Today, he died at the front… Today, what did you do, Mr. President, for freedom?
(Image and wording are edited from a WW II poster/flyer.)
Archive for the ‘Military’ category
Today…
October 12, 2009One for the U.S. Air Farce
July 8, 2009“Air Force Denies Request for Flyover at Christian Festival”
“A defense department official told FOX News the Air Force denied the request because it violates a Pentagon policy”
The following is typical government (yes, military) gobbledygook intended to be so non-specific that it can effectively/selectively be applied to any given situation or circumstance – even the tribute paid to a fallen fellow fighter pilot… you know the missing wingman formation flyover often done at the funeral of fallen military personnel.
A defense department official told FOX News the Air Force denied the request because it violates a Pentagon policy against supporting any event “that provides a selective benefit to any individual, group, or organization, including any religious or sectarian organization, ideological movement, political campaign or organization, or commercial enterprise, to include a shopping mall or motion picture promotion.“
“…provides a selective benefit to any individual, group, or organization…” That pretty much eliminates all entities that could possibly request a “flyover.” Political correctness at its finest! Isn’t liberalism grand?! …at least no individual, group or organization benefitted, I’ll give you that!
I mean no offense to the fine folks who wear or have worn the U.S. Air Force blues. The decision rendered by the Air Force representative, in this case, could just as easily have been rendered by the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marines, etc. My jab is directed toward the anti-anything-perceived-as-Christian environment that runaway political correctness has precipitated within all branches of our Christian-phobic government. Our founding fathers would be so proud of our progressiveness…
Decoration Day, 2009
May 24, 2009
Arlington National Cemetery
Monday, May 25th, is officially observed as Memorial Day, a day to remember our fallen heroes. Many of you, as I, remember Memorial Day as Decoration Day; a day to not only honor our fallen heroes, but to “decorate” their grave site. I cannot help but feel that the meaning of the day has been somewhat devalued. Decoration Day is not a day to honor our living veterans and active duty Soldiers, rather it is a day to reflect upon the price paid for our freedom and a day to honor those who paid that price.
May those who gave their life in defense of this nation rest peacefully in the arms of our Lord. May their living family members take pride in realizing there is no greater honor than to give one’s life for another. May all the rest of us not only bask in the freedom secured by their blood, but be immeasurably thankful for their ultimate sacrifice.
Indeed, freedom is not free.
Screw You, Mr. President!
March 17, 2009UPDATE: Hat tip to BB-Idaho… “White House Drops Plan to Bill Disabled Veterans’ Insurance for Care“
Not even in office sixty days yet and the rays of President Obama’s Socialism are shining through. He apparently has an insatiable appetite for taking from those who have earned merely to give to those who have not [earned]. His target at this juncture is America’s finest; her veterans of military service! He is incapable of seeing and appreciating the great personal sacrifice and hardships born by those who serve(d) and their families; he can only focus upon the dollar signs attached to the healthcare these brave people now unnecessarily consume… dollars (~$540M) that could fund the free healthcare for the crack-head or illegal alien who cannot afford health insurance. How frigging generous of him!!
According to ‘Yahoo News,’ American Legion Commander David K Rehbein met with the president today and came away quite upset. Here’s the article – go read it. Oh, Hell, here’s the gist of it…
WASHINGTON, March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The leader of the nation’s largest veterans organization says he is “deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
“It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. “He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.”
“…but refused to hear arguments about moral and government-approved obligations…” Sounds like a fare and open minded liberal to me… “You have, we want, you lose!” “Hope” and “Change;” that was the mantra, wasn’t it? I can only ‘hope’ this administration ‘changes’ in four years!
Barack Obama, a young man who has risen from basically nothing to the highest governmental office of this great nation by riding the freedom and liberty assured by the very people he now seeks to screw. How ironic! A man who, outside the office he presently holds, could not pass the background check necessary to be granted a ‘Secret’ security clearance – a clearance all officers in the military must hold – is now going to tap them and their loyal troops for funds to keep his scary Socialistic ‘programs’ going.
Personally, I am insulted immensely; but beyond that I am livid that our new Commander in Chief has such disdain for those who are willing to die at his behest. The man has no soul if he can unabashedly demand our veterans fund (out of their own pocket) portions of their medical care for injuries they incurred while in active military duty (aka service connected). This is not only unconscionable – it is despicable!
For those who might believe that service people are compensated handsomely for their hardships, I must say… phooey (aka BULLSHIT)! If Soldiers are paid handsomely or even adequately; why do we have military families who qualify for food stamp programs? True the pay improves with rank and tenure, but still lags well behind civilian counterparts. Part of the computed compensation includes such tangibles and intangibles as: free medical and dental care, commissary and Post Exchange privileges (which are not so much better than the chain establishments anymore), base housing (with the forfeiture of quarters allowance {usually more than the quarters are worth}) and retirement.
By way of education, let me explain as simply as I can the military pay system. It consists of: base pay, clothing allowance (for enlisted members only), quarters allowance and subsistence allowance. There are additional “Specialty or Hazardous Duty Pays’ for: flight status, diver status, combat pay, separation allowance (for ‘un-accompanied’ tours), submariner status, etc.) Twenty year retirement will net a Soldier 50 percent if his/her ‘base pay.’ A thirty retirement will net 75 percent of ‘base pay.’ All the other pays and allowances are not included in retirement computations. Neat, huh? Our military just doesn’t know how good they have it, right? Consider that government civil service receives one un-fragmented pay and they can receive up to 80 percent for retirement. Fair and equitable… you tell me.
If you still think military retirees have the life of Riley who receive just compensation and are just whiners who do not want to do their part… I challenge you to go walk in the shoes of most any retiree/veteran and then give up what you will rightfully feel you have earned. I challenge everyone who reads this post to correspond with the White House and express disapproval with this hair-brained scheme to bilk our veterans out of what they have sacrificially earned. Only an overpowering ground swell of disapproval will cause President Obama to abandon this plan.
“Troops Upset Over ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Repeal”
January 21, 2009So reads the headline of this ‘NewsMax’ article. From the article…
BAGHDAD — Many U.S. troops in Iraq were overjoyed to see President Barack Obama take his oath, but some were unhappy about one thing the Democrat has promised to do: permit gay and lesbian soldiers to serve openly.
Obama said during his campaign he opposed a 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible to work in the U.S. military, widely referred to as the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” rule.
This month, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, when asked whether the new administration planned to scrap the law, replied on the president’s transition website: “You don’t hear politicians give a one-word answer much. But it’s ‘yes’.”
The issue of homosexuals and lesbians being permitted to openly serve in the military remains a sensitive subject for our uniformed personnel. It is difficult for anyone who has not served or been closely associated with those who do serve or have served to understand the reluctance to accept homosexuals into the uniformed services.
Whether anyone wants to admit it (or not), a majority of Americans view homosexuality as deviate behavior. That majority may be slim among all of America, but that majority balloons within the ranks of the military. Why? Well, consider this: America Soldiers have for centuries been held to a higher moral standard than has the general public. Again, why? Because the average citizen does not want a bunch of trained killers to look like a bunch of killers. Soldiers have been held to a much higher standard of appearance and conduct, and to ensure they meet the higher standard they are subjected to a system of double jeopardy. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) applies in addition to any statues (laws) that apply to the conduct of our military.
That high standard of appearance and conduct generates less tolerance for deviate behavior; which is one of the reasons that comparable crime rates are lower to much lower in the uniformed services (versus the nation as a whole). Right wrong or indifferent, the majority of folks in the military still view homosexuality as deviate behavior and they do not want that behavior openly flaunted among their ranks. Permitting homosexuals to openly serve flies in the face of that demanded higher standard.
If our nation is a true democracy, then the new president should consider the opinions of his military personnel, versus a bunch of agenda pushing radicals who perceive some sort of injustice perpetuated toward them. Every time homosexuality is publically addressed it is basically told to sit down and be quiet. E.g. CA’s Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Acts, definition of marriage legislature, etc. It is the court system that continues to ignore the majority and advance the homosexual agenda.
I certainly do not agree with permitting openly gay people to serve in the military, not because I believe homosexuals cannot cut the mustard; rather I believe it flies in the face of discipline and the maintenance of higher moral standards among our troops. For that reason, I hope President Obama will at least study and take under advisement the council of senior military leaders. Although he has the power, to unilaterally decree that homosexuals are now free to openly serve in our military may have consequences that our president has not considered.
“Democrats seek criminal probe of Bush ‘abuses’”
January 15, 2009So reads the title of of this ‘myway’ article.
WASHINGTON (AP) – The incoming Obama administration should launch a criminal investigation of Bush administration officials to see whether they broke the law in the name of national security, a House Democratic report said Tuesday. President-elect Barack Obama has been more cautious on the issue and has not endorsed such a recommendation.
Along with the criminal probe, the report called for a Sept. 11-style commission with subpoena power, to gather facts and make recommendations on preventing misuse of power, according to the report by the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee.
The report covers Bush administration policies that Democrats have protested for some time. Among them: interrogation of foreign detainees, warrantless wiretaps, retribution against critics, manipulation of intelligence and political dismissals of U.S. attorneys.
“Abuses,” very nice word selection… conjures up a prejudice of indisputable guilt; even before any [called for] investigation. I suppose discovery and trial are totally unnecessary… just send the guilty bastards to jail, right? Such open minded liberalism… basically the same liberalism that triggered our revolting from the king’s rule – I think not!
I am so sick of hearing and reading the rhetoric of sniveling whining-assed do-nothings that I could just puke! Criticism is too damned easy – get your sorry ass out into the action and see if your view doesn’t change! Criticizing President Bush for protecting this country to the utmost of his abilities given the resources at his disposal is arm chair quarterbacking at its finest. The allegations are smoke screens intended to distract our attention.
The liberal media and pundits have relentlessly hammered President Bush, making him the scapegoat for all the ills this country has suffered for the last century (or so it would seem). His cowboy arrogance is responsible for 911… and off to the races we go with allegations. He was personally at fault for gasoline costing nearly $4.00 per gallon at one time; so where is the credit for $1.69 per gallon prices? Get over it already! I do not agree with everything President Bush did or tried to do; but I certainly do not condemn him for doing what he believed was right in defense of this nation.
I do fault this administration’s knuckling under to the whiny-assed liberal objections to allowing our military commanders full authority to make every battle, every skirmish a victory. “Proportional response” is a death sentence for our own Soldiers. Right, wrong or indifferent; in violent confrontations (aka war) three is no conflict resolution without a clear winner and a totally defeated loser. Korea, Vietnam, and Somalia are shining examples of the outcomes of no commitment to victory.
Committing the precious lives of our Soldiers to war demands that the nation unequivocally support them in attaining unconditional victory; they deserve nothing less. They must be given the latitude to fight the battle in such a way that destroys the enemy and preserves as many of our Soldiers’ lives as possible. If the enemy employs tactics that cause collateral casualties the fault lays at the feet of the enemy – not our Soldiers. If you are not willing to don full combat gear, march on patrol, and exercise undue restraint when you are deliberately shot at, then do not demand such unnatural combat behavior from our Soldiers!
If [as a nation] we expect to be world leaders we must be powerful beyond challenge and we must exhibit a will to use that power by dispatching violent enemies immediately and without remorse. There is no fear of the meanest SOB in the valley when it is known peaceful friendship is the SOB’s preference. However, it must also be excruciatingly clear to those who mean us harm that their days are finitely numbered. Any enemy must know that we will not tolerate cowardly attacks upon noncombatant civilians without an overwhelming response.
As for the objections to the enemy interrogation techniques that we employ to maintain our national security, I say, “Stay the course!” Those who believe your peaceful next door neighbor was secreted away to Gitmo might want to read this. The Gitmo detainees are dangerous people who sincerely want to kill you and me. If they have knowledge of future ops then I want my government to do what is necessary to prevent that operation from occurring – if that means water-boarding, so be it… if it means placing women’s panties on their head, so be it. To the best of my knowledge, we have not delved in the al Qaida practices employed on: Nick Berg, PFC Kristian Menchaca, PFC Thomas Tucker, Daniel Pearl, and many more. If you don’t like the way the dogs are protecting you, become a dog and make changes from within – but don’t offhandedly condemn their actions without even considering their mission is to protect your sorry ass!
Obama’s “change” is WRONG for America!
September 7, 2008
Hat tip to Gayle of ‘Dragon Lady’s Den.’
Be a Man Mr. Murtha!
June 20, 2008Via ‘FoxNews:’ Haditha charges dropped against top Marine officer
Via the ‘Drudge Report:’ Haditha Marine prepares to sue Murtha over smear
Read them both; you won’t find these articles spotlighted in any of the ‘big’ MSM outlets.
Personally, I hope LTC Chessani succeeds in suing ex-Marine turned congressman John “Jack” Murtha. Throwing Marines under the political bus to score points is deplorable; throwing Marines under the political bus, who acted as trained in real combat, is despicable. If Murtha is a man, he should stand accountable by accepting responsibility for his comments; which I believe fanned the firestorm of legal proceedings against the accused Marines. (Unless you have experienced it, you cannot believe the pressure a congressman can bring to bear on the military which usually results in over-reaction.) However, I shall not hold my breath awaiting Murtha’s acknowledgement of being in gross error.
Absolute power absolutely corrupts and Murtha is a shining example. He willing smeared [fellow] Marines with his “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” remark. With malicious forethought he used Marines, who in real combat experienced the detonation of an IED and were engagement by small arms fire, to score political points amongst his anti-war political cronies. Of all politicians to besmirch the Corps, it had to be an ex-Marine; one who had achieved the rank of Colonel, no less. (For clarity sake the term ex-Marine is insulting; the Corps motto is, “Once a Marine, always a Marine.” To be labeled an ex-Marine likens to being excommunicated from the Corps.)
I hope and pray that Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich is also exonerated of any wrong doing. Combat demands split-second decisions. When IEDs are going off and bullets are fired at you, you respond as trained – counter attack. There is no time within which to sort out and understand that the engaging enemy has purposely shielded himself with civilians. Since our current enemy wears no uniform; distinguishing him from civilian shields is near impossible. To unfoundedly judge our combatant military as ‘killers,’ because they respond as trained, is exemplified hypocrisy; and yet those hypocrites claim to ‘support’ our military.
Be a man, John “Jack” Murtha; do the right thing!
Does the Constitution Apply to U.S. Soldiers?
May 20, 2008With regards to freedom of speech, the answer is a resounding, “No!” Our heroes in uniform live in a system of double jeopardy in some circumstances and no rights in other [circumstances]. Via ‘The Drudge Report’ comes this piece, “US military: soldier shot at Quran for practice,” written by Kim Gamel and appearing in “MyWay News.’ From the article…
BAGHDAD (AP) – An American soldier used a Quran, the Islamic holy book, for target practice in a predominantly Sunni area west of Baghdad, prompting an apology from the U.S. military, a spokesman said Sunday.
…
Iraqi police found the bullet-riddled Quran with graffiti inside the cover on a small-arms range near a police station in Radwaniyah, a former insurgent stronghold west of Baghdad, U.S. military spokesman Col. Bill Buckner said in an e-mailed response to a query.
American commanders then launched an inquiry that led to disciplinary action against the soldier, who has been removed from Iraq, Buckner said.
The shooting, which occurred May 9 and was discovered two days later, threatened to further strain relations between the Americans and Sunni allies who have joined forces with them against al-Qaida in Iraq in Radwaniyah and other areas.
The Association of Muslim Scholars, a Sunni group, condemned the shooting of the Quran, calling it “a hideous act against the book of almighty God and the constitution of the nation and the source of its glory and dignity.”
The incident was first reported by CNN, which broadcast a ceremony at which the top American commander in Baghdad apologized to tribal leaders in Radwaniyah. The military confirmed the details in an e-mailed response to a query.
“I come before you here seeking your forgiveness,” Maj. Gen. Jeffery Hammond was quoted as saying. “In the most humble manner I look in your eyes today and I say please forgive me and my soldiers.”
The commander also read a letter of apology by the shooter, and another military official kissed a Quran and presented it to the tribal leaders, according to CNN.
The military statement called the incident “serious and deeply troubling” but stressed it was the result of one soldier’s actions and “not representative of the professionalism of our soldiers or the respect they have for all faiths.”
First of all, the bit about free speech in our Constitution does not apply to American Soldiers; so get that thought out of your head right now. I doubt seriously if the ACLU would represent this Soldier because he shot the Qur’an, not the Holy Bible.
I am personally embarrassed that Major General Hammond would be required to grovel before these people apologizing for a soldier shooting the book that justifies the actions taken against Nick Berg, Private Thomas Tucker and Private Kristian Menchaca to name but a few. I would issue a statement indicating an apology might be considered after the Imams and Clerics started apologizing for the 11,000-plus acts of terror that Islam has visited upon the world (including their own believers).
Although apologizing may seem like the right thing to do (to pansy-assed warm-and-fuzzy liberals), it clearly sends a message of weakness to our radical Islamic neighbors, who by the way, refuse to play nicely. In deed, we are clearly dancing to the music of the Devil in this instance. The meanest SOB in the fight emerges as the victor, not Mr Rogers! Right now it appears the radical Islamists have the upper hand in meanness. We didn’t defeat Tojo by being nice; we didn’t defeat Gerry by being nice; we did what had to be done to take away their will to continue to wage war against us. We knocked their manhood in the dirt and stomped on it with spiked boots! Like it or not, that is the way a war is won – not by applying “measured response,” or avoiding “collateral damage,” but by overwhelming the enemy with force and destruction; removing their will to wage war against us.
So if you want to win this war, John McCain; if you want to win this war, Barrack Obama; if you want to win this war, Hillary Clinton; if you want to win this war, Nancy Pelosi; (oops, my bad, those last three don’t want to win the war – they just want to get along…) you’re going to have to be the meanest SOB in the fight. Only when radical Islamist jihadists are placed on the endangered species list will they slow down their quest to annihilate the West (that would be US). Cow-towing to Imams by groveling over a Soldier using the Qur’an for target practice should not be in the war winning scenario, period! IMHO, if the Soldier missed hitting the Qur’an with more than 20 percent of the rounds he fired, then he should be sent to remedial marksmanship, otherwise there should be no action taken.
As a Soldier who has waged war (on more than one occasion), I adamantly oppose war; because, it is the Soldier who ultimately pays the price demanded by the degeneration of civilized international (or in this case inter-theological) relations. That said; I do believe in us nationally thwarting those who would remove our personal liberties – those same liberties our forefathers fought and died to establish. I recognize that freedom is not free and that from time to time it requires Soldiers’ blood to continue to flourish (how morally sad that is). This is one of those times when we have been dragged into a fight that we, once again, did not start; yet we must end it victoriously, or be prepared to fight it for another hundred years.
As an old Soldier, I am not willing to send a message to the resting souls of 4,000 American Soldiers who gave their all in this war against radical Islam that their sacrifice was in vain; that we were not serious about thwarting future radical Islamist attacks against us and our personal liberties. I advocate getting extremely mean and concluding this war victoriously!
I don’t like it either…, but
March 2, 2008First the new presidential VH-71 helicopter was awarded to Lockheed Martin who pimped the AgustaWestland EH-101, a British made helicopter, making Sikorsky a sore looser.
Next the U.S. Army selected the European Aeronautic Defense Systems (EADS) German made EC-145 entrant as it new Light Utility Helicopter, the UH-72A.
Now, the USAF has awarded its lucrative new in-air refueler aircraft, the KC-45, to the Northrop Grumman/EADS consortium for the French made Airbus 330, leaving Boeing with egg all over its face.
Some GOP lawmakers are supposedly beside themselves with the idea that the USAF would award the new air tanker contract to the French versus our own Boeing Aircraft Corporation. Well, perhaps if Boeing had pitched a newer platform it might have been selected; however, they were arrogant enough to pitch their 767. The 767 is at the end of its commercial production life; winning the KC-45 program would have extended the 767 line for a number of more years. Unfortunately the USAF would have been buying obsolescence rather than a platform that was still viable in the commercial world. With the 767, spares (spare repair parts) could have become an immediate problem at the completion of the procurement cycle. Had Boeing pitched their 777 perhaps they would have won the contract, who knows?
Look, no one is any more pro-American made than I am; I even buy huge Ford vehicles and will willingly pay more for a product that is “made in America.” It galls me to no end to think that our defense products, especially weapons platforms, would be procured form sources outside the US; but I also expect our own businesses to be honest and put forth their best product, not their leftovers. There is a part of me that hopes the KC-45 program is somehow turned around so that Boeing wins (with an aircraft other than the 767), and yet, there is another part of me that hopes Boeing learns a lesson by having the shaft they offered our government shoved up their own a$$.
Perhaps now Boeing will begin to believe the old adage, “What goes around, comes around.” Should Boeing’s protest fall short, they will have let America down to a certain degree, but not to the extent that they would have screwed America’s defenders by selling them an inferior product.
Old Soldier 