administration have sought to paint the fight against ISIS in rosy hues -- despite the terror army’s seizure of major cities like Mosul and Fallujah. John Allen, the retired Marine general charged with coordinating the ISIS campaign, said in July:

"ISIS is losing."

Secretary of State John Kerry said in March, using Team Obama's preferred acronym for the group:

"I am confident that over time, we will beat, we will, indeed, degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL."

Barack Obama said in May:

"No, I don’t think we’re losing."

Yet a growing group of intelligence analysts persisted with their complaints. For some, who have served at CENTCOM for more than a decade, scars remained from the run-up to the 2003 war in Iraq, when poorly written intelligence reports suggesting Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, when it did not, formed the basis of the George W. Bush administration’s case for war.

"They were frustrated because they didn’t do the right thing then" and speak up about their doubts on Iraq’s weapons program, the defense official told The Daily Beast.

Related:  One year, 6,700 airstrikes and $4 billion after Obama vowed to "destroy" ISIS, the jihadists are still on the offensive

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Posts: 217
Reply with quote  #115 
I signed it too.  But I haven't seen my name on the list yet.  Perhaps it takes a while to update.

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #116 

It doesn't get any sicker than this  -- but Team Obama IS sick


S. Noble says this administration is about to perform yet another sick farce and the American public are expected to sit by and watch like drugged zombies. Team Obama is going to prosecute the Naval officer who shot at the crazed terrorist in Chattanooga to save himself and his men.

When you hear this story, think about the absurd rules of engagement that Barack Obama has put in place overseas and the risks the military face because of it.

On July 16th, a deranged Muslim terrorist shot up two Naval reserve centers, killing five Marines and a sailor at the second location. A courageous Lt. Commander Timothy White, head of the Naval Support Reserve Center in Chattanooga, discharged a personal side arm while standing up to the terrorist. He didn't run. He defended his post.

The Commander is married and his wife is about to give birth to their seventh child.

He is about to be formally charged by the Navy for "illegally discharging a firearm on federal property." If you will remember, this was a gun free zone but the terrorist didn't read the sign on the door it seems.

The Commander returned fire along with one other Marine, probably one of those murdered. The Commander didn't start the shooting. He probably saved lives.

Will the Navy charge the deceased Marine posthumously also?

Why aren't the other military standing up for the Lt. Commander? Where are our Naval leaders?

We have a deserter -- Bowe Bergdahl -- running around pot houses, who we traded five dangerous terrorists for, but it's the Lt. Commander who is to be court martialed?

The Commander has served loyally for thirteen years and all that could be lost with a court martial.

These miserable people -- disgusting people -- are so anti-gun that they don't care who they hurt or how ridiculous they look.

Lt. Col. West wrote about the situation. 

There are things which make you just upset, like the liberal progressive left and media accomplices' rage over the shooting of a lion in Africa but abject disregard and disdain reference Planned Parenthood dismembering babies and selling their body parts. But this story has me dog fighting mad and seriously p***** off.

What kind of freaking idiots are in charge of our Armed Forces -- pardon me, our "unArmed Forces?" What would they prefer that (the killer) Abdulazeez had been able to kill all the Marines and Sailors at the Naval Support Reserve Center? Let me draw an interesting contrast: Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus is more concerned about lifting the ban on transgendered Sailors.

Mabus has a problem in that for the first time since 2007 the US Navy will not have a Carrier Battle Group operating in the Persian Gulf. But this knucklehead has no problem with the Navy seeking to destroy the career of a Sailor, a commander of an installation, returning fire against an Islamic jihadist attack. I do not care if it was his personal weapon, he deserves a medal for facing the enemy.

Read the article Lt. Col. West has posted at this link.

This is sick, totally sick. It is so perverse. I must be in an alternative universe.

Many military carry sidearms since Hassan murdered the defenseless soldiers in Fort Hood. They know they're targets.

A petition with over 12,000 signatures on "We the People" is currently on a White House site asking to honor Lt. Commander White and a yet-unidentified Marine who returned fire with their "illegal" firearms. You can sign the petition here.

A misdemeanor can't be overlooked for self-defense and for protecting others?

Should these sailors have just allowed themselves to be killed? Are our military supposed to die to support some inane rule about military not having guns in military facilities, a rule currently being reviewed by Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter.

It's tragic and pathetic. People need to show outrage over this destructive nonsense.

Former Congressman West said people need to take action. "Flood the phones of SecNav Ray Mabus and SecDef Carter and ask them whose side they're on. Demand the charges being brought against LTC White be immediately dropped. If those charges are not dropped, (Allen West) will personally lead the charge to have Carter and Mabus removed from their positions.

Ashton Carter is the Secretary of Defense for the United States. Marine Gen. Martin Dempsey is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Ray Mabus is the Secretary of the U.S. Navy. All three work at the Pentagon where the mailing address is: 1400 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1400. The main switchboard number is 703 571-3343.

None of these men deserve our respect but this decision came right from the top. There is no way this is being done without a call having been made to -- or from -- Obama. LTC White watched while his men were slaughtered. That has to be an absolutely horrendous experience and now he has to go through this too?

I encourage you to sign this petition. I did.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #117 

Obama’s answer to terrorism against our troops -- disarm them and remove their uniforms

Warner Todd Huston is reporting that on the heels of a terrorist attack on two military recruiting offices in Tennessee by a Muslim immigrant, the Obama administration announced a policy change to help prevent future attacks. Was it to finally arm our soldiers? Nope. It was to have them take off their uniforms. No really!

According to the Military Times, Obama’s weak-kneed Defense Secretary Ash Cater approved the decree that recruiters should take off their uniforms while performing their recruitment duties from now on.

So, now recruiters will be wearing…. what, shots and a t-shirt? Or better yet, maybe a burkah or maybe some turban-styled head covering. All in order to cringe in front of Islamic terrorists while pleading, “oh, please, please, Mr. terrorist, don’t kill us.”

Note that Carter didn’t demand that all recruiters be frikking armed so that they might be able to shoot back when Muslims attack.

No, now soldiers are supposed to die at their desks and now don’t even have the benefit of dying in the uniform of their country!

And let’s not even mention that recruiting without a uniform proudly worn by a recruiter puts a serious dent in the whole emotional appeal of recruiting and will make the recruiter’s job harder.

One of the whole aspects of being recruited is that potential recruits have a visceral reaction to the crisp, flashy uniform worn by their guide to the service. It’s part of the whole package to be able to show recruits how handsome, or how sharp and orderly they will look in their own uniforms when they get one.

And now Obama wants to take that away from the services?

Well, it shouldn’t be a surprise. Obama is not proud of our military. In fact, he’d love to see it dwindle to nothing. This just fits with his desire to undermine our armed forces.

Meanwhile, it is taking the actions of some Republican governors to come to the aid of our soldiers even if the Obama administration refuse to do so. Governors Greg Abbott, Asa Hutchinson, Rick Scott, Bobby Jindal, Mary Fallin, and Mike Pence have all issued orders to one extent or another that National Guard recruiting officers shall have arms at the ready if need be.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #118 

My Beloved Marines have been ordered to submit to Islam

The above item prompted this email from member Khe Sahn:

That's right folks.  Our United States Marines who work at recruitment centers have been ordered NOT to wear their Marine Corp uniforms to work.  They have been ordered to wear civilian clothes in the hope when the next jihadist goes to kill them that they will show mercy.  And no, my Marines will not be permitted to carry weapons because the White House (in my opinion) fears they might harm a sub-human Muslim jihadist.

This information was provided by ABC News Pentagon Digital Journalist Luis Martinez.

No, I am not kidding.

This is insanity and we are participants.

Other:  The French newspaper Charlie Hebdo capitulated and surrendered to the Muslims a few days ago.  They promised to never again publish a cartoon of Mohammad.

Comments ?

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #119 

Odierno surrenders -- recruiting centers to remain unarmed and unguarded -- recruiters told to not wear uniforms

Kristinn Taylor is reporting that Army chief of staff Gen. Ray Odierno said on Friday he has no plans to arm recruiters or add security patrols to military recruitment centers in the wake of the Islamist terror attacks on unarmed, unguarded military offices in Chattanooga, Tennessee on Thursday. Odierno basically said he doesn’t trust his troops to handle their weapons properly.

Also on Friday, the Marine Corps ordered recruiters to not wear their uniforms at work for "force protection."

Odierno made his comments at a breakfast with reporters, according to the AP

"Security at military recruiting and reserve centers will be reviewed in the aftermath of the deadly shooting in Tennessee, but it’s too early to say whether the facilities should have security guards or other increased protection, the Army’s top officer said Friday.

“A day after a gunman shot and killed four Marines and wounded three other people in Chattanooga, Gen. Ray Odierno, chief of staff of the Army, told reporters that arming troops in those offices could cause more problems than it might solve.

“”I think we have to be careful about over-arming ourselves, and I’m not talking about where you end up attacking each other,” Odierno said during a morning breakfast. Instead, he said, it’s more about “accidental discharges and everything else that goes along with having weapons that are loaded that causes injuries.””

…”In the wake of previous shootings at military facilities, the services have reviewed and strengthened security precautions at the centers. But most of those involve safety precautions and the need to be aware and watchful of surroundings.

“Odierno said that there are currently no plans to have security personnel posted at recruiting centers, but added that there will be a review. He said a notice went out Thursday to all Army locations reminding them of protection measures.”

On Friday evening ABC News Pentagon reporter Luis Martinez reported on Twitter the Marine Corps ordered recruiters to not wear their uniforms at work.


That's OK, general, REAL Americans have our recruiters covered.


A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #120 

Army National Guard hit with data breach

Cheryl Chumley is reporting that Army National Guard members from as far back as 2004 are being warned their personal information may be at risk due to a data breach, separate from the massive Office of Personnel Management hack, that compromised the outfit's computer-stored information.

OPM reported a hack of nearly 22 million records. This National Guard data breach is believed to have compromised members' names, full Social Security numbers, addresses, dates of birth and other private information, the Hill reported.

"All current and former Army National Guard members since 2004 could be affected by this breach because files containing personal information [were] inadvertently transferred to a non-DoD-accredited data center by a contract employee," said Maj. Earl Brown, a spokesman for the National Guard Bureau, the Hill reported.

Brown also assured the National Guard was taking the breach seriously.

"After investigating the circumstances of these actions, and the information that was transferred, the Guard has determined, out of an abundance of caution, to inform current and past Guard personnel that their personally identifiable information (PII) was among the files that were transferred," he said, the Hill reported.

Brown specified the data breach isn't believed to have been malicious.

"The issue was identified and promptly reported, and we believe the data will be used lawfully." he said. "This was not a hacking incident, in which the intent was to use data for financial gain. Nonetheless, the Guard believes that individuals potentially affected need to know about the breach and what actions they can take to protect themselves from potential identity theft."

Not "malicious" -- whew! That's a relief!

The legacy of Barack Obama: No laws; no borders and no secrets.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #121 

Obama cuts another 40,000 from the Army

Tom Vanden Brook is reporting that the U.S. Army is reportedly cutting 40,000 troops in the next two years. That cut doesn't include the number that could be lost due to sequestration.

The Army plans to cut 40,000 soldiers from its ranks over the next two years, a reduction that will affect virtually all of its domestic and foreign posts, the service asserts in a document obtained by USA TODAY.

The potential troop cut comes as the Obama administration is pondering its next moves against the Islamic State militant group in Iraq and Syria. President Obama said Monday he and military leaders had not discussed sending additional troops to Iraq to fight the Islamic State. There are about 3,500 troops in Iraq.

"This will not be quick -- this is a long-term campaign," Obama said at the Pentagon after meeting top military brass in the wake of setbacks that have prompted critics to call for a more robust U.S. response against the Islamic State.

An additional 17,000 Army civilian employees would be laid off under the plan officials intend to announce this week. Under the plan, the Army would have 450,000 soldiers by Sept. 30, 2017, the end of the 2017 budget year. The reduction in troops and civilians is due to budget constraints, the document says.

The Pentagon's budget, released in February, envisioned the reduction to 450,000 would occur by Sept. 30, 2018.

Some of the cuts were expected. During the peak of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army swelled to about 570,000 soldiers to ensure that deployments could be limited to one year. After most troops came home from those wars, the Army planned to shrink.

The Army should bottom out at 450,000 soldiers, said Michael O'Hanlon, a military analyst at the Brookings Institution.

Cutting "more would make me quite nervous," he said.

The Army declined to comment on the proposed reductions in its forces.

If the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration, set to begin in October, take place the Army would have to slash another 30,000 soldiers, according to the document. At that level, the Army would not be able to meet its current deployments and respond to demands for troops in other regions.

Among the proposed changes, brigades at Fort Benning, Ga., and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska will be downsized from units of about 4,000 soldiers to battalion task forces of 1,050 soldiers.

Downsizing Army forces in Alaska "makes no strategic sense," said Sen. Dan Sullivan, a Republican member of the Armed Services committee from Alaska. The White House emphasis on shifting military assets to the Asia-Pacific region and concerns about Russian aggression in the Arctic require strong forces in Alaska.

"One person who's going to be very pleased with this is Vladimir Putin," Sullivan said.

The Army overall will require more than 450,000 soldiers because the number of national security challenges around the world have "risen dramatically" in the past few years.

In 2013, the Army maintained in budget documents that dipping below 450,000 soldiers could prevent it from prevailing in a war.

Related:  US Army warns of defeat with new cutbacks

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #122 

US Air Force cancels two UK 4th of July shows due to "severe and credible" threats


Jim Hoft is reporting that the U.S. Air Force has cancelled planned Independence Day celebrations at a Norfolk RAF base due to the increased risk of a Jihadi terror attack.

The two-day festival was due to be hosted by U.S crew based in RAF Lakenheath and Mildenhall, home to the 48th Fighter Wing at the nearby RAF Feltwell in Norfolk.

Among the highlights of the show was to be a display by the RAF Red Arrows as well as the RAF Falcons parachute team.

However, due to the increased risk posed by ISIS, following last week’s Tunisian terror attacks and the anniversary of the London 7/7 attacks, security chiefs decided to cancel the planned two-day festival.

According to the U.S. Air Force: "The decision was made due to the most current local threat assessments. The base continually surveys the security environment alongside host nation counterparts and must take appropriate measures based on those assessments."

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #123 

U.S. troops in Afghanistan "feel abandoned"


F. Michael Maloof is reporting that ISIS is beginning to extend its influence into Afghanistan, but Team Obama no longer is giving the country priority, and the 10,000 American troops that remain are feeling abandoned, a U.S. intelligence officer has told Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin

The officer, who is stationed in Afghanistan and has requested anonymity for security reasons, paints a bleak picture in a war zone that is apparently all but forgotten after an investment of more than $1 trillion by the U.S.

There simply aren’t enough active-duty U.S. reservists or National Guard personnel in Afghanistan to complete the mission, he contends.

The United States has "zero strategy for the country," the intelligence officer said.

"We’re essentially waiting for politicians to pull the plug."

In March, Obama announced he was freezing U.S. troop levels to 9,800 through the end of this year and would conclude the American war before leaving office.

Yet, defense ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization meeting recently in Brussels reaffirmed their commitment to secure Afghanistan as security deteriorates.

On June 22, the Afghan parliament in Kabul was attacked amid clashes throughout northern Afghanistan.

The Institute for the Study of War recently pointed out that Taliban forces have attacked several strategic bases as their forces have been bolstered by foreign fighters, including Arabs, Uighurs, Chechens, Tajiks and Uzbeks.

"This force composition is somewhat unusual for the Taliban and may reflect a unification of effort between several anti-government militant fronts or a spillover of foreign militants into Afghanistan," the institute’s report said.

In addition, it said ISIS is establishing judiciary courts and imposing social restrictions in a number of provinces as a sign of "its transition from a fighting force into a governing presence" in Afghanistan.

"The compelling threat posed by a growing ISIS legitimacy, the surge of foreign militants, and the effective military operations of the Taliban will combine to test the limits of the Afghan government and (Afghan security forces) throughout the summer offensive," the institute said.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #124 

Obama is transforming the military into a vision of political correctness

S. Noble is reporting that our military is becoming a little less of a fighting machine and a little more of a PC social work enterprise under this administration. The administration is easing the changes into every fiber of its being.

Our troops not only have to put their lives in danger in war zones under rules of engagement that require them to be fired on before they can react, but they now have to fast when they are in Muslim countries.

The Weekly Standard reports that "U.S. Air Forces Central Command Public Affairs, Brig. Gen. John Quintas, 380th Air Expeditionary Wing commander in Southwest Asia, said that the U.S. is "committed to the concepts of tolerance, freedom and diversity." But he added that soldiers should "become more informed and appreciative of the traditions and htheistory of the people in this region of the world… [R]emember we are guests here and that the host nation is our shoulder-to-shoulder, brothers and sisters in arms, risking their lives for our common cause to defeat terrorism."


Military commanders are also given Ramadan sensitivity training.


It doesn't seem like the best idea. In Muslim countries, Christians have to pay a jizya tax. This PC-ism seems too similar to a subservient, inferior role for the U.S. as opposed to showing respect.

There is no such sensitivity for Christians like Monifa Sterling who wouldn't remove a bible verse from her computer. She lost her job over it.


Only last month, the U.S. embassy in Indonesia celebrated Independence Day on June 4th instead of July. They not only moved the holiday, our most important patriotic day, they called it Green Independence Day, completely changing the meaning.

We don't have enough ships of our own now partly due to sequestration and partly due to the extraordinary expenses of "green energy", so we are looking to deploy Marines from foreign ships. They want to be able to respond quickly in the event of an emergency though with this president, the only emergencies are those connected to making us into socialists domestically.

The government that wants to allow the persecution of Christians also wants to make extraordinary accommodations for the religious preferences of more exotic religions. The U.S. military eased uniform requirements to allow turbans, beards, piercings, tattoos et cetera for religious purposes so all can serve.

We all want this good man pictured below to be able to serve but it can't be at the expense of discipline and it can't be done to change the military culture.

ease requirements

The gay flag is allowed to fly.

gay flag

Crosses are banned from chapels since 2011.

cross removed

Foreigners can now serve, efforts to recruit into the service reach questionable sectors, and we have gang members infiltrating the Army. Many gang members have infiltrated every branch of the military.

Did you know we are bringing foreigners into the country to be trained? An Iraqi General was killed after the F-16 he was flying on a night training mission crashed in southeastern Arizona.

CNN reported that the 162nd Wing, headquartered in Tucson, specializes in the training of international F-16 Fighting Falcon aircrews.

There have been reports of foreign troops in other states. Obama has promoted exchange programs in which Russians and military from other countries come here for training but we generally don't go there.

Americans have always been able to count on the military and the police to protect us from an out-of-control government but if both are intrinsically changed, that won't necessarily be the case.

This administration does not hold Christians in high regard, they do believe in the majority accommodating the tiny minority, they don't understand discipline, and they are fundamentally transforming the military.

This entire approach goes along with Obama's hatred and distrust of the military and our influence abroad, which he wants to be erased.

The objective has always been to move America away from a nation built on American Exceptionalism, individual liberty and economic freedom and toward a government welfare and dependency state with no visible military presence in the world. Socialism, communism, statism, leftism -- call it what you will -- the results will be the same.

Revolutionary wealth redistribution, radical race and class warfare, socialized medicine, the atomization of American culture, divisive identity politics, the war on success, the loss of our Triple A credit rating, the retrenchment of U.S. power abroad, the gutting of our military, the erosion of our international credibility are all being done deliberately and with great success.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #125 

Tammy Bruce can’t believe where US military might have to deploy Marines


Author and radio host Tammy Bruce helped provide an update to what military cuts are leading to:


Sadly, nothing is surprising anymore:

Faced with a shortage of U.S. Navy ships, the Marine Corps is exploring a plan to deploy its forces aboard foreign vessels to ensure they can respond quickly to global crises around Europe and western Africa.

The initiative is a stopgap way to deploy Marines aboard ships overseas until more American vessels are available, said Brig. Gen. Norman Cooling, deputy commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces Europe and Africa.
“There’s no substitute for U.S. amphibious” vessels, Cooling said. "We’re looking at other options" in the meantime, he added.

Can asking the greatest military in the world to hitchhike be far behind?

Marines on foreign-flagged ships would be effectively under the command of foreign commanders.

This has never happened before.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Previous Topic | Next Topic

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

Help fight the

The United States Library of Congress
has selected for inclusion
in its historic collection of Internet materials

Be a subscriber

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011 - 2017
All rights reserved