Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Pentagon Official: The Facts Are In, And Obama’s Policy Is A Direct Danger To The United States


Recommended Posts

US
2014-05-26T040845Z_1_CBREA4P0BIY00_RTROP  

Pentagon Official: The Facts Are In, And Obama’s Policy Is A Direct Danger To The United States

10:42 PM 08/01/2014
 
  •  
 

Joseph Miller is the pen name for a ranking Department of Defense official with a background in U.S. special operations and combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has worked in strategic planning.

The report is in, and the review of the president’s foreign policy is clear: If there is not an immediate course-reversal, the United States is in serious danger.

In 2013, the United States Institute for Peace, “a congressionally-created, independent, nonpartisan institution whose mission is to prevent, mitigate, and resolve violent conflicts around the world,” was asked to assist the National Defense Panel with reviewing the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The National Defense Panel is a congressional-mandated bipartisan commission that’s co-chairs were appointed by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

On July 31, the National Defense Panel released its long-awaited report on the effects of the QDR and delivered its findings to Congress. The panel pulled no punches — its findings were a scathing indictment of Obama’s foreign policy, national security policy, and defense policy. The panel found that president Barack Obama’s QDR, military force reductions, and trillion-dollar defense budget cuts are dangerous — and will leave the country in a position where it is unable to respond to threats to our nation’s security. This, the panel concluded, must be reversed as soon as possible.

In particular, the report addresses the need for the administration to return to the flexible response doctrine — a policy where the military was tasked with being capable of fighting two wars at the same time. Given the current state of affairs and the threats posed to our nation, the panel felt that the two-war doctrine was still required to meet our nation’s national security challenges. The man-power reductions and budget cuts are both reflections of this change in policy, so it must be altered before that is possible.

So what is the flexible response doctrine, and why is it so important?

In 1961, the Kennedy administration sought to remake U.S. defense doctrine after concluding that former President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “New Look” doctrine, which focused on mutually-assured destruction, was inappropriate for the Cold War. Kennedy decided that the United States would adopt a “Flexible Response Doctrine,” in which we would hold adversaries at bay through strategic deterrence and the ability to fight two wars — plus a smaller conflict — at the same time. That doctrine carried the United States through the Cold War and all of the other so-called shooting wars that followed, despite numerous challenges from nation states and non-state actors alike.

In 2012, the Obama administration decided to change the two-and-a-half war policy of the Flexible Response doctrine, in part due to the nation’s war fatigue, after having been at war for over a decade, and also in response to budgetary constraints exacerbated by a sluggish economy. The administration announced its intentions to significantly reduce the defense budget and re-examine the acquisition of major defense systems and hardware, shaping the future size and scope of the U.S. military. Given that Obama was first elected on an antiwar platform, this decision seems reasonable.

Here’s the problem: At the time the Obama administration announced the change in our defense doctrine, the president was also in front of the cameras threatening to use military force in Iran and Syria, announcing a “strategic pivot” toward Asia to counter a rising China, and swearing to uphold our defense treaties with Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, NATO, etc, all while we were still at war in Afghanistan. How can you threaten to take military action that could start a war when you are already fighting one in Afghanistan if you have changed your military doctrine to only fight one war at a time?

Some detractors may argue that this is a good thing, because it will prevent the president from starting another war. It’s worth pointing out that not all wars are of our choosing. The U.S. went to war twice in the last 50 years because our homeland was attacked by enemy forces. And unlike World War II, the enemy has not been defeated — even though the president plans to withdraw our forces from Afghanistan and has chosen to not take decisive action against these enemies in Iraq, Syria, Africa, etc. — an enemy that still seeks to do us harm. The next war may not be of our choosing. And the enemy has pledged to do just that.

 
 
 

What is even more distressing is that this doctrine will trickle down into military acquisition strategy. The U.S. Navy purchases ships that will be in service for 50 years. That means that the ships we buy today will make up the Navy’s fleet in 2065. The change in military doctrine that Obama directed will have a negative effect on the size and shape of our armed forces for decades to come. With a rising China, a re-emerging Russia, and a continued threat of global terrorism, who knows if at that time, the U.S. will be able to meet the challenges that lie ahead.

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you want.” He was criticized for that remark, but it reflected the reality that he had to go to war with — an Army that had been hollowed out after the Gulf War by the Clinton administration. War is not a video game. You cannot hit the pause button on a crisis and ask the defense industrial base and the armed services to give you what you need to fight a war. That only comes from long-term acquisition strategy driven by doctrine that accurately reflects future threats.

If the administration does not reverse course on its defense strategy and ask congressional Democrats to reverse defense spending cuts, then our nation will find itself in a position where it is unable to defend itself and could become the victim of terrorism on U.S. soil once again.


 By Jennifer Van Laar 5 hours ago
saluting1-770x330.jpg?edef5f
 

President Obama’s systematic weakening of our armed forces is continuing. The Army, according to the Associated Press, has announced it is laying off 500 majors, including some who are currently stationed in Afghanistan.

This news comes after last month’s layoff of 1,200 Army captains and is blamed on “budget cuts.”

 

We see the President’s priorities reflected in budget spending. The safety of Americans at home and abroad is clearly not at the top of the list.

The Army has close to 514,000 soldiers now, but will have to be down to 510,000 by October, shrink to 490,000 by October 2015 and be down to 450,000 by 2019. In addition, if Congress doesn’t act to prevent automatic budget cuts from resuming, the Army may eventually have to get down to 420,000 — a size that that leaders say may not allow them to wage even one major, prolonged military campaign.

 

The Army tried to avoid some cuts by slowing enlistments and using attrition and some voluntary separations. It also has been combing through files looking for soldiers with disciplinary or other problems in their annual evaluations to weed out lower-performing officers first, officials said.

During Obama’s time in office, welfare spending is up over 30% during Obama’s presidency, and the administration is asking for billions of dollars to deal with illegal immigrants rather than enforcing existing laws.

With so much instability around the world (Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Gaza, to name a few) and a feeling of increased anti-American sentiment, is it really smart to be targeting the military for budget cuts?

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Yota - there is a reasonable tenor to the report that is surprising given the excellent brain trust behind it.  Short of a panic but still a very sober wake up call.  The question is, what motivates the president; ideological purpose or incompetence?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Aw heck Ma - grab the AR47 and AR15 from the bedroom - we's a goin' ta war! LOL

Your attempt at humor escapes me.  No one is getting "up in arms" but you.  Comedic timing is everything, Gym... work on it!  ;)

BTW... it's an AK47... and it's in the gun safe... not the bedroom!

  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

1185849_01_ar_47_for_sale_640.jpg

FOR SALE: AR-47 FOR SALE PRICED TO SELL.
Price: $ 1,600 Seller: Private Party Account: Registered on 1/28/2013   Listings by this user
Listed On: Sunday, March 03, 2013 Listed In: Rifles Location: Frisco, Dallas, Texas - Map
 
Manufacturer: DPMS Caliber: 7.62x39 Action: Semi-automatic Firearm Type: Rifle  
 

If you like the prices and stopping power of ammo for the AK-47 but would still like to have the accuracy and adaptability of an AR-15 this weapon is perfect. This is a custom built AR-15 that shoots the famous 7.62x39 round just as the AK-47. These guns are a lot of fun to shoot, easier on the wallet, and extremely rare and hard to find available. I just built this rifle today and it is up for sale. If you want one of these and want it before a ban goes through now is the time.

The weapon has the standard collapsible stock, low profile gas block, free float hand guard, and is optic ready.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'll be darned George! Is that an AK receiver on an AR body? Rare, indeed. $1,600 seems kinda steep though...

Ma prefers a scattergun anyway! ;)

 

Actually it's a high bred misnomer; it's still an AR upper but chambered for 7.62X39.  In addition to a barrel swap it appears the mag well has been modified to accept the iconic AK mag, thus a similar 'look' of the AK is achieved.

 

Still, it's an AR action with buffer tube that has the nickname of AK15.  B)   

 

Nothin wrong with a scatter gun - it can always put food on the table.

Edited by George Hayduke
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another fiasco for the Obama Administration.  

The downgrading of the military is another step in bringing the USA down to the level of "other" nations. It is the ignorant or downright stupid reasoning that one must have parity with the enemy.  All sides must loose the same armament, technology, and number of troops.  If the enemy has 10 Generals and we have 1000, then we must fire 990 of them.  If we kill 150 of them, we must allow them to kill 150 of us.  Stupid, illogical, and downright traitorous. Individuals who think this way haven't a clue how to protect the citizens of the USA.  JMO. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The administration's policy in Iraq is proving to be disastrous.  Unless we assist the Iraqi government with airpower, surveillance, and strikes with drones, or Baghdad will fall before September.  The ISIS murderers are planning a mass slaughter.  They are surrounding the city, placing cell groups inside the city, and undermining the moral of the people.  ISIS is an enemy of the world and not just Iraq.  

The idealism of radical Islam is continuing to draw murderers and the disenfranchised from all over the world. They are thrilled with murder, rape, and the praise they receive from participating in the ungodly deeds of the ISLAMIC STATE. No amount of reasoning will thwart ISIS's efforts to frighten and bully those they "conquer" into accepting the terrorist god they claim as allah. The evil thermostat is just about full and Jehovah is going to use another world power to discipline and destroy the demurrage monsters.  JMO  I hope it will be the USA.  

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another fiasco for the Obama Administration.  

The downgrading of the military is another step in bringing the USA down to the level of "other" nations. It is the ignorant or downright stupid reasoning that one must have parity with the enemy.  All sides must loose the same armament, technology, and number of troops.  If the enemy has 10 Generals and we have 1000, then we must fire 990 of them.  If we kill 150 of them, we must allow them to kill 150 of us.  Stupid, illogical, and downright traitorous. Individuals who think this way haven't a clue how to protect the citizens of the USA.  JMO. 

 

The administration's policy in Iraq is proving to be disastrous.  Unless we assist the Iraqi government with airpower, surveillance, and strikes with drones, or Baghdad will fall before September.  The ISIS murderers are planning a mass slaughter.  They are surrounding the city, placing cell groups inside the city, and undermining the moral of the people.  ISIS is an enemy of the world and not just Iraq.  

The idealism of radical Islam is continuing to draw murderers and the disenfranchised from all over the world. They are thrilled with murder, rape, and the praise they receive from participating in the ungodly deeds of the ISLAMIC STATE. No amount of reasoning will thwart ISIS's efforts to frighten and bully those they "conquer" into accepting the terrorist god they claim as allah. The evil thermostat is just about full and Jehovah is going to use another world power to discipline and destroy the demurrage monsters.  JMO  I hope it will be the USA.  

 

Whether one is Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib or Post-Trib, things are beginning to line up.  I would not be surprised if the Pope ends up being the Peace Maker that simmers the pot...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just have one question.

If the dipshites at the Pentagon know this then when in the hell are they gonna

HONOR their oath?

"......to protect and defend. .......(this country).........against ALL enemies, both foreign

and DOMESTIC"

Obama, and several dems and repugs have clearly committed treason and serious

dereliction of duty.

To the Pentagon I ask,

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your attempt at humor escapes me.  No one is getting "up in arms" but you.  Comedic timing is everything, Gym... work on it!   ;)

BTW... it's an AK47... and it's in the gun safe... not the bedroom!

 

Really ?

I keep mine in the bathroom

The stoner is in the living room

and the shotgun and 1911 is in the bedroom.  :)

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really ?

I keep mine in the bathroom

The stoner is in the living room

and the shotgun and 1911 is in the bedroom.  :)

You could probably get away with keeping your AK in the bathroom... (an AR would just get rusty and jam)!  Uh oh... now I've done it!  :eyebrows:

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the US finally made a decision to move on the murderers of ISIS.  Maybe the tide is turning but we well need to see how far the assistance goes.  

I would suggest that the consulate offices in Erbil post ample guards and be ready for action. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1185849_01_ar_47_for_sale_640.jpg

FOR SALE: AR-47 FOR SALE PRICED TO SELL.
Price: $ 1,600 Seller: Private Party Account: Registered on 1/28/2013   Listings by this user
Listed On: Sunday, March 03, 2013 Listed In: Rifles Location: Frisco, Dallas, Texas - Map
 
Manufacturer: DPMS Caliber: 7.62x39 Action: Semi-automatic Firearm Type: Rifle  
 

If you like the prices and stopping power of ammo for the AK-47 but would still like to have the accuracy and adaptability of an AR-15 this weapon is perfect. This is a custom built AR-15 that shoots the famous 7.62x39 round just as the AK-47. These guns are a lot of fun to shoot, easier on the wallet, and extremely rare and hard to find available. I just built this rifle today and it is up for sale. If you want one of these and want it before a ban goes through now is the time.

The weapon has the standard collapsible stock, low profile gas block, free float hand guard, and is optic ready.

Sparta Arms makes a way higher quality 7.62X39 AR and it's about 300 bucks cheaper.  B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether one is Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib or Post-Trib, things are beginning to line up.  I would not be surprised if the Pope ends up being the Peace Maker that simmers the pot...

Just so you will know, I am none of the above.  Without a long dissertation:

  • The Lord reigns over His Kingdom now.  He has always reigned, but reigns in this world through those in His Kingdom.
  • Tribulations come and go as per the "Day of the Lord." That day has happened many times since the establishment of human kingdoms.  The final Day of the Lord will come, but there are no signs that will be given.
  • When the Lord returns, it will be to gather the redeemed to the eternal kingdom in the spiritual realm of heaven, to  judge the rest of mankind for the sin of unbelief, to give man a new spiritual body fit for eternal realms.
  • That even will be in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet sound.
  • Until then the saint serve, pray, live, and demonstrate love in the world. Persecution, tribulation, being an outcast of society is part of living in this world of unbelief.  
  • With that in mind, I continue to teach the love of God, the gospel of grace received in Christ, and call individuals everywhere to believe in Jesus as Lord, Savior, and God come in the flesh to save us from eternal death and punishment in hell.   
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nelg - thanks for the brevity.  I understand and agree with your condensed S.O.F. except for absence of 'Tribulation' as commonly defined in eschatology.  It's not that I wouldn't agree with it but I have not heard of such a position before today.

 

I'm not going to hijack this thread into a theological discussion but I am interested examining your position further.  

 

Could you point me to a resource for additional study?

 

GH

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Yota - there is a reasonable tenor to the report that is surprising given the excellent brain trust behind it.  Short of a panic but still a very sober wake up call.  The question is, what motivates the president; ideological purpose or incompetence?

BOTH. Just hope the next guy or gal in the white house has the brains to get us back to the domestic and international levels we were at before Jimmy Carter got elected to his third term.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just have one question.

If the dipshites at the Pentagon know this then when in the hell are they gonna

HONOR their oath?

"......to protect and defend. .......(this country).........against ALL enemies, both foreign

and DOMESTIC"

Obama, and several dems and repugs have clearly committed treason and serious

dereliction of duty.

To the Pentagon I ask,

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

They probably won't due a darn thing brother til someone new gets into the office and puts them back on point. How many times have i been aware of how to do something better than my boss only to be told that as the boss sees it ... that doesn't matter right now  ... and I should humble myself and do things his way. The unsafe, inefficient and stupid way. When this response comes up now I document that I told the boss xyz and he responded with crud, and that I responded with going about doing my job the best I knew how knowing that my documentation is going to save my butt when the boss tries to blame me and or others for things being done wrong when the shiite hits the fan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nelg - thanks for the brevity.  I understand and agree with your condensed S.O.F. except for absence of 'Tribulation' as commonly defined in eschatology.  It's not that I wouldn't agree with it but I have not heard of such a position before today.

 

I'm not going to hijack this thread into a theological discussion but I am interested examining your position further.  

 

Could you point me to a resource for additional study?

 

GH

I don't want to "highjack" this thread either.  I was just responding to the pre-, mid-, and post-tribulation concept.  

 

Use a complete concordance.  Do a study of every time the word is used in Scripture.  Look at it in context.  Categorize the results.   

 

I know the method is simple, but it has provide me better understand than reading the words from a commentary or theological book.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

BOTH. Just hope the next guy or gal in the white house has the brains to get us back to the domestic and international levels we were at before Jimmy Carter got elected to his third term.

.?????

Sarcasm? I would have sworn the prez is limited to 2 terms.

I was a cheech and Chong wannabe in 81 maybe I missed it! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.