Remembering Why

Yesterday Fort Stewart, home of the 3rd Infantry Division, held a tree dedication ceremony in memory of another fallen soldier, SGT Aaron Wittman, 28 years old.   He was the first American soldier killed in  Afghanistan this year, but this tree dedication is but one of  445 for this military installation.  The news article can be found here.

A few years ago I attended one of these tree dedication ceremonies and memorials should serve as a reminder to us all.   It made me tear up just seeing these long lines of trees with personal items placed around the base by their brothers and sisters in arms, their friends and family.  It forcefully reminds you that these were all young people in the prime of their lives who died in service to our country.   We should never forget that the policies our government follows come at a very real cost for those in uniform.  This young soldier’s father said his son, “loved being a soldier”.  We should never forget these brave soldiers, but we need to demand accountability of our leaders in Washington.  President Obama should attend a few of these ceremonies and talk to the families, at least as often as he has time to golf.

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

Link To Opinion Piece – “Women In Foxholes”

This is an excellent commentary by Major General Patrick Brady, U.S. Army (retired) – (Here).  He raises  many excellent points and makes the case quite eloquently on why women don’t belong in combat.  We’d do much better as a society if we started focusing on respecting the differences between men and women, rather than trying to emasculate men and masculinize (yep, had to check my trusty Webster’s for that one) women.  If we started from the ground truth that men and women aren’t physically or psychologically the same, which there’s a plethora of research and daily observation to attest to this fact, we might be better able to formulate policies that make military sense as well as being inclusive of women.   By using a fact-based, reality-based framework to formulate policies, then we could reasonably discuss the military requirements and put in place standards that we will enforce, instead of playing this game of willfully turning a blind-eye when women can’t meet the standards and due to political pressure pretending they do.  Lowering standards to accommodate this political agenda only degrades our military competence.  There are so many people, both men and women, buying into the decades old myths about female performance in the field and cherry-picking only the female success stories, while ignoring the troubling large number of  problems that negatively impact missions.  Ralph Peters wrote a New York Post column in January, “Sergeant rock-ette” (Here), where he predicated his glowing endorsement of accepting women with open arms (figuratively speaking, I am sure) on if it’s “done right”.  Nothing regarding integration of women has ever been put to the simple test that men and women in the military must meet the same physical standards for a MOS, so how on earth he thinks this will be any different defies logic.  I served a short time and from day one, there were different physical standards, yet they sent women with these very different physical standards into many jobs that required a great deal of physical strength and endurance.  I observed the real results first-hand and formed my opinion, which I’ll repeat again, all military missions should be based on what assets best fit the mission.   Fair standards be damned, what we need are the highest standards,  in my book, if we want to win wars and maintain our military preeminence. Even survival in a field training environment places more stresses on a female body than on a male body.  These basic biological differences will always hamper female performance in combat jobs where only the strongest males succeed.   It would be real eye-opener if the actual statistics and facts on integration ever reached the light of day.  Major General Brady’s piece offered a blast of fresh air to the topic, where most military officers prefer to take the three wise monkey path – see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.  I admire his candor!

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

Military Expertise: Maybe Not So Much

An American Thinker piece titled, “On  Giving Pro-Obama Military Veterans A Pass”, written by Dan Nagasaki and Glenn Doi (here), offers some important historical examples of why veteran status does not in any way indicate whether a person is qualified to be Secretary of Defense.  In today’s military it is a rarity to find even four-star generals with the historical vision, strategic aptitude and  most importantly,  the sterling character required to be exemplars worthy of leading  the United States Armed Forces.   In the present case of Chuck Hagel’s competence, clearly his combat experience , in and of itself, does nothing to recommend him to be Secretary of Defense.  Yet too many in the media and in our society, at large, pay blind homage to military service, in an almost reflexive way to atone for the disgraceful treatment of our military during the Vietnam era.

Perhaps we would be better able to make decisions if we started out with a list of job requirements,  just like we’d begin with any other job.  If we did a checklist of job requirements and checked them off as we assessed Chuck Hagel, it would become clear as day, just by his pathetic confirmation hearing, that he isn’t fit for a job that requires making decisions for a vastly complex organization like our Defense Department.  He didn’t even seem clear on strategic issues or where we stand on many of these issues and yet, President Obama thinks this man is the best choice for this difficult, challenging and vastly important position?   Aside from Hagel’s disturbing personal history of making remarks about Israel and Iran, he seemed so unprepared for his confirmation hearing, that one might wonder how he would handle all the highly detailed decision-making this job will require.  Yes, of course he will have plenty of flunkies and Obama policy wonks peeking over his shoulder to make sure he sticks to the administration track, but he will still need to represent the US in important talks and dealing with our military allies and adversaries.  He will get confirmed though and then at every turn, President Obama will remind us that Chuck Hagel is a Republican, to deflect us from the dismantling of the greatest military in the world.

Now to take this topic to a broader context, the media and the public give veterans and military service constant praise, but regarding military matters, they prefer to remain completely ignorant and blindly accepting of military experience, military  “expertise” and most dangerously, they accept everything someone with military rank says as some sort of fount of military knowledge and wisdom.   It’s way past time to start questioning these military “experts” that the media foists on us and also to begin questioning the theories, strategies and policies these people spout.   To blindly follow based on some flashy medals on a chest, makes us dupes, no better than those following a tinpot dictator.  This common thread advice of mine definitely fits this situation: Think For Yourself!   A citizenry of blind followers and media “fans” could prove our undoing if we keep traveling this path, where the public, at large, won’t bother to read The Constitution and start taking an interest in learning some military history.  Sure, most people don’t want to become military historians or strategists, but truly most strategies should be easily understood by people of average intelligence.  If a strategy sounds highly complicated and convoluted, just apply common sense and realize that it just might be a bunch of malarkey.  Start trusting in your own good common sense and less in fancy titles, military ranks and highfalutin terminology.  Break any strategy down to its parts and you’ll be able to assess it without a doctorate degree.  We should demand that our leaders and all these “experts”, who foist so much loopy,  top-lofty-sounding tripe on us, be able to put their ideas in plain English and then we would quickly see that most of  it’s more hot air than strategic expertise.  Ask questions until you get answers that make sense and stop buying into other people’s bullshit (sorry I couldn’t think of a more genteel way to say that)!

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

Who Is A Terrorist???

Inside our insular little lives we would like to believe many naive things about our government that fall a far distance from the truth.  We would like to believe that our elected officials “care” about American citizens and  what’s in our best interests.   Above all else we would like to believe that the selfless pursuit of our interests guides their actions.  Long ago our  founding fathers determined that their government fell far short of promoting and protecting their interests and they risked all to free us from the chains of  monarchical rule and in the process devised our Constitutional Republic, which they felt offered the best hope for securing the blessings of liberty.  They knew that power corrupts, so a system of checks and balances was carefully fitted into their work, ending with the The Constitution of the United States

Americans receive much ribbing and derogatory press about our reverence for The Constitution, because many in the free world function well without a written constitution.  Yet for many Americans, myself included, The Constitution stands as the keystone providing the center stone support in our arch of freedom.  It’s importance lies so central to our belief system that the very first act passed by the US Senate on May5, 1789 was the Oath Act, requiring members and civil servants to swear to support The Constitution.  We require elected officials, judges and every member of our armed forces to swear an oath that they will defend The Constitution.

The Constitution lies at the center of this alarming acceptance of expanding executive branch power.  In recent days the press buzzes with stories about the Obama Justice Department’s memo (here),  which lays out broad power for the executive branch to target American citizens to be summarily executed, based on their “intelligence” (no one has to even double check that info by the way).  So, we accept the premise that one man (it need not even be the President according to this memo) can arbitrarily decide a particular American citizen poses such a threat to the Republic that he/she can be executed without needing  to prove his/her guilt.  Keep in mind too that in 2011 the Obama administration not only executed alleged terrorist, Anwar al Awlaki, but in a separate attack a couple weeks later they executed his 16 year-old son, Abdulrahman al Awlaki too, who was also an American citizen. The Huffington Post link: here.  Sure many people will just shrug their shoulders and brush off any concern about this by glibly asserting something along the lines, “oh what the hell, little terrorists grow up to be big terrorists.”   However how you can square that with our reverence for the law and our bedrock principle that every citizen has equal protection under the law and a right to a  jury trial if accused of a crime  with targeted assassinations carried out on flimsy grounds by an executive branch without any checks or balances, nor even Congressional oversight, well, it completely escapes me, because I don’t believe you can in good faith assert both things

Now couple this power to assassinate our fellow citizens at will with a government that accepts “spin” as an acceptable political tool to be used brazenly and without any concern for the law to secure political advantage and you are placing this power into the hands of people who lack character and truly aren’t trustworthy (do you trust liars in your life).  And then this can be pushed one step further because in the Clinton years the press glowed on about getting two for one, so the American people elected Bill Clinton, but by virtue of her supposed greatness, they cloaked Hillary with executive power too.  So, we had a wife, who was not elected and not legally accountable, wielding the power of the presidency.  I, for one, am thankful drone technology was not in our arsenal back then, when the “smartest woman in the world” was running amok without any checks on her power and so far Michelle Obama has remained in a more traditional First Lady role, urging us to exercise more and eat healthier food.

The US Army embarked on this crazy path too, encouraging what they dubbed the “command team” concept.  They wanted commanders’ spouses (almost always wives) to run the family support activities,  thus giving them a quasi-official status and allowing many of them to run amok wearing their husband’s rank to push their weight around all volunteer activities  and also to stick their noses in personal family problems, where they had no training, no accountability and yet often these very situations could have resulted in UCMJ action against the solider.  Enlisted wives were allowed entry into volunteer activities if the commanders wives allowed it.  Granted most commanders wives weren’t tyrants, but as we moved around the Army I met a few and boy, one time dealing with that type of officer’s wife was more than enough.  I’ve read so much press about Holly Petraeus, champion of the lowly soldiers,  and I’ve often wondered which type of commander’s wife she was, because her Daddy was a general and GEN Petraeus moved through the political channels, not the tough command route, to get to the top.

Do you believe an administration that embraced sleazy players like James Carville to propagate lies and slander on political opponents would hesitate to create a file of lies to attack an American citizen they deemed a “threat” to their political survival?   Someday we may get the answers to that question.  I remain ever hopeful that truth will triumph.  And I also remain hopeful that Americans will wake up and realize that just a cursory glance at the morally bankrupt types we elect to Washington should have us demanding more checks and balances and definitely more definitive proof that an American citizen is a terrorist other than a file compiled by nebulous government flunkies who have predetermined that the “terrorist” is guilty  just by association and no clear cut proof is required of what terrorist activities the person plotted or participated in – only that  they believe the person is ideologically aligned with that cause.  Keep in mind this President, when a senator, called US soldiers terrorists and has made other unsettling  stereotyping type remarks about various groups of American citizens, while refusing to call actual acts of terrorism as such.   Yet he shows no hesitation at secretly assassinating people from his hit list, compiled by our oh so efficient intelligence services or political operatives or actually we don’t know how that hit list is arrived at, but who cares, right?  In the meantime we’re supposed to accept their word that this 16 year old deserved to be assassinated and in the words of former Obama press secretary, Robert Gibbs,  “he should have [had] a more responsible father” (quote from the above Huffington post article) .  No other explanation or justification seemed necessary and we never questioned the Obama administration further.  Scary times we live in where lies now serve as well as the truth and no one even murmurs a protest.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

Getting To Know You

How well do you know anyone else or even yourself?  Most people automatically assume they know themselves perfectly and from that little self-conceit they believe they know most of the people around them extremely well too.  I’ve decided to challenge you to step out of your comfort zone and really think about what things you believe to be true about yourself and what things really are true based on how you conduct your life.  All it takes is a short list of the things you say you believe and a quick honest appraisal of  how in practice you live up to your own value system to see that you, like just about everyone else (since we’re none of us saints) , falls short on just about every metric we deem as a worthy value to uphold.  This can be a humbling experience when you first start doing it, but after time it can help you learn to work on your areas of particular weakness and also help you build on your areas of strength.

Long ago these types of character-building exercises permeated society from religious institutions all the way through our political institutions and down through our civic organizations and educational system.  Teaching “good citizenship” rested upon teaching the building of a good character.  These days “good character” got kicked to the curb, replaced by being green, being a diversity advocate, being non-judgmental, and being value neutral.  In other words nothing is right or wrong and if you believe there are moral absolutes, well, you need to be re-indoctrinated to get with the new regime.   The only institution that still  pays lip service to values constantly is in the military and that leadership has been hijacked by political sycophants for the most part.

To avoid making this too deep of a theological exercise, let’s just focus on the difference between actually  “knowing people” and “knowing about people”.  The first one takes more personal effort, because it involves actually making a personal connection with individual people and listening to them.  It takes time to get to “know people”.  To “know about people” ranks as a shallow second and third hand exercise where what you know usually comes from other people, in other words, much of it is little more than gossip that you accept as fact.  In our personal, everyday life this distinction might not have a huge impact other than to create unnecessary conflicts with neighbors, co-workers and within our own families.  And believe me, it’s hard to resolve some of these deep-seated misunderstandings based on not  knowing what’s truly in the hearts of others.  It’s hard work listening to others and really trying to understand what other people think, believe, dream.

While believing incorrect or absolute lies about other people isn’t usually too earth-shattering in our everyday lives, having our media and political institutions  reduced to consumers of “knowing about” people rather than taking the time to “know people” leads to many very unsettling results.  For instance reporters often zoom in on neighbors when seeking to add context to stories, yet do they ever bother to think that perhaps the neighbor hated the  person whom the story is about?  Do they bother to seek a broader understanding of the situation?

In this Newtown massacre within the first 48 hours, the press reported so many false stories that by the time they started coming up with a few facts, their credibility was nil and the damage had already been done.    Long ago most news organizations prided themselves of being reporters of the truth, with reporters trained to seek out who, what, when,where,  why and how.  Now we have live ‘reporting” where reporters fill the long segments with rambling gossip, innuendo, pop psychology detours, and plain emotional outbursts that should have no place in real journalism.

When this trend of accepting lies without question captures our political system, our Republic may be doomed.   Our founding fathers told us that the system they devised will only stand for a moral people.  Our electorate now falls mainly on shallow emotional hot-button issues, which both political parties shamelessly play.  The key factor in every election should be the character of the individual running for office, but we know that standard fell to the wayside long, long ago.  In the past 20 years, our moral compass as a nation died and we now have a media that helps promulgate lies for political advantage.  This mostly benefits the left, because the vast majority of journalists fall to the left politically.

During the Clinton years this dangerous threat to our Republic came to be known by the rather innocuous term “spin”.  Spin is the deliberate, concerted effort of your elected officials to lie and deceive you.  If you accept “spin” as truth or excuse it as just part of politics, then seriously there is little hope of rescuing our society from the moral sewer where these Clinton spinmeisters left us decaying.   George Bush did spin some facts on the “war on terror” (a term that is in and of  itself a fallacy), but they avoided the cheap character assassinations that the Clinton crowd excelled at.  Now we reached a new level of lying where cheap race-baiting tactics get used at every turn to keep the most shallow, intellectually vapid person ever to reach the Oval Office in power.  For rational people to accept flimsy “composite” white people as representative of the white mentality and to listen to his constant vile stereotyping of  white people, conservatives, rural Pennsylvanians (having grown up as one – well I took offense), well we are on a dangerous course here.  Now, the left is embracing junk science to promote the idea that conservatives are “genetically’  intellectually inferior beings compared to the liberals.

These dangerous paths always lead to governments running way off course to extremes, where an idiot like Roseanne Barr, seriously suggested re-education camps for conservatives.   Where was the outrage from the left about that insanity???

Americans need to wake up and realize that before they side up against other Americans they had better take the time to walk up to those who hold different views and sit down and talk first. Perhaps by actually getting “to know” other people, we might be able to bridge the gaps and build a stronger nation, where all views from all people get heard at our political kitchen table.  And just maybe communities might get back to holding potluck dinners where everyone comes and shares a meal and gets to know his/her neighbors.

What an amazing concept that is – getting to know other people, up close and personal.  It just might revolutionize America;-)

3 Comments

Filed under Politics, Uncategorized

The Most Interesting Career: Housewife

Interesting column by Selwyn Duke:  “The Most Interesting Career: Housewife”.  Naturally, I quite agree, because the 18 years I spent as a homemaker were pretty darned interesting

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/02/the_most_interesting_career_housewife.html.

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Food for Thought

A Quiet Reflection

I came across this prayer, which fits my mood.  Whenever I am waiting for anything to happen, I get very impatient.    I remember when my husband deployed to war, I was always conflicted with feelings of wanting it to move faster, while dreading the terrible consequences  and at the same time yearning that one day war would no longer be.  Such is the hope of all military families.  Such a mixed bag of emotions.  Anyway, I thought this was a nice prayer.  Y’all have a nice day:)

A Prayer For Patience
Teach me Thy patience; still with Thee
In closer, dearer company;
In work that keeps faith sweet and strong;
In trust that triumphs over wrong;
In hope that sends a shining ray
Far down the future’s broadening way;
In peace that only Thou cast give —
With Thee, O Master, let me live!

– Washington Gladden

Leave a comment

Filed under Food for Thought

Here’s what I mean…….

This will be a short post following on my usual quotathon (yes, I coined a new word).  Everybody knows we have a Liberty Bell,, but do you know  the inscription that runs across the bell?  It’s an Old Testament verse that reads:

“PROCLAIM LIBERTY THROUGHOUT ALL THE LAND UNTO ALL THE INHABITANTS THEREOF LEV. XXV X.”

To read more about my name (here).  Have a nice day everyone!

Leave a comment

Filed under American History

Carville laments “Clinton haters”…… oh the hypocrisy

This Politico story (here) took me back to the Clinton Impeachment days, when there existed no sewer too foul for Carville and the other Clinton sewer rats to scurry through.    One can only hope that someday the  full  extent the  Clinton political machine went to silence anyone whom they perceived as a threat comes to light.  Oh, that would make one a conspiracy nut, in addition to a “hater”.  His line, “I mean, this is really an inhumane kind of discussion that these people were having. I have no idea what would lead them to do something like that. It’s sort of beyond me” , oh yes, James I have spent  all these years wondering what would lead people to behave like that too.  One can only hope that saying holds true:

“The truth will always out in the end.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/james-carville-hillary-clinton-haters-inhumane-85790.html#ixzz2HAzbOEcZ

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

Putin By A Mile

My grown children often bring off-the-wall topics to my door as topics of conversation.   Yesterday, my youngest daughter called me from a Southwest state where she lives with her soldier husband.  She chattered on about how  to get rid of their Christmas tree, since their garbage service doesn’t pick up trees.  She mentioned something in their local paper about a project of feeding Christmas trees to elephants, which prompted my response, ” I don’t think there’re any elephants where you live, perhaps a long lost camel might still be roaming about, but I doubt it”  Before I had filled in only the briefest details of Jefferson Davis’  US Army Camel Corps (here), she interrupted with “it says the horses were afraid of the camels, and she added, “that elephant story is in Berlin (here).   Such is the nature of discussions in the internet age.  Later one of my sons brought up a continuing discussion we’ve had for a long while now and finally I think he sees my point of view.  When I first mentioned to him that if  it came to picking Vladimir Putin vs Barack Obama for a hypothetical geopolitical competition , I’d pick Putin in a heartbeat.  When this conversation began a year or so ago, my son would list off all the “evils” that are Putin, such as the alleged polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko (here) and his KGB  past.  The following is my reasoning for picking Putin.

Often our policymakers and the media present foreign policy whereby it sounds like they are reading from the pages in a tabloid magazine , with all the details focusing  on gossipy details rather than on articulating some clear strategic interests.  I will never forget the highly sensationalized images of Saddam Hussein, that turned him into some larger-than-life nemesis rather than just an average tyrant with a military, whose ability was grossly exaggerated.   This same trend plays out often, where we seem to have no clue of who we’re dealing with.   Here are  some of the things I considered.  This all goes back to something I mentioned in a previous post that I think  knowing people always trumps knowing “about” people.  Years ago, I read a book that I had signed out from our local library that was Putin’s first lengthy interview with a western reporter.  His answers provided clues to how he thinks about being a leader of his country and what his hopes and aspirations are for Russia.  Luckily for us, most of the worlds leaders fall into the camp of rational actors.  I harbor doubts about say North Korea, but I thought Saddam was a rational actor, Qaddafi – rational actor, Ju Jintao – completely rational.  Now,  Hillary’s friend in Argentina, Christina Fernandez de Kirchner, makes me pause to wonder what the heck she’s thinking, but truthfully there are very few totally, what can only be called “batshit crazy” leaders.  But Putin is supremely rational and a geopolitical adversary worthy of respect.

Taking “a walk a mile in their shoes approach” puts us on firmer strategic ground than all this suspect psychobabble our assessments often contain. To understand Putin all it takes is to view Russia from where he stands.  George Friedman does this best (here).    While Putin’s actions do remain diametrically opposed to ours and most assuredly will produce future friction points, his actions make perfect strategic sense from the Russian viewpoint.  He aggressively has secured energy resources and engaged the US in nuclear arms wrangling where he certainly pushed and received the things that are advantageous to Russia.

Then we have Barack Obama where he refused to sign the Keystone Pipeline deal, he gave away too much in the nuclear arms dealing and he and Madame Secretary have made one after another terrible missteps, stabbing our allies in the back, while bowing and scraping to our adversaries.  He’s put us on the path to not only universal healthcare, but to being a universal third-rate bit player on the world stage.  If I were assessing how the strategic plane looks from others’ vantage points, I would wonder, “those stupid Americans, they don’t even have the national will to promote their own interests”.  And truly, any administration that utters a phrase like, “leading from behind” is worthy of only supreme contempt, in my opinion.

The ill-mannered TV reality urchin, Honey boo boo can keep Barack Obama, but as for me I’d pick Putin by a mile.

1 Comment

Filed under Foreign Policy