My Lucky Rabbit

wp-1497810128257.jpg

My kitten rug my Pop bought for me in a local PA diner.

In several posts I’ve talked about my father, whom we called “Pop”.  He had a 10th grade education and started out in road construction, operating heavy equipment.  In time, he worked his way up to supervisory positions in a construction company.  Often on weekends he would take a couple of us kids along to see his latest road construction projects.  I always loved those little trips, because first we’d have breakfast at a local diner (a PA iconic fixture).  My Pop knew everyone, so I loved listening to all the conversations.  One time some salesman came into the diner and had a bunch of rugs with various pictures on them (sorry no Elvis ones back then) and my eyes lit up when they struck upon this small rug with a row of cute kittens on it.  I didn’t even utter a word, but Pop told the salesmen he wanted the one with the kittens on it.  I still have that rug.  He often came home with small gifts for my sisters and brothers and he always played it off like it was no big deal and he just happened to come across this.  He loved to fish and he bought fishing poles and little tackle boxes, worm bait boxes, minnow buckets, etc. for us.  He even patiently tried to teach me to cast my line, but being a leftie, mishaps often followed my aimless casts.  My hook only occasionally landed in the water.  One time it ended up in Pam’s curly hair and her Dad and Pop spent several minutes trying to extract that hook without pulling out a chunk of her scalp.  Pop didn’t yell or lecture me, no, he moved me several yards upstream and told me it was safer to give me more room to practice.

Sometimes amazing things happen and as for me, well, this story made me a believer in miracles.  It’s a short story about how Pop brought my dead pet rabbit back to life.  We had lots of pets.  Let me rephrase that, my brothers and sisters had some pets, but I had lots of pets.  Today, the pop psychology terminology to describe my behavior would be “pet hoarding”, but back then I thought I just loved animals.  I carted home numerous strays and unwanted pets.  Luck followed me, as some of my pet acquisitions could have been problematic, like the time a boy brought three mice to school for a science project in a small aquarium and then said he didn’t want them.  I felt like fortune had smiled on me that day.  My Mom’s immediate concern was the odds of those three multiplying,  but it turned out that they were all male mice.

We had lots of rabbits over the years and many of them were very tame.  We would have them out in the yard hopping around. One summer my favorite rabbit suddenly became ill and he couldn’t hold his head up.  My Mom thought he had a neurological problem and  he had been out in the front yard frequently, so she wondered if the recent insecticide spraying might be the cause.   Pop took my rabbit along with him to work one day and Mom told me that he had to get rid of my rabbit, because he was suffering so much.  I cried for days, but gradually I accepted the loss.

Almost a year later Pop came home from work one day and he had a surprise for me – my rabbit, alive and healthy.  Pop said that the day he took my rabbit along to work to dispose of, he stopped at the diner for breakfast and the man sitting next to him started talking.  This man had some sort of job with the PA wildlife commission.  Pop said when he explained the situation with my rabbit and how he couldn’t hold his head up, this man said he would take my rabbit to the state lab where they were doing research.  This man contacted my father and returned my rabbit, fully restored to health.  I’ve often heard people talk about the fancy things their fathers bought for them – like a new car, but so far none of those things tops Pop bringing my rabbit back to life.

1 Comment

Filed under Food for Thought

George Will on constitutional limits – time for some choke collars

The incomparable, George Will, perfectly explains the Constitutional fork in the road in America’s last century, in a column titled, “Slipping the constitutional leash” .   This “must-read” column lays out the history of our abandonment of the 10th Amendment (Washington Post column here) and the road not taken.

Leave a comment

Filed under American History, Politics, The Constitution

My mea culpa moment – Sarah Palin got it right

I mentioned in my previous post that I had said some negative things about Sarah Palin in comments at The American Thinker blog a long time ago (before we had a Republican nominee for President the last go around).  In a nutshell there were two things that bother me about Sarah Palin and I’ll get those out of the way before I get to the things I do admire about her, because even though I didn’t think she was ready to be President, she shouldn’t be written off as a national conservative voice.   The first thing that bothered me about Sarah Palin is how when given the opportunity to influence opinion on the national stage with a prominent news analyst position on Fox News, she didn’t offer anything more than repetitive political boilerplate comments.   The many times I watched her, left me wondering why she didn’t do more research and become better informed on issues and when Charles Krauthammer pointed out the obvious, he was pilloried by her ‘fans”.    I felt she wasn’t offering much to the discussions and outside of energy policy, where she really does shine, truthfully, she seemed in need of some intensive reading (particularly on history).  I remembered Lynne Cheney on CNN’s Crossfire in the old days and now there was a remarkable woman – brilliant, well-read on history, and a powerful voice for conservatives.  I kept hoping that Sarah Palin could move beyond the “lamestream media” trite phrases and really excel as a new voice of conservatism.  Her speeches indicated that she does have the ability to be on the national political stage.   The second thing that bothered me was how she was always getting on the cultural warrior soapbox, but she placed her family in the midst of one of the most detrimental cultural phenomenons of our time – that disgusting venture called “‘reality TV”.  My feeling is that a family’s home should be sacrosanct – a refuge from the world at large and a family’s internal workings should be private.  The American family has been undercut by the pervasive pop culture where people jumped on the Phil Donahue and Oprah train and for families to go on national TV to air private family issues in public ranks as one of the worst breaches of trust imaginable.  I was dismayed when she appeared with her “teenage mom” daughter on Oprah and allowed Oprah to question her parenting.  Then she had her entire family on display on a reality TV show, which laid lie to her culture warrior credo.

Well, in the past week, I remembered how the mainstream press lambasted Palin about her remarks about  “death panels” under Obamacare.  And here I’ll take my own dose of strong medicine and here’s my mea culpa moment – Sarah Palin didn’t flinch in that onslaught of criticism over her view on the “death panels” and she was right.   Watching this sad spectacle of Kathleen Sebelius refusing to intervene to save a little girl’s life (CBS report here) and listening to the remarks coming from Sebelius, proved that Palin had it right all along – government bureaucrats are more concerned about upholding their maze of rules and regulations than they are about saving a human life.  The alarming aspect of the case of this little girl in need of a lung transplant in PA was if this is how Sebelius and her band of medical “experts” react to saving  the life of a child, then one can only imagine how cavalierly they will treat the elderly, whose lives they may well choose to check as past the government-approved expiration date for many life-saving procedures.   After seeing how the Department of Health and Human Services handled the case of 10 year-old, Sarah Murnaghan’s desperate need of a lung transplant, it’s time to offer an apology for being so harsh about Sarah Palin (even though my comments never were posted online) and say one of the things I do admire about her is that she never wavered in the face of relentless media attacks on her position and the past week proved she nailed this “death panel” scenario exactly right.  We should all be very scared of the looming Obamacare bureaucracy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture Wars, Politics

Selwyn Duke On Female Breadwinners – worth reading

Unlike Matt Drudge, I always ramble on and on about articles I read, which I feel should be shared – he just posts a catchy headline to grab your attention.  Selwyn Duke writes many biting, hard-hitting conservative pieces, where he just says it like it is.  His latest piece in The American Thinker (from which I was banned from posting comments – really I was for being pushy about my criticisms of Sarah Palin, whom they love at their website – true story, lol) is definitely thought-provoking….or just provoking if you’re a feminist.  The American Thinker offers lots of smart commentary and even though I’m still banned from posting comments, I love their website anyway. (okay, my comments were pretty harsh about Sarah Palin, there I admit it).   Back to the point here, Selwyn tackles the feminist myths about how great it is that so many women are now the primary breadwinners in the family (truly way too many of them are the only breadwinner, but don’t let that fact take the shine off of the march forward for women).  His latest article is titled “Rise in Female Breadwinners Means America Is a Loser.

Feminist-indoctrinated women, of both the political left and right, react just as he states, arguing based on their emotional investment in the girl power upbringing in America.  I know how easy it is to be sucked into that grand delusion, where we applaud every female who gets to be the “first” to blaze the trail into new career fields, while our American children, particularly boys, become social misfits, diagnosed with dubious psychological ailments and drugged at alarmingly young ages rather than promoting steady, consistent parenting to promote a safe, secure home environment where children can flourish – in that patriarchal evil  environ called a traditional family with a mother and a father.    The trajectory for young black males is a national disgrace, where due to the collapse of the traditional family, fatherless homes, and single mothers struggling to raise their kids in a mostly poverty-level environment,  an alarming number of young black males seem destined for a life marked by criminality and spending time behind bars.  The large numbers of young black men who fall through the cracks should alarm everyone – so much wasted potential and wasted lives where the deck seems stacked against these males from birth.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture Wars, Food for Thought

Story of the Week: The Day I Sprouted Wings

Here’s a great short story about the first black man to become a licensed pilot in the United States in the 1920s.  James Herman Banning ran his own small auto repair shop in Iowa and his heart’s desire was to learn to fly.  He didn’t go whining to the government about being a victim or expect anyone to help him achieve his dream.  He watched the newspapers for government sales of old airplane parts and gradually built his own airplane in his cow pasture.  This in one of those truly inspirational American self-reliance stories of what an individual can do if he breaks free of a defeatist mindset.

Story of the Week: The Day I Sprouted Wings.

Leave a comment

Filed under American History, Food for Thought

NSA Junk Mail Folders

This latest massive security leak over the NSA spying on American citizens routine internet usage and on our allies (as well as our enemies) triggered the press to jump into a frenzied mob, albeit a very mindless mob at that.  “How dare the government spy on us” seems to be what’s got them in a tizzy.  Skip the American press to get any solid reporting!  The UK paper, The Guardian, landed the major haul – an in-depth interview with the self-identified leaker, Edward Snowden, a former technical assistant for the CIA.  (interview here & here).

The dilemma for many of us, follow all the rules types, is that our instant reaction to this story is to demand they prosecute this leaker to the full extent of the law.  Whenever I catch wind of these stories of people with security clearances blatantly violating the trust placed in them by their government, well, I automatically judge that behavior reprehensible.  Since 9/11 our government leaped into overdrive on revamping, expanding and completely overhauling our intelligence capabilities, to atone for the colossal intelligence failures that led to that horrific attack.  The problem seems to be that with so many different agencies and contractors involved in this devilish monstrosity, that only big government can spawn, no one seems to be able to know for certain the full scope of our “intelligence-gathering” on ordinary, law-abiding American citizens.  The even larger looming security risk is with the government relying so heavily on private contractors for much of this work, our intelligence agencies set up a very insecure “team” to run this show.  Our premier intelligence agencies, which we’re paying through the teeth to fund, farm out much of this surveillance work to private contractors and seem to be placing our national security in their hands, rather than in the hands of fully vetted and accountable government employees.  (another piece from theguardian).

Amazingly, with so much spent to gather this vast amount of intelligence, the best this administration could come up with on Benghazi was blaming some lame video and offering varying “narratives”, minus any concrete evidence or hard facts.  No one in the administration has ever fully explained how Fast and Furious came about or who authorized it.  We’ve got an attorney general who blazed to national prominence  in the Waco/Ruby Ridge/Elian Gonzalez (corrupt to the core) Reno Justice Department and he seems incapable of speaking the truth, so help him God!   The former Secretary of State, told us, “what difference does it make?” and she, who rode her husband’s splendid political coat tails to power and who wielded many Presidential powers as the media cheered, “two for one”, to this day is hailed as one of America’s most respected women.  What a marvel there, where she ran a team of scurrilous sewer rats in relentless forays looking for any dirt she could dig on any and all she perceived as political enemies.   The media turned a blind-eye to her crazed witch hunts (the extent which hopefully someday sees the light of day).  She trolled the internet looking for a vast, right-wing conspiracy way back then – an internet trailblazer for sure.  And truly, no one in this administration has come anywhere close to understanding the Arab Spring or much of anything else going on in the world.

Billions upon billions spent for intelligence and this is the “quality” of what our government comes up with???  We’re spending a fortune for useless junk mail folders filled to overflowing.  The clowns in this administration  couldn’t put the pieces of some complicated intelligence puzzle together even with a numbered diagram in front of them and all the pieces already numbered to show them where they fit.  Basically we’re paying a fortune to fill up bottomless junk mail folders of useless minutiae.  What’s missing from all this reliance on computer wizardry and the ability to acquire so much information is a commensurate level of  human intelligence to provide the nuanced analytical requirement to produce a quality intelligence product.

A corrupt government deserves no loyalty and certainly this administration nudged out the Clinton thugs for the title of most corrupt administration in my lifetime.  So, I’m left in a moral quandary over this latest leaker, not ready to hail him as a hero for the people and not quite ready to demand we leave no avenue untraveled to hunt him down.  Our government is a national disgrace and quite frankly, we should all demand better, because let’s hope we, the American people, still hold true to some pride in being an honest, generous, worthy nation.   Let’s hope there are enough of us left who still believe in the Constitution and the rule of law.

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, Politics, The Constitution, The Media

Obama’s Women: The cackling hens have come home to roost……

This morning brings the true radical agenda of Obama into clear view.  In fact, the mainstream media will need to dig much faster and deeper to bury the true extent of this administration’s  far left lunacy with today’s news that Susan Rice will become the new National Security Adviser, in the wake of Tom Donilon announcing his resignation (story here).  Since this position does not require Senate confirmation, President Obama, once again thumbed his nose at the American people.  Who cares that he sent Susan Rice out to lie to the American people about Benghazi?

And to complete the far-left turn in President Obama’s foreign policy trajectory comes Samantha Power, the relentless humanitarian interventionist, who has no respect for the US military, but wants to use them as her personal tool to wield her lofty, unbelievably naive strategy to end genocide in the world. (here)  Power advocates some principle she calls “the responsibility to protect”, to prod the US to intervene all over the world to stop “genocide’  (a term which definitely is in the eye of the beholder in most of these racial and ethnic squabbles).  She’s all for American unilateral military intervention on her terms and for the trendy causes that left-wing academics embrace. (American Thinker piece on her views here) She knows absolutely nothing about military matters, but that never has stopped any of these tough-talking, leftist ideologues from wanting to use the US military for their political  adventures.

As I stated in a previous post, only when the world’s major powers can act in unison and form a united front, should we intervene in these messy third-world situations, where we have no clear national security objectives.    Going it alone leads to mission creep and puts our troops in situations with murky, ill-defined military objectives and unnecessarily costs American lives.  For this administration the loss of American lives doesn’t count – this President with these pushy women prodding him, continues to lie about Benghazi, authorizes drone strikes killing American citizens with no outside oversight, and now has promoted two of the most ideologically left women to complete his second term foreign policy team.   So, let’s not act surprised when President Obama decides to ratchet up US support for the Syrian rebels or if he starts using the US military for more military adventurism in the Middle East.  With these two women tightening their apron strings around this indecisive waffler-in chief, don’t be surprised if Samantha borrows from her husband’s theories and turns those Sunstein “nudges” into “shoves”, as she tries to subvert American law to the will of her international legal remedies for the world’s humanitarian problems.

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, Military, Politics

Military leadership 101: Set the standard

Politicizing the military chain of command continued full-throttle with today’s Senate Armed Forces Committee grilling of the Joint Chiefs of Staff over the recent spate of high-profile sexual assault cases.  (Reuters report here).  The most idiotic comment came from Senator Kristen Gillibrand, from New York, who stated, ““Not every commander can distinguish between a slap on the ass and rape.”   The political solution that Gillibrand proposes adds a layer of bureaucracy between commanders and their troops – a special third-party entity to handle sexual harassment and sexual assault issues.  This will further erode trust between soldiers and their chain of command.  This smells like one more effort to turn the military into a politicized social engineering project of the left-wing politicos.  

As a female in the Army decades ago (circa 1980), I was sent to a Pershing missile unit, as I’ve mentioned before.  My battalion had less than 100 women and around 1,ooo men.  The Army back then had a pretty bad drug problem in Europe too, so things were a little rough.  Since this in my blog, I’m going to speak the truth.  I love the Army and I learned so many important lessons that have carried me through life and truly taught me how to face challenges head-on.  The integration of women into the military rates as a mixed bag of results.  One of my sisters completed a very successful career in the Air Force and she never experienced anything remotely what I did when I arrived to my Pershing unit.  Each service grappled with how to integrate women into the ranks amidst a great deal of politicized decision-making , where actual military excellence has always taken a backseat to the feminist-driven objectives.   Many women do excel in the military and certainly our military benefits from having as many of our best and brightest young people serving in uniform, so I’m not against women in the military.  What I’m going to say, is my opinion, based on my own personal experiences and observations – not some poll or what someone else said.  I’m going to speak about the real life problems that persist by integration being about politics, not what’s best for the mission or the soldiers.  It’s the real life proverbial elephant in the middle of the room that no male soldier dare speak about

In an earlier post I sort of tongue-in-cheek referred to my experiences in a battalion with so many men and so few women as the best diversionary tactics training in the world and you know what, it really was!  The minute I arrived at my battery, men started swarming around me and I guess the most accurate description would be, they were talking a lot of shit.  Yes, men talk a lot of shit, that’s a fact.  A young man grabbed my arm and I grabbed him by his shirt and slammed him against the wall and told him, “Don’t touch me!”   The other guys started laughing and talking more shit, but not a single one of them ever touched me again and the one who did grab my arm became a friend.  A female sergeant walked me down the sidewalk, past the next battery and on to the end of the parade field (those German kasernes usually have central parade field with the barracks arranged around the perimeter) .  The men were hanging out of the windows screaming vulgar things at me and the female sergeant told me not to look up and to just keep walking.  We went and retrieved my TA50 (field gear) and then she marched me back to my battery.  I was very scared my first few weeks there.

I have always felt thankful I was assigned to a battery with a good battery commander and an outstanding first sergeant.  My first sergeant (in the Army he’s called Top) was a Special Forces Vietnam vet, who taught me how to be a soldier.  The first time I met him, I was standing in front of his desk and he asked me where I was from and he looked me up and down and said, “Young lady, you don’t belong here!”  He was at a loss with how to deal with women, but he assigned us tasks, just like the men, and one thing I learned very quickly with him was if you worked hard and did what you were supposed to, he made sure to praise your efforts.  After several months there, some commander decided they should have a female M60 gunner to impress the NATO evaluators who observed many of our field training exercises.  Top picked me to be a machine gunner.  And the morning he told me that  I was going to become a machine gunner, this cocky infantry sergeant (Mr Hotshot 82nd paratrooper) said, “Top, girls can’t be machine gunners!”  Top told him, “Sergeant, you’re going to train her!”  So, I became a machine gunner and that sergeant took me to the range and as many times as I said, “I can’t do this” and I told him, “I’m scared of guns!”  He told me, “the mind controls the body, the body does not control the mind!”  Well, I learned.  Top made sure I learned a lot of other stuff when we went to the field too and to this day, I rank him as one of a handful of men whom I respect the most.  That cocky sergeant later became my husband.

Now, what kind of stuff happens when you’ve got so few young women and so many men – lots of drama and the men would make comments about why most of these women were pregnant and the rest were lesbians, totally oblivious to their roles in events.  Here’s another thing that seems to be part of the male mindset – they divide women into categories and treat them accordingly.  I behaved like a lady and was treated respectfully.  Once a few men determined I was a “nice little country girl”,  they insured other men treated me respectfully.  Men do some sort of internal policing from what I observed.  A typical occurrence would be some man would say something vulgar to me and other men would jump in and tell him that he couldn’t talk to me like that.  I quickly had many men “protecting” me and I felt safe almost anywhere on post.   I observed that many young women arrived there and went to the club and got into bad situations quickly, because men perceived them to be sluts.  Men really do divide women into groups.   One friend of mine was a young woman, who arrived at the same time I did, and she got involved in a few abusive relationships with men and after several months, she joined what I referred to as the “lesbian alliance” – it sure seemed more like a safe sex group from my viewpoint than it seemed to be about some heartfelt “sexual orientation”.  I asked this young woman why she decided to become a lesbian and she told me about her bad experiences with men and how this was safe sex and she didn’t have to worry about being beat up.

Army experiences can vary even in the same battalion and the biggest difference is in the quality of your chain of command.  I felt very fortunate to be in a battery with good order and discipline.  The friend mentioned in the previous paragraph ended up in a battery where there seemed to be little order or discipline and we had a couple of batteries like that in our battalion – in fact, I dreaded even walking into those batteries in broad daylight and going to the orderly room for official  business.  I sure wouldn’t have walked in there after duty hours.  I had another female friend who lived in a battery where the standards weren’t like in my battery.  Top had the female soldiers on the first floor with a female CQ at our end of the hallway and there was a male CQ down by the orderly room.  I felt safe in my room.  Now, this female friend, her first sergeant stuck the women on the top floor with only an unlocked door and a female CQ sitting there.  I walked up to her room only one time by myself and after that I always had a male friend with me.  You don’t ever want to get cornered on a stairwell.   My female friend who lived there was barely 5 feet tall and I bet she didn’t even weigh 100 lbs and she had to walk up that stairwell several times a day and sleep knowing only one female soldier was guarding her from a battery of men (many who used drugs and got drunk frequently).  As an aside, most of the females I met were from blue-collar or below backgrounds.  They weren’t the Hillary Clinton “experts” on women’s issues, but their very personal safety was impacted by these feminist harpies, who continue to push their idiotic feminist agenda on the military.

We had an old school battalion commander and since my public affairs job had me in close contact with the command group, I got to know the entire command group well.  My battalion commander took me along with him for many German/American events and he treated his driver and me fantastic.  He spoke fluent German,  could explain German history as well as he could military history and I loved listening to him explain things.  I had a battalion executive officer, who was a whiz at explaining how Pershing missiles actually worked and he could explain our entire nuclear posture in simple terms, where it all made sense.  I liked talking to him too.  My battalion commander nicknamed me, Fraulein Wunderbar, and he hadn’t quite grasped the female soldier thing.  He always stood up when I walked in his office and one time he had some young officers in there and he told them, “you stand up when a lady enters the room!”.  He made one of them give me his seat.  One time I had to travel with him to a Combat Alert Site, where the firing battery had been there a long time.  He had his driver stop at a nearby village and he bought us dinner in a nice German guesthouse.  When we were ready to leave he handed me over to a German lady and he told me that I was staying in this German guesthouse for the night and he would have his driver pick me up in the morning.  I told him I would be fine at the CAS site and he said, “I wouldn’t dream of having you stay there, those men have been out there for 3 months!”  He treated me like he would treat his daughter.  However, the gap in this is each of those firing batteries had a handful or so of female soldiers, so one can only imagine how they fared.  I can say that I never saw any female soldiers who were physically strong enough to be a Pershing missile crewman, but the Army had them.

I learned to handle a machine gun, but was I strong enough, if I had to pick up that machine gun and move quickly with it – hell, no!.  Yet, I could max the female PT test.  Therein lies the main rub with all this integration hoopla – the feminist harpies in political circles want women in every job in the military, yet they possess not a lick of understanding about these jobs or about unit cohesion, or about how we fight or how to win wars.  All they care about is their lame feminist agenda and waxing on about smashing glass ceilings.  There are females in the military like this too – totally centered on being the “first female” this or that – with no regard for the big picture – how their feminist agenda affects the whole team.  No one ever speaks honestly about the problems of women serving in positions where there are two different sets of physical standards for the same job, yet everyone has to pretend there aren’t.  No male commander can mention how pregnancy in actual deployments creates a gap in mission performance, nor can he impose any sensible policies for fear of the feminist harpies who monitor women in the military issues.  (ABC news story of one such attempt)

When we went on field training exercises, I spent many hours being a perimeter guard and I slept in a two-man tent with my machine gun partner, who luckily for me was a young man whom I could trust and who never said a single inappropriate comment to me.   So, when he was sleeping, I was on guard duty and the thing these feminist harpies fail to realize is their idiotic decisions could cause someone’s death in real war.  When we went to the field they used the few infantry soldiers we had to play the opposing force.  One young infantry sergeant would toss a stone near my guard position at night and whisper my name (he always approached from in front of my position).  He would come sit a few minutes and talk, then he’d head back to be the opposing force.  Now, that cocky 82nd sergeant, he’d approach my guard position from behind me, which meant he already had breached our perimeter.  He would often whisper my name in the dark too and then he would come over and he always checked that machine gun first to make sure I had it set up properly, then he asked me if I remembered this and that and after that he would sit a few minutes and talk.  He would then say, “Okay, back to fighting the war.” and he’d head back into the dark.    I always heard the young infantry sergeant long before he tossed a stone, but that 82nd sergeant, well most of the time I didn’t hear him until he whispered my name and by then he was close enough to take me out.  I would sit there in the dark after he left, telling myself, “I jeopardized our mission again!”  And I would try harder, but I thought about if we were at war against the Soviets – any Soviet infantryman could have killed me in a  heartbeat if it came to one on one fighting and I would think about my partner sleeping a few feet away and his life would have been at risk too.  I always knew that no matter how much I trained, the physical advantage was on the man’s side.  Smart armies should want the strongest men to be infantry soldiers – they best fit the mission.

The answer to the sexual assault and rape problems isn’t to get Congress involved or to have more sensitivity training.  The solution is to train better leaders in the ranks – we need to get back to basics and away from all this politicized claptrap and turning the military into a political correctness experiment.  Back to good order and discipline, back to treating soldiers fairly and consistently, back to focusing on setting high standards.  And most of all we need to decide all missions based on what best fits the mission ( in some cases that will mean men perform those missions) !

And here’s the truth about women and men, we need to get back to teaching them to be ladies and gentlemen, especially in the officer ranks.  Teaching respect at every level in the military will set the standard, so that every soldier will have confidence in the chain of command again.

6 Comments

Filed under Culture Wars, Military, Politics

The GOP policy maverick rides again (unfortunately)

Andrew McCarthy penned a brutally honest assessment of the John McCain Arab democracy projects in a National Review piece, “Syria: John McCain’s Next Libya” (article here).  It’s way past time for the GOP to take away the megaphones from John McCain and Lindsey Graham.  They spend more time being simultaneously for and against issues than John Kerry and that sure takes policy acrobatics to a whole new level.  These two relish all the media attention and they hog the media spotlight to such an extent that President Obama gets a pass on these policy debacles, because Graham and McCain so generously stamp the GOP seal of approval all over these foreign policy disasters.  It seems like only a few upstarts like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have the guts to stand up to these bloviating relics.   The GOP needs an internal rebellion or maybe it’s time for a new party, because the GOP  doesn’t seem to welcome new ideas and their “maverick” should be put out to pasture with his woefully misguided foreign policy adventure notions.

Long, long ago there was a revolution that was not our own.  Our own political leaders argued back and forth whether to stick our nose into some other country’s  internal struggles.  During that revolution (the French Revolution), George Washington stood on a policy of neutrality, amidst impassioned cries for the United States to come to the aid of the revolutionary factions trying to topple an odious monarch.  His wise decision should give us pause to keep arming rebel bands, whose willingness to commit atrocities make them no better than the autocrat they’re trying to depose.  The French Revolution did not usher in some glorious new period of enlightened democratic governance.  It opened the door for an even more odious tyrant, Napoleon Bonaparte, to grasp the reins of power and embark on a decade of military adventurism, waging war across Europe, into North Africa and all the way into Russia.   John McCain always speaks like he’s an expert on military matters, but thus far he sure seems weak on military history and if his Libya adventure is any indication, he’s clueless on his glorious Arab Spring.

Like I said before, the only way to effectively stop the slaughter in Syria is for the major world powers to form a unified front and insist on a cessation of the carnage.  This would incur a great deal of responsibility for these world leaders too, which they won’t want to incur.  Plus, the Russians and Chinese have already decided to play the same old Cold War era game, so we should resist the urge to join in that outdated policy avenue.  Far better to stay out of the Syria mess than to escalate the violence and arm more jihadists and throw in more advanced weaponry that can be used against us or our only true ally in the region – Israel.  If you’re not willing to do what’s necessary for an outcome you want, then you’re better to stay out of a mess like this.  We should have learned in Iraq and Afghanistan that we can’t install democracy – it’s got to come from within.

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, Military, Politics

The Mom World Peace Solution

For decades I’ve read about foreign policy, military strategy and history.  Of course, being around the US Army my entire adult life helped me form my world view, which runs toward believing in a strong national defense.  The question “why war” captivated my imagination long ago when I was assigned to a Pershing missile unit and first learned about being a Cold War Warrior.  Grenada shaped that question to looking for a road to Peace and I’ve spent years pondering this question.  Is there actually a road to Peace or are we destined to endless  wars?   In the for what it’s worth department, here’s my opinion.

If the world had leaders who could find their way toward trusting a little more and agreeing on some common ground – situations like Syria wouldn’t linger.  I talk about how we don’t have a dog in that fight and that’s true – but really the death of thousands to senseless violence hurts us all in the long run – another intractable cycle of virulent hate and factional fighting. 

If we had groups of kids fighting like that, we would step in and separate them, take away their weapons and tell them they need to sit in time out until they can learn to play nice.  In situations like this where the sides fighting are varied and irrational – our world “leaders” only big internal debate is about giving these out of control factions more weapons – so they can wreak more havoc.  We wouldn’t even consider this with kids and yet with the least-developed, least stable states – that’s our answer – give them more sophisticated weapons and then we really think we can control these rogue states that we armed to the teeth?  Would you trust kids who haven’t mastered some self control and demonstrated some maturity with your car keys?  But we talk about trusting them with advanced weaponry?  We have North Korea with nuclear weapons, with the nuts in Iran close behind, for crying out loud.

The leaders would have to agree on some ways to stop the slaughter of so many people and actually help some stable civil institutions emerge under the watchful eye of a united front of world leaders.  But the world leaders are always playing these elaborate games to one up each other and lying so much to each other in the pursuit of playing high stakes diplomacy that the entire world system is built upon the shaky house of cards called lying.  Distrust is the foundation of all our international institutions. 

It would take time and many failures to change that fundamental lack of trust, but good leaders have got to pave the way toward that goal, by gradually embarking on cooperating on some issues and getting a few wins in the building trust department. For instance when one of my sons went to Russia for a study abroad program, he stayed with one family at first where he didn’t feel comfortable, so he was put in a hotel until they located another family for him.  Finally they placed him in the home of a retired Soviet Army officer and my gut reaction after all those years embracing the Cold Warrior mentality – was relief.  I believed a Soviet Army officer would have an orderly, disciplined home and live by good principles.  He and his wife treated my son like part of their family and my son still talks about “my host father” all the time.

The world can’t change overnight, but with a commitment to dealing with people (as flawed as they are) and having some courageous world leaders take some steps toward building trust and acting in unison to quell some of these bad situations like Syria, with the senseless slaughter – over time we could have more wins in positive cooperation and helping people and less violence – bringing people toward more peaceful coexistence benefits everyone. 

A strong national defense remains vital though – because the strong really must protect the weak.  I believe the “world order” could change for the better and I don’t understand why people accept this belief that this is the way it’s always been, so this is the way it has to be.  People are flawed – sure, they lie a lot, and that leads to all these other bad things – but we sure don’t have to set up our international institutions based on the lowest common denominator – how about raising the bar some and setting some ideals worth striving for? 

The UN turned out to be a cesspool of lying and so fraught with corruption that it sure as hell hasn’t provided an avenue, so maybe if we had just a handful or so of world leaders willing to begin the change and embarking on a few trial problems, as honest brokers – changing course could inch forward.  Wouldn’t that be “change you can believe in”? (lol)

In the case of Syria, President Obama continues to drag his feet on action.  Aside from some clandestine support to the opposition (of which Benghazi was probably part of some gunrunning operation), he has remained indecisive.  Now, John McCain upped the ante a bit by entering Syria and meeting with a Syrian rebel force (here) and he’s pushing for us to unilaterally jump into this hot mess. 

The Russians and Chinese, in Cold War default mode, are aiding Assad, so we’re stuck in the same old pattern.  Now, I sure don’t support the US independently taking on the role of world policeman and until we can get the world leaders to step outside their traditional geopolitical mindset – yes, we are doomed to endless  wars.  Men, who thought up all these elaborate theories for war, only think about more force to have one side win.  Truly, for the Russians, Chinese or the United States, is some rebel band leading Syria going to be much better than Assad?  

The rationale offered by people like McCain is that if we arm these rebels, they can topple Assad and end the fighting.  That’s a nice bit of wishful thinking.  There’s no political leadership behind these rebel groups, just bands of rampaging, angry men.  The hope that amongst them is some George Washington at the end of the road, to unite and build a functioning democratic state requires a degree of delusional thinking that escapes me.

Certainly the tragedy in Syria leaves one wishing for a way to end the fighting quickly.  However, handing more weapons to poorly led, rampaging bands of rebels with little military finesse and a lot of rage seems a recipe for more horrific violence, not less. 

The world needs real leadership where the strongest countries should agree to provide a united front and force some calm and work at disarming rather than funneling in more and more advanced weaponry.  Once the irrational actors are neutralized, then rational actors in places like Syria should come to the table and work at political solutions.  This is the Mom world peace solution – take away the dangerous toys from the kids who can’t play nice and who haven’t mastered some self-control.  No fancy one-world government solution or new complicated political theory or even some religion- just common sense. 

The road to Peace is built, brick by brick, by building trust among leaders (people). 

As with most human endeavors the answers are simple, but that sure doesn’t make them easy.   Trust is one of the hardest things for people to achieve – definitely much harder than devising a theory like “mutually assured destruction”.  Only men could think up that one, believe me!  A Mom sure never would – she’d take away the weapons from the misbehaving, immature kids on the world stage and put them in time out until they learned to play nice;-)

3 Comments

Filed under Food for Thought, Foreign Policy, Military, Politics