“… according to American intelligence estimates. The conservative side of the estimate, at more than 7,000 Russian troop deaths, is greater than the number of American troops killed over 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. It is a staggering number amassed in just three weeks of fighting, American officials say, with implications for the combat effectiveness of Russian units, including soldiers in tank formations. Pentagon officials say a 10 percent casualty rate, including dead and wounded, for a single unit renders it unable to carry out combat-related tasks…. ‘Losses like this affect morale and unit cohesion, especially since these soldiers don’t understand why they’re fighting,’ said Evelyn Farkas, the top Pentagon official for Russia and Ukraine during the Obama administration… ‘It is stunning, and the Russians haven’t even gotten to the worst of it, when they hit urban combat in the cities,’ [said] Representative Jason Crow, Democrat of Colorado….”
Category: Military
Quip O’ The Day
“Hope we spend more time on propulsion than on pronouns.”
Moon battle: New Space Force plans raise fears over militarizing the lunar surface.
The battle is on for the moon.
The U.S. military is investing in new technologies to build large structures on the lunar surface. It’s designing a spy satellite to orbit the moon. And it just announced plans for a surveillance network — what it calls a “highway patrol” — for the vast domain between Earth’s orbit and the moon, known as cislunar space. Top military strategists and documents, meanwhile, now consistently refer to this region as a new realm of operations.
The funding is also starting to flow. The government spending bill passed by Congress this week added $61 million for the military to pursue projects in cislunar space.
“That’s basically the first significant chunk of money that we’re putting towards this,” said Space Force Col. Eric Felt, commander of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico.
He likened it to “putting the toe into the water, but we think this is an important potential future tech area.”
“From the Space Force’s perspective,” he added, “they don’t know how big of a deal this is going to be in the future, but it could be a big deal.”
The Pentagon maintains these new pursuits, all launched since the creation of the Space Force three years ago, are primarily designed to help secure a growing private space economy and safeguard civilian astronauts. In all, the newest branch believes nation-states and commercial companies will fly nearly 100 missions — both crewed and uncrewed — to the moon between now and 2030.
But space policy and security experts also fear that the armed forces could outstrip NASA in space exploration and thrust what has largely been a peaceful competition into a military contest.
Aaron Boley, co-director of Outer Space Institute at the University of British Columbia, says the Pentagon already plays an outsized role in Earth orbit, where satellites are used to support military operations and global security.
“But once we move to the moon, this should really be driven by civilian organizations to ensure that peaceful purposes are maintained,” he said.
Some leading military strategists, however, say there is simply too much at stake in the space race to leave it to civilians, and that the Pentagon will likely be compelled to take on a bigger role.
China’s space agency has made significant strides in its plan to develop the moon, including landing the first spacecraft on the south pole in 2019. It also plans at least three additional robotic missions, beginning in 2024, to build a lunar base, with missions involving taikonauts to follow.
Proponents for a more muscular U.S. military say they fear China cannot be trusted to pursue only peaceful aims and could use its space program for both economic and military advantage, including a new partnership with Russia to build a moon base.
“Power abhors a vacuum,” said Peter Garretson, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel and space strategist who is now a senior fellow in defense studies at the American Foreign Policy Council. “You should expect that other actors will act in ways that favor their interests to the exclusion of others.”
“I think we all hope that NASA will rise to the occasion again and be able to perform that traditional exploration role,” he added. “But with the slipping of budgets and slipping the timelines, I think there is some concern as to whether or not NASA is scaling its efforts and will be able to rise to the occasion.”
The Space Force maintains it is interested only in developing the means for “domain awareness,” not exploration.
BLUF:
My guess is that the Russian infantry massing around Kiev isn’t even going to enter the city. They know what sort of losses they’d take in urban combat; there’s no reason to think they could outfight the Ukrainians on their own streets. More likely is that they’re going to lay siege to the capital a la Mariupol and wait for a surrender. The outcome of the war may turn on whether Russia is capable of doing that successfully or whether Ukrainian troops outside the city can mount the sort of counteroffensive described above to break the siege. If they can, the Russians will be faced with a scenario in which they can neither starve the Ukrainians into submission nor overpower them in combat. Maybe that’s when Fukuyama’s prediction of morale “vaporizing” comes true.
But it’s also when things would get really dangerous.
Is Russia going to lose?
One way to answer the question in the headline is “It already has.” Even to a rank amateur like me, it was clear by *day three* that Putin was facing a strategic debacle. He misjudged Ukraine’s desire and ability to resist, he misjudged the strength of his military, and he misjudged the west’s willingness to paralyze Russia’s economy with sanctions. “No Russian leader since Tsar Nicholas II has done his country so much harm, so fast, as Vladimir Putin,” David Frum tweeted a few days ago, marveling at how diminished Russian power has been by Putin’s folly in the span of a few weeks.
Nothing that happens in Ukraine from this point will undo that. It’s a fiasco.
But a strategic defeat is distinct from defeat on the battlefield. Even optimists have assumed that Russia would eventually brute-force its way to controlling Kiev and other major Ukrainian cities. The “real” fight for Ukraine would come after that when Russia’s occupying forces and Ukraine’s insurgency would wage a war of attrition. Eventually Moscow would run out of patience and withdraw, but “eventually” could take months. Years. Decades, conceivably.
But what if the optimists were too pessimistic? What if Russia is facing near-term defeat on the battlefield as well?
Realistically, there are three ways in which the Russian army might lose:
“Appear strong when you are weak.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
What If Everyone Is Wrong About The Russian Military?
As a kid, the only thing close to as tough as the United States military was those communist bastards they were protecting us from. We were tougher, of course, but since we were the good guys we didn’t even consider invading them. Should they invade us, which we knew they wanted to do, we’d be ready to kick some commie ass! At least, that’s what we told ourselves, mostly to avoid thinking about the complete, total and world-wide nuclear annulation. Times have changed, and so has the Russian military…or has it?
We always assumed they were as strong militarily as we were, but mostly because of parades and their size. Everyone has seen the footage of battalions marching through Red Square, huge intercontinental ballistic missiles rolling along with them in a sea of soldiers and tanks. They sure projected strength and readiness. But maybe they weren’t ready?
All we really had to go on was the Soviet Union’s word, their propaganda videos, and the fact that they could push around so small countries. But maybe they were a super-power based solely on their huge nuclear arsenal?
We never really saw the Soviets take on another organized military, their power was largely acquired through propping up dictators and intimidation – they were very good at disappearing the disloyal and beating up the weak.
We were told they were strong, minus the nukes, mostly because they were big, and that assumption continues to this day. But their actions in Ukraine are not that of a world-class military, not by a long-shot. It’s more like a drunken douchebag indiscriminately launching rockets, quite possibly because they lack anything with precision. We can drop a missile down a chimney with the accuracy of Santa Claus, but what if the Russians couldn’t even hit a brick in a brick factory?
Remember what we were told about the Republican Guard in Iraq? They were the “best of the best.” Pick your Gulf War, when they started the story was about how we’d have no real issues with the regular Iraqi troops, but when we encountered the Republican Guard things would get hairy. They never did. The Republican Guard was as insignificant as the regular army. Both times the people in charge were completely wrong about what we were up against, the RG folded like a cheap tent. Could history be repeating itself with Russia?
Putin going to war in Ukraine risked disclosing his military’s real abilities ……and limitations. The Russian Army isn’t a ‘paper tiger’ but it turns out to not be anything close to ‘as advertised’. Of course, that’s standard military procedure. ‘The enemy will only tell you where he is strong.’
BLUF:
For Washington, this display of Russian military weakness should be comforting in terms of Moscow’s true military threat to Europe. At the same time though, it exposes the need for a different national security strategy, one that doesn’t imagine Russia as a military equal, and one that doesn’t push Vladimir Putin’s back against a wall.
Shocking Lessons U.S. Military Leaders Learned by Watching Putin’s Invasion.
Russia’s military is weak and backwards.
Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine produced this paradigm-shifting surprise—one that should transform the West’s view of Russia’s prowess, the threat that the country represents, and the Kremlin’s future in the global arena.
Ukrainian tanks move on a road before an attack in Lugansk region on February 26, 2022 .ANATOLII STEPANOV/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
After just one day of fighting, Russia’s ground force lost most of its initial momentum, undermined by shortages of fuel, ammunition and even food, but also because of a poorly trained and led force. Russia began to compensate for the weaknesses of its land army with more long-range air, missile and artillery strikes. And President Putin resorted to a nuclear threat—a reaction, U.S. military experts say, to the failure of Moscow’s conventional forces to make quick progress on the ground.
Other military observers are flabbergasted that a Russian invasion force, fully prepared and operating from Russian soil, has been able to move just tens of miles into an adjoining country. One retired U.S. Army general told Newsweek in an email: “We know that Russia has a plodding army and that Russian military force has always been a blunt instrument, but why risk the antipathy of the entire planet if you have no prospect of achieving even minimal gains.” The Army general believes that the only explanation is that the Kremlin overestimated its own forces.
“I believe that at the heart of Russian military thinking is how Marshall Zhukov marched across Eastern Europe to Berlin,” a former high-level CIA official told Newsweek in an interview. Zhukov’s orders were to “line up the artillery and … flatten everything ahead of you,” he says. “‘Then send in the peasant Army to kill or rape anyone left alive.’ Subtle the Russians are not.”
In the short term, Russia’s military failures in Ukraine increase the threat of escalation, including the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons. But in the longer term, if escalation doesn’t worsen and the Ukrainian conflict can be contained, Russian conventional military weakness upends many assumptions that geopolitical strategists—even those inside the U.S. government—make about Russia as a military threat.
#BREAKING: Watch crash of Mi-8MTV-5 transport helicopters of #RussianAirForce at #Dniper river in North of #Kiev. As you can see, they were flying too low to avoid getting hit by the Stinger MANPAD. Even one of them collided with water but went up again. They lost two helicipters pic.twitter.com/MlO45itlBF
— Babak Taghvaee – Μπάπακ Τακβαίε – بابک تقوایی (@BabakTaghvaee) March 1, 2022
These are very easy to use. We teach 17-18 year old kids how. And it was purposefully designed to operate like an arcade game.
St. Javelin? Trump’s gift to Ukraine
This image of a saint wielding an FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile has become an iconic symbol of the Ukrainian resistance to the Russian invasion. When you see video of destroyed Russian tanks and armored personnel carriers, chances are it was a Javelin that did the damage.
The Javelin is quite a sophisticated weapon, so much so that a single missile costs more than $80,000. It is a “fire-and-forget” weapon; once the target is acquired through the sighting system, the missile locks onto the target and as soon as it is fired, the crew can run for cover or change their position. However, because of the missile’s “soft launch” technology, the location of the Javelin crew is not revealed to the enemy forces, who may not even know what hit them, much less where it came from. Besides which, when one of your tanks gets blown up by an armor-piercing missile, your first thought is probably, “Let’s get the hell out of here,” rather than attempting to mount a counterattack.
You’ve seen news about the Russians being “bogged down” because of “unexpectedly” strong Ukrainian opposition? St. Javelin, baby!
The Javelins were, yes, acquired by Ukraine from our former, competent, president. And yes, to be fair, the Biden administration has also sent Javelins and other aid
A US military aid package worth $60 million arrived in Ukraine on June 16, which included Javelin anti-tank missiles and other military aid. Another $350 million in military assistance was greenlit by US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken today.
“We are not confirming quantities, just that we have supplied Javelins and other lethal and non-lethal security assistance,” said an Office of the Secretary of Defense representative in an email response to Coffee or Die Magazine. The representative would not comment on quantities.
So, SloJoe is living is his own little delusional dream world where he can do no wrong and it’s everyone else’s fault. And he even can’t remember which country he’s talking about. Ukraine..errr…Iraq…errr….Afghanistan…
Biden says he rejects findings of Army report on Afghanistan
They made movie(s) about this.
A Black Hawk helicopter flew for the first time without pilots.
February has already been a big month for autonomous flight. For the first time, this past Saturday, and then again on Monday, a specially equipped Black Hawk helicopter flew without a single human on board. The computer-piloted aircraft was being tested as part of a DARPA program called Alias, and the tests took place out of Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
The retrofitted whirlybird was controlled by a Sikorsky-made autonomy system. As part of that system, the helicopter has a switch on board that allows the aviators to indicate whether two pilots, one pilot, or zero pilots will be operating the chopper. This was the first time that a Black Hawk was sent into the air with the no-pilots option, so that the computer system was handling all the controls. While these were just test flights, they hint at a future in which the Army could potentially send an autonomous helicopter on a dangerous rescue mission—and have no one on board it at all.
US Defense Database DMED Tracked Exploding Number of Vaccine-Related Injuries
When US Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) held a hearing on vaccine safety in January this year, a number of DOD whistleblowers stepped forward with alarming data. They shared data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) which tracks every illness of military members.
The purpose of gathering such data is expressly to spot adverse health trends that could affect combat readiness. It is therefore accurate, complete and designed for early detection.
Lawyer Thomas Renz reported on five years of data during the hearing which showed an alarming rise in medical problems related to Covid vaccines. The whistleblowers stepped forward because their superiors had ignored the problem. Renz plans to pursue the matter in a US federal court.
Arguably, the DMED is the best epidemiological database in the world and since neither Pfizer nor Moderna is able to provide better data, this upward trend related to vaccine injury must be cause for great concern.
In a declaration under penalty of perjury, the three military physicians Samuel Sigoloff, Peter Chambers, and Theresa Long, exposed the 300 percent increase in DMED codes registered for miscarriages in the military in 2021 over the five-year average. The five-year average has been 1499 codes for miscarriages per year, but during the first 10 months of 2021, it shot up to 4 182.
The same trend was seen in spiking cancer cases, from a five-year average of 38 700 per year to 114 645 in the first 11 months of 2021, coinciding with the vaccine. And reported neurological disorders increased by an incredible 1000 percent.
BLUF:
As Shijian-21’s recent actions demonstrate, there is a pressing need for the United States to be able to defend its assets in distant orbit. It’s likely we could see similar shows of force in the near term as Space Force responds to other nations’ demonstrations of “killer” satellite capabilities.
A Chinese Satellite Just Grappled Another And Pulled It Out Of Orbit.
When I made my last career move to the Newport News areas back in late ’09, actual construction on the Ford was just beginning.
12+ years later………….
The Navy’s costliest warship finally has all the elevators needed to lift bombs from below its deck so it can deploy on its first operational patrol — more than four and a half years after delivery.
The service has announced that the 11th and final Advanced Weapons Elevator is in place on the $13.3 billion USS Gerald R. Ford and the aircraft carrier is ready for training and operations.
“This is a significant milestone for the Navy, ship and her crew,” Rear Admiral James Downey, the Navy’s program executive officer for aircraft carriers, said in a statement. “We now have the entire system to operate and train with.” He said the service and the prime contractor, Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc., used “hundreds of craftsmen, technicians and engineers, working around the clock –through multiple underway and holiday periods — to get these advanced systems on line and operational.”
The Navy took delivery of the first in the Ford class of carriers in May 2017, praising the “newest, most capable, most advanced warship” and saying it was “expected to be operational in 2020.” The service didn’t disclose that none of the 11 elevators were operational, much less installed, until Bloomberg News reported the problem in November 2018.
“I recognize the extraordinary effort that it has taken to finish all 11 of these elevators, but this effort should not have been necessary,” Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the most vocal congressional critic of the Navy on the issue, said in a statement.
The carrier ultimately was delivered “six years late and $2.8 billion over budget,” Inhofe said.
The delay to fix the elevators and resolve other issues “has lengthened a period during which the Navy is attempting to maintain policy maker-desired levels of carrier forward deployments with its 10 other carriers,” the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said in a report this month.
Inhofe put it more bluntly. He said the delay has forced other ships and crews to deploy “longer and more often,” as well as causing gaps in the Navy’s global “presence when no carrier could deploy, at a time when naval presence and capability could not be more critical for our national security.”
Perhaps the only positive outcome of the weapons elevator delays is “development of what the Navy and the shipyard should have had from the very beginning — a Ford-class plan for the development, building, installation and operational training” that’s now needed to avoid such mistakes on the second ship in the four-vessel class, the USS John F. Kennedy, said Mike Fabey, author of “Heavy Metal: The Hard Days and Nights of the Shipyard Workers Who Build America’s Supercarriers.”
A U.S. Navy combat ship is stranded in Guantánamo Bay with a virus outbreak.
A Navy combat ship deployed to intercept drug trafficking in the Caribbean and East Pacific is stuck in the port at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, with a coronavirus outbreak among its fully vaccinated crew.
‘Water water everywhere and not a drop to drink’……….
US Navy Seizes 1,400 AK-47s, Over 226K Rounds Of Ammunition From Iranian Ship
The U.S. Navy seized over 1,400 AK-47 rifles and 226,600 rounds of ammunition from an Iranian ship bound for Yemen in the North Arabian Sea, the State Department reported.
The seizure occurred on Dec. 20 when U.S. Naval forces identified a stateless fishing vessel, according to the State Department.
U.S. Naval Forces Central Command said the vessel was traveling along a route previously used by smugglers who were trafficking weapons to the Houthis in Yemen in violation of U.N. Security Council Resolutions and U.S. sanctions.
BLUF:
The intentionally muddy writing shouldn’t obscure that this is a plan for a military coup. The Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S. Code § 1385, prevents the military from acting as a police force within the U.S. under all but the most limited of circumstances. If the Defense Department is unilaterally planning to take over “any agency that works hand in hand with the military” to ensure progressives remain in power if the next election is contested, then our modern military will have recast itself in the mold of a Third World military junta.
Three Retired Generals Loudly Demand A Military Coup In 2024
Democrats claim that democracy is under attack in America and Democrats must act decisively to protect it. They’ve been trying to end the filibuster, nationalize voting, and pack the Supreme Court. The most ominous “fix,” which hinges on the myth of a “January 6 Insurrection,” sees retired generals argue that the military must purge the ranks of Trump supporters and prepare for a military coup to block a future contested election. This is unconstitutional, illegal, and spells the end of American democracy.
Victor Davis Hanson notes that leftists are loudly worrying about democracy’s end while ignoring all they’ve done to end democracy, such as bringing in millions of illegal aliens, many of whom are being given the vote; destroying centuries-old governing traditions such as the filibuster; packing the court; ending the Electoral College; and more.
If Democrats can kill the Senate filibuster (and Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema is the only thing stopping them, not the craven Senator Mitch McConnell), they have the unfettered ability to enshrine vote fraud and pack the Supreme Court. The latter move spells the final—and deeply unconstitutional—progressive rewrite of our Constitution, and ends our constitutional republic.
The wild card in all of this, though, is what would the military do if, in fact, the progressives were able to achieve these goals (or even if they weren’t). Three retired officers have signaled that they want to purge the military of Trump supporters, and then plan a takeover of the military and related federal agencies that coordinate with the military to effect a coup in 2024. Considering the current state of the Pentagon, this may be more than a progressive fantasy.
Thirty years ago, when I was a U.S. Army Infantry Officer, our military was unquestionably a politically neutral, colorblind institution. It was the single most well-integrated institution in our nation and, indeed, was the primary engine integrating our nation. But progressives have done everything they can to turn the military into a dysfunctional machine warped by racial, sexual, and gender identity divisions. This began with Obama, who injected the toxic myth of white supremacy and the tenets of critical race theory.
In 2019, Kyle Smith explained:
A curious thing happened in the second half of the Obama era: The commander-in-chief began viewing the military less as an entity designed to destroy enemies but [sic] a tool with which to achieve progressive goals. Warriors were turned into social-justice warriors. Men and women with risible-to-nonexistent military records were made heads of the services. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus (who had logged all of two years’ service as a junior officer) named ships after Cesar Chavez and Harvey Milk.
Obama also purged the military of any flag rank officer not reliably progressive, a process Andrea Widburg document at her blog and at American Thinker (here and here). Those who remain today are nothing but progressive race hustlers, such as the odious Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, or traitorous politicians in uniform, such as General Mark “white rage” Milley.
Enter now three retired U.S. Army Generals: Major Generals Paul D. Eaton and Antonio M. Taguba and Brigadier General Steven M. Anderson (“the Three”). In a Washington Post opinion piece, “3 retired generals: The military must prepare now for a 2024 insurrection,” they contend that events in 2020 revealed an incipient military coup and that, to save our nation, the U.S. military must act preemptively—radically and unilaterally. What they write should frighten every American.
I’m afraid it’s going to take a serious war with a ‘peer opponent’ (read that as Russia and/or China) with massive amounts of American blood spilled, to get these morons, and their idiotic ‘woke’ mentality excised from the military, along with the politicians who thought up this BS.
Vice Chair JCOS Nominee Cool With Gender Advisers
The top brass of the United States Military are all genuinely committed to never winning another war, ever again. This will not surprise those of us who have been alive long enough to remember the incompetent and deadly Afghanistan withdrawal last August. Still, it is jarring to hear a Navy Flag Officer, nominated to be the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, say that “gender advisers” for combat troops are critical to mission success.
“Gender advisers” come from the 2017 Women, Peace and Security Act passed by the House and Senate and signed by President Donald Trump (I am weeping openly just typing that).
This bill expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the United States should be a global leader in promoting the participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution and post-conflict relief and recovery efforts; (2) the political participation and leadership of women in fragile environments, particularly during democratic transitions, is critical to sustaining democratic institutions; and (3) the participation of women in conflict prevention and conflict resolution helps promote more inclusive and democratic societies and is critical to country and regional stability.
(Sec. 5) The President, within one year after enactment of this bill and again four years later, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees and make public a Women, Peace, and Security Strategy, which shall:
be aligned with other nations’ plans to improve the participation of women in peace and security processes, conflict prevention, peace building, and decision-making institutions; and
include goals and evaluation plans to ensure strategy effectiveness.
Such a strategy shall include a specific implementation plan from each relevant federal agency.The President is urged to promote women’s participation in conflict prevention.
In addition to breaking my heart that Donald Trump signed this Bill into law, then Representative, now Governor, Kristi Noem sponsored the bill in the House. We have long suspected Kristi was a squish. Now, most of think qualified women should be included in all endeavors where they are needed, but why, in the name of homemade sin, does the military need gender advisers? We have women at every level of the U.S. Military. Are they not capable of advising? Are there not men in the U.S. military who value the perspective of women and can advise on the value of that perspective? This excrement is crazy making.
When I want to know whether military excrement is real, I search the Army War College website. Here is the description for the Gender Adviser course at the Army WAR College:
The military is committed to never winning another war, ever again. Can you see Admirals David Farrugut or Chester Nimitz being down with a Gender Adviser? Admiral Christopher Grady is down with the Gender Advisers. He’ll be out there bleating, “Damn the guided missiles. Get me the Gender Advisers.”. Joe Biden’s nominee to be Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said as much in his Senate Armed Services Committee Confirmation hearing. From the Washington Free Beacon:
President Joe Biden’s nominee for the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Senate “gender advisers” for combat troops are critical to the United States’ success, a position some veterans say is nothing more than a left-wing initiative that distracts from the military’s core duties.
The revelation came during a Dec. 8 exchange with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), who asked how Adm. Christopher Grady intends to implement “women, peace, and security” legislation within the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“The role of a gender adviser is a way to attack a very significant issue, and if confirmed, I look forward to leveraging those advisers who can make me think better and smarter about the issues that you raise,” Grady said. “So I look forward to, if confirmed, understanding that ecosystem and helping advance that cause going forward again.”
Do you think Admiral Grady was always this much of a pussy-footing, tea drinker, or is he saying whatever he has to say to get a job? Whatevs! He will fit right in General Mark “White Rage” Milley. Watch and despair as Grady sucks up openly to Senator Jean Shaheen, Senator sponsor of the Women, Peace and Security Act:
Intercede for us, General Patton. This is exactly what President/General Eisenhower meant by the Military Industrial Complex. Let’s get troops killed. Let’s leave $80 million in equipment for our enemy to use against us, but our gender advisers will put gold stars on our daily reports to the Pentagon. My favorite Twitter response regarding Admiral Grady:
This response from a Purple Heart recipient is where I stand:
“When someone nominated to be the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says something like this, it tells me top brass is aligned with radical political elements in the country,” he said. “You have people’s lives on the line. These positions aren’t about how to communicate with Afghan women, we have a diplomatic corps for that.”
As for Gender Advisers help with domestic issues, I can handle that in less than a 40 hour course:
1. Do your job.
2. Be respectful to everyone
3. Keep your hands to yourself.
4. Don’t defecate where you eat.
5. Kill the enemy and have your battle buddy’s back.
Please let me know if I missed anything. I really want a job as a Gender Adviser. Sounds like a sweet gig. And, I would love to see our military win, every time.
Three soldiers to be awarded Medals of Honor
Sgt. 1st Class Alwyn Cashe died from burns he sustained in Iraq in 2005. He was pulling 7 people one-by-one from a tank that caught on fire after it hit an IED.
Master Sgt. Earl Plumlee is a Green Beret who fended off multiple attackers who had blown a hole in his base’s perimeter in Afghanistan in 2013.
Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Celiz, an Army Ranger, was killed in 2018 while providing security for a medical evacuation flight also in Afghanistan.
The awards will represent the 19th and 20th Medals of Honor for actions in Afghanistan and the 7th for the Iraqi theatre.
House Passes 2022 NDAA with Red Flag Law Language Removed
The House of Representatives passed a final version of the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Tuesday night which does not contain the red flag law language present in the original.
The Washington Post reported that the NDAA passed Tuesday by vote of 363 to 70. Following the vote the NRA tweeted:
BREAKING: U.S. House just passed a revised version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which notably DOES NOT INCLUDE unconstitutional red flag laws for military personnel.
The bill now awaits action in the U.S. Senate, which is expected in coming days. Stay tuned.
— NRA (@NRA) December 8, 2021
On September 25, 2021, Breitbart News noted the initial 2022 NDAA legislation passed House with red flag law language applicable to service men and women. The 2022 NDAA contained a provision authorizing military courts to issue orders restraining military personnel from “possessing, receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm.”
The provision for prohibiting gun possession is contained in Section 529 of the 2022 NDAA. That section was titled, “Authority Of Military Judges And Military Magistrates To Issue Military Court Protective Orders.”
The specific provision would have given military courts the authority to prohibit gun possession via protective orders in two ways: 1. By giving the subject of the order an “opportunity to be heard on the order.” 2. By issuing the order ex parte.
However, Section 529 in the final version of the 2022 NDAA is completely different, dealing with “exemptions and deferments for a possible military draft.”
BLUF:
As this author has previously pointed out in The Federalist, there is no greater long-term danger to the country than the politicization of the military. For that reason, the military has a culture of not publicly wading into partisan disagreements.
The regrettable direction of the NDU article by the Cyber Center authors creates an unfortunate appearance that this nonpartisan culture may be at risk. These authors have shown little hesitation about wading into partisan thickets. Let us hope that this is an outlier, not a trend.
Four military officers who describe themselves as “researchers” at the Army’s highly respected Cyber Institute have published an article that adds to the growing concern about the ongoing politicization of the military. Published by the military’s National Defense University (NDU), their article purports to analyze the dangers of misinformation and disinformation and to advise the Biden administration about how to counter it.
The article’s authors all are military officers and at least two are professors at West Point. They say their article “is written in response to the Capitol insurrection.”
Ironically, the article is itself misinformation. That this misinformation is published by military officers associated with two highly prestigious institutions, the NDU and the Cyber Institute, makes it all the more inappropriate and dangerous.
Oklahoma files lawsuit over National Guard COVID-19 vaccine mandate
Oklahoma’s attorney general filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all federal employees and the state’s National Guard on Thursday, according to a news release.
The lawsuit asked a federal court to implement a temporary restraining order to halt the enforcement of the vaccine mandate, the news release said.
“Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate ensures that many Oklahoma National Guard members will simply quit instead of getting a vaccine, a situation that will irreparably harm Oklahomans’ safety and security,” said Attorney General John O’Connor. “These patriots, along with many federal employees, who serve their country and their state are now at risk of being terminated because they do not wish to take the vaccine.”
Additionally, the lawsuit asks the court to block the Biden administration from withholding federal funding from the state’s National Guard and its members.