As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: military

Trump Attacked for Treatment of Military By Those Who Nearly Destroyed It

It’s hilarious, truly, to hear the whining from Democrats and the carping in the press about President Trump’s supposed offenses toward our servicemembers.

In recent days, he’s taken a boatload of you-know-what – let’s say, opprobrium – from the left for his treatment of the armed forces members serving on battlefields – and those buried beneath them.

Trump didn’t go visit an American World War I cemetery in France last weekend because of the rain. What a wimp! These boys fought in the trenches and Trump can’t deal with a few raindrops, crowed the left and their allies in the press. Rejected out of hand was his excuse that the Secret Service didn’t want him to shut down French roads on a long, traffic-snarling, and potentially insecure trip to the cemetery once his helicopter was grounded.

Obama Secretary of State John Kerry took to front lines of Twitter to sneer.

It’s great to hear Kerry sounding off while he and his boss presided over such damaging cuts to the military budget. Kerry celebrates our past warfighters even as he screwed our present soldiers, seamen, and aviators. Nice, John.

Trump has received growing criticism in recent days for failing the parachute in to visit with troops in combat zones on holidays, LIKE OBAMA DID! Obama got lots of great press for cutting turkey and slopping cranberry sauce on the plates of U.S. servicemembers. But while he was ladling out the trimmings, he was busy cutting the equipment and manpower they needed to fight and survive, and endangering their lives by restricting their rules of engagement.

If you look closely, you can find buried somewhere on the Washington Post website Tuesday, beneath a few articles slamming Trump, a piece titled, U.S. military edge has eroded to “a dangerous degree,” study for Congress finds.

Now I wonder who is responsible for that?

From the report:

The United States has lost its military edge to a dangerous degree and could potentially lose a war against China or Russia, according to a report released Wednesday by a bipartisan commission that Congress created to evaluate the Trump administration’s defense strategy . . .

The picture of the national security landscape that the 12-person commission sketched is a bleak one, in which an American military that has enjoyed undisputed dominance for decades is failing to receive the resources, innovation and prioritization its leaders need to outmuscle China and Russia in a race for military might reminiscent of the Cold War.

The military balance has shifted adversely for the United States in Europe, Asia and the Middle East, undermining the confidence of American allies and increasing the likelihood of military conflict, the commission found, after reviewing classified documents, receiving Pentagon briefings and interviewing top defense officials.

“The U.S. military could suffer unacceptably high casualties and loss of major capital assets in its next conflict. It might struggle to win, or perhaps lose, a war against China or Russia,” the report said. “The United States is particularly at risk of being overwhelmed should its military be forced to fight on two or more fronts simultaneously.”

Trump finally caved into demands by Democrats who had held military spending increases hostage to hiking up already-soaring domestic outlays, allowing both categories of spending to increase. Obama, the commander in chief, was never able to put the nation’s security above his pique at Republicans demanding a slowdown in domestic spending.

Because I think, in his heart, Obama doesn’t particularly like the military. He’s a peace, love and understanding guy raised by leftists in Hawaii.

Trump is trying to repair the damage he did. Because Obama denied the military what it needed. But he served a nice heap of stuffing.

Mattis: U.S. not Strong Enough to Deter Russia and China

Retired Gen. James Mattis said Thursday that he does not believe the U.S. military is strong enough to deter Russia and China, the Washington Examiner reported.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, asked Mattis if America has a strong enough military to be able to deter against those threats and he responded “No, sir.”

Pentagon Lifts Ban on Women in Combat

The Obama administration today ended the official ban on women engaging in front-line combat.

According to the New York Times:

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is lifting the military’s ban on women in combat, which will open up hundreds of thousands of additional front-line jobs to them, senior defense officials said on Wednesday.

The groundbreaking decision overturns a 1994 Pentagon rule that restricts women from many positions in the infantry and artillery, even though in reality women have found themselves in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, where more than 20,000 have served. As of last year, more than 800 women had been wounded in the two wars and more than 130 had died.

I know that many of you are current and former military. I’d be especially interested to hear what you think.

No Surprise: Obama Can’t Pronounce Khe Sanh

It spooks you a little when the commander in chief doesn’t seem to know much about military history, or the military itself.

Who can forget this treasure from February 2010. He’d already been president a year.

And now yesterday, we got this:

How do you, especially if you are running our armed forces, not recognize Khe Sanh and know how to pronounce it? Goodness, you need only have listened to Bruce Springsteen’s anti-America diatribe, “Born in the USA,” to have known how, since he mentions the Battle of Khe Sanh in the song.

Look at the veterans at the end of the video. They almost look like they’re scratching their heads. “Key-san? Like, ‘I left my keys on the counter?'”

Well, some may think I’m picking on Obama, but I think not.

I believe we have elected the first truly peacenik president. I don’t think he understands war, I don’t think he’s studied it, and I don’t think he believes it is particularly important or perceives its ramifications, beyond that it causes death and destruction.

I think his dovish sensibility is what caused him to conduct a half hearted “surge” in Afghanistan that featured an explicit alert to the Taliban about how long they would have to hang on before we left. I think it is what caused him to remove all our troops from Iraq before it was safe to bring them home. And I believe it’s what prompted him to “lead from behind” in Libya, resulting in a far longer war that caused more death and destruction than needed occur.

His policies may well lead to a reassertion of Taliban control over Afghanistan and the squandering of the victory won by George W. Bush.

Because the only thing he gets about war is that he wants to get out of it. Beyond caring for our soldiers, the military means nothing to him

And that’s why he can’t pronounce corpsman or Khe Sanh.

Obama Agrees to Hold National Security Hostage

A president has no higher responsibility than to safeguard the country. And yet, in his zest for a deal that allows him to not have to revisit the debt ceiling debate until after Election Day 2012, President Obama has signed onto an agreement that could destroy the nation’s ability to defend itself.

Obama, with his abject failure to tackle the deficit earlier in his term by proposing meaningful cuts to entitlement programs we cannot afford, has left spending on national security  – and our national security itself – open to perilous reduction.

And Republicans, with their absolute insistence on no tax increases, have as I predicted brought about a situation where Democrats get to dive into Defense and rip out huge chunks of it.

According to the White House, the deal would potentially impose $850 billion in cuts to the Defense Department – $350 billion now, and another $500 billion in automatic cuts if a special committee can’t agree on anything by the end of the year. Additional cuts would come out of other national security spending.

Obama earlier this year had proposed to cut $400 billion from Defense, a bad idea that has somehow gained general acceptance. Now the president is prepared to try to force the special committee to come up with a plan – and avoid the automatic cuts – by holding our national security hostage.

Here’s what incoming Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said last week about such defense cuts, before he knew they would be part of the debt ceiling deal:

Based on the difficulty of achieving the $400 billion cut, I believe $800 billion would be extraordinarily difficult and very high risk.

Forget what Dempsey says – as our president  and Congress evidently did. It doesn’t take an expert in military planning to understand that you don’t vastly decrease defense spending during a time of war and while overseas threats are growing.

We are at war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and with terrorism. Iran is on the cusp of possessing nuclear weapons – an intolerable situation that must be dealt with militarily – and is spreading its tentacles throughout the Middle East. Chinese defense industry workers are busy as elves before Christmas growing their country’s military might, which China increasingly seeks to project around the world. Russia is on the rebound and is acting far less friendly than we had hoped.

Osama Bin Laden is dead, but the threat of terrorism remains as the United States wages a protracted struggle against Islamism worldwide. Europe refuses to defend itself, and as nice as it would be to tell them to shove it, we need a functioning group of Western democracies and so will have to bear at least some of the responsibility for maintaining them in their happy lifestyle.

Many of us think our own happy lifestyles will go on forever, forgetting the blood sweet and tears that purchased our unparalleled comfort. But the world will remind us of the terrible price we must pay, as it did in the form of Bin Laden and Islamism following years of irresponsible defense cuts by Bill Clinton.

Obama Leads “One of the Greatest” Militaries Ever

Some may think this is a small thing, but I believe it is emblematic of a bigger thing.

Here’s a line from Obama’s remarks on Memorial Day, pointed out to me by Miranda, one of our readers. She saw it at Andrew Breitbart’s Big Peace.

It’s one of my highest honors, it is my most solemn responsibility as President, to serve as Commander-in-Chief of one of the finest fighting forces the world has ever known.

First of all, this is factually incorrect. It can be stated without question and without resort to excessive chauvinism that the U.S. military IS the finest fighting force ever, not one of them. It can destroy any other military currently or previously deployed. Assuming decisive leadership, that is.

So what could cause our president to make such a mistake? It reminds me of Obama’s now infamous resort to relativism early in his presidency on the question of whether America is the best place on earth.

I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.

This implies of course that the superiority of America is just one man’s opinion, and not a fact. I think it is a fact; others may disagree. But there really shouldn’t be much question in the mind of the man who is actually leading the country. Perhaps after two and a half years as president, there no longer is.

Now, for the commander in chief to have to qualify his opinion of the armed forces, when no qualification is necessary by anyone, shows . . . well, I’m not really a psychoanalyst.

I just know that the president needs to do some research.