Category Archives: military news

military news, national news

'Stolen Valor' goes viral

1 Comment

Nothing is theft-proof. Not even valor, the kind one demonstrates on the battlefield.

People “steal” valor all the time, or so it appears. They deserve the shame that others heap on them.

A video has gone viral that shows an actual Army combat infantry veteran confronting a faux veteran at a Philadelphia shopping mall. The alleged imposter is taking advantage of the veteran discounts that many retailers offer customer.

I guess all you have to do is show up in a uniform and you get the discount.

Ryan Beck caught this guy in the act of faking his own military service.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/12/03/how-viral-videos-became-the-way-veterans-combat-stolen-valor/

Perhaps the most hilarious part of the video — which is included in the link attached to this post — is that the apparent imposter tells the real veteran, Beck, that he is an Army Ranger. Umm, take a look at the individual and you can tell right up front that he is not a member of the elite Army fighting unit.

The guy can’t explain why he’s wearing an improper Combat Infantryman Badge, or why the U.S. flag on his right sleeve is in the wrong location.

The Stolen Valor Act is meant to criminalize the act of impersonating a veteran. Indeed, it should be a crime, particularly when the imposters use their fake status to take money from businesses offering discounts in good faith to men and women who actually are serving in the military.

The manner in which Beck confronts this guy is classic. He isn’t rude. He isn’t bullying the guy. He’s asking legitimate questions that came to his mind the moment he saw this fellow at the mall in Philly.

Someone ought to give Beck another medal for “outing” this individual.

 

International news, military news

Air power aid from Iran? Watch out!

U.S. intelligence officials believe Iranian air force jets launched air strikes against Islamic State terrorist targets about 10 days ago, using U.S.-made F-4 Phantom jets, sent to Iran presumably before the Islamic revolution of 1979.

This is a curious twist in a story full of intrigue and complexity.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-believes-iran-launched-air-raids-on-islamic-state-in-iraq/ar-BBghelW

Do we accept the Iranian help in bombing the daylights out of ISIL? Do we welcome the Iranians as “partners” in this fight against the Sunni extremist terror cult? Yes to the first part, no to the second.

Let’s remember that the Iranians still are our enemy. The Tehran government hates the Great Satan. It has vowed to destroy Israel, our most valuable ally in the Middle East.

However, the Iranian government is run by Shiite Muslims, the hated adversary of the ISIL Sunnis. Therefore, the Iranians have some skin in this game as well.

I don’t have a particular problem with the Iranians joining the fight against ISIL — as long as they understand that the United States won’t reopen diplomatic ties with their government as a thank you gift for helping us out.

There remain many barriers between the United States and Iran. Our government recognizes it and is making it clear that clearing away those barriers will require the Iranians to do many things, chief among them being dismantling their nuclear program.

If the Iranian air force can fly sorties against ISIL, let them have at it.

 

military news, national news, political news

Now it's Ashton Carter at DoD

We’ll get to see just how partisan it’s going to get in Washington, D.C.

CNN reports that President Obama is going to nominate Ashton Carter as the next secretary of defense.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/obama-expected-to-nominate-ashton-carter-to-lead-pentagon-cnn/ar-BBgey1B

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson withdrew from consideration. So did defense expert Michelle Fluornoy. Presumably others have pulled out, too, for all I know.

Carter is a big hitter. He’s been a deputy defense secretary and was the main weapons buyer for the Pentagon. He also worked as a deputy defense boss during the Clinton administration.

He doesn’t seem to be overly political. He doesn’t have a lot of baggage. Carter seems to be a good fit for the Obama administration, which reportedly forced Chuck Hagel to quit as defense secretary after less than two years on the job.

However, in this day and time, politics seems to matter the most. Republicans who’ll take control of the Senate in January are likely to find all kinds of things to throw against Carter. The chief among them just might be that he’s Barack Obama’s choice to lead the Pentagon.

Senators have said they won’t block national security picks, while fighting other presidential nominees in retaliation for the president’s immigration executive order.

Many of us out here intend to hold them to their word.

 

 

military news, national news, political news

Lieberman for defense chief? Fat chance, Ted

Leave it to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz to provide a laugh amid a serious discussion about national defense policy.

The freshman Republican from Texas thinks former Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., would make a wonderful choice to become the next secretary of defense, replacing Chuck Hagel, who announced his (forced?) resignation Monday.

President Obama might make his pick later today, so I have to get this thought out quickly.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2014/11/cruz-proposes-lieberman-to-replace-hagel-at-pentagon/

Lieberman might make a good choice except for one little thing.

In 2008, Lieberman — who campaigned as Al Gore’s vice-presidential running mate on the 2000 Democratic ticket — bolted from the party in 2008 when he backed Sen. John McCain for president against, yes, Sen. Barack Obama.

I guess Lieberman is still a Democrat, but I hardly think the president would select someone who’s on record as backing one of the president’s most vocal foreign-policy critics to lead the Pentagon.

Does a president of either party deserve to have folks loyal to him and his policies? Would a President Cruz — perish the thought!) — demand loyalty were he to sit in the Oval Office? “Yes” to the first question. “You bet he would” to the second question.

So, I’ll creep just a tiny bit out on the limb here and predict that Barack Obama will ignore Ted Cruz’s advice and go with someone with whom he feels most comfortable in helping shape American defense policy in this difficult and trying time.

 

 

military news, national news, political news

Hagel was 'up to the job'

Chuck Hagel’s departure today as secretary of defense has the look of a forced resignation.

It now appears, at least to me, that Hagel was the one who forced the issue. That’s too bad. The Pentagon and the Obama administration have lost a good man who knows and understands the needs of the men and women who do all the heavy lifting … in the field.

How Obama and Chuck Hagel reached the end of the line

President Obama talked today about how then-Sen. Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, took the young Sen. Obama under his wing and showed him the ropes in a body prone to cliques. He heaped praise on the defense boss and wished him well, which is what one would expect.

Now comes word that Hagel tried to crack the president’s tight inner circle, but couldn’t get in. He had difficulty making his defense policy opinions heard by the commander in chief and those who form that tight-knit circle around him.

If Sen. Hagel was such a trusted ally to the man who would be president, how is it that he was left on the outside looking in when key policy decisions and critical shifts in defense policy were occurring?

Sen. John McCain, one of Hagel’s best friends in the Senate, is set to lead the Senate Armed Services Committee next January. He will chair the panel that will decide whether to confirm the next defense boss. I hope McCain can set aside his personal animus toward Obama — who beat him in the 2008 presidential election — and conduct a thorough but fair hearing of the next nominee.

One of the questions that needs answering, though, is whether the new person will have the access to the commander in chief he or she will need to operate at maximum efficiency. The nominee won’t know that with certainty. The president will and he should make that clear when he announces his next defense secretary nominee.

 

military news, national news, political news

Hagel bids awkward adieu at Defense

Talk about an awkward moment.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel resigned today amid media reports that he was forced out by the White House that reportedly was unhappy with the way he communicated foreign policy strategy. Then, in an extraordinary attempt at trying to look happy about his departure, he stood with President Obama and Vice President Biden, both of whom heaped praise on their “friend.”

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/24/politics/defense-secretary-hagel-to-step-down/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

This is how you play the game in Washington, or I suppose in any government power center.

Hagel will stay on until the next defense secretary gets confirmed by the Senate.

And here is where it will get real interesting.

A cadre of bomb-throwing Republicans are vowing to block future presidential appointments in retaliation for Obama’s executive order on immigration this past week. The bomb thrower in chief, of course, is the Texas loudmouth Sen. Ted Cruz, who did qualify his threat by saying he wouldn’t object to key national security appointments.

Well, someone must tell me if there is a more important national security post than that of defense secretary. I can’t think of one.

I have zero confidence that Cruz will step aside and let this next appointment get the kind of “fair and thorough” confirmation hearing he or she will deserve.

But let’s hope for the best.

As for Hagel, I’m sorry to see him go. I rather liked the fact that an enlisted Vietnam War combat veteran was picked to lead the Pentagon. I also appreciated that Obama reached across the aisle to select a Republican former senator for this key post. I thought Hagel acquitted himself well under extreme pressure when the chips were down. He was at the helm during a time of enormous change at the Pentagon.

Our military force is still the strongest in the history of the world. I am quite certain we will maintain or position as the world’s pre-eminent military power.

Now, let’s find a successor and get the new person confirmed.

local news, military news, political news

Thornberry to head armed forces panel

It’s official: Mac Thornberry is going to become the next chairman of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee.

They’re cheering at three key locations in Thornberry’s sprawling 13th Congressional District in Texas: at the Bell/Textron and the Pantex operations in Amarillo and at Sheppard Air Force Base in Wichita Falls.

Thornberry’s constituency includes those enormously important operations.

Here’s the question: Is the veteran Texas Panhandle congressman going to protect these operations from possible budget cuts at the expense of other equally important defense-related projects?

I pose the question because for the two decades Thornberry has served in Congress, he’s been ensconced comfortably and quietly on the back bench. He hasn’t made much noise about the work he does on behalf of those projects. He does so quietly and with little fanfare.

Now, though, he assumes a high-profile role as chairman of one the House’s most visible committees. He’s become the go-to guy on armed services issues. The pressure is going to be on the congressman to deliver the goods back home while listening with a fair and impartial ear to the needs of his colleagues’ districts elsewhere. There might even be colleagues on his committee who’ll be sure to push hard for spending in their districts. With limited money — relatively speaking — to go around, the House panel is going to have to husband its resources carefully.

How is Chairman Thornberry going to respond to those pressures with the eyes of the nation fixed on how he conducts himself and how he runs this congressional committee?

Good luck, Mr. Chairman.

 

International news, military news

'An act of pure evil'

Islamic State terrorists have beheaded another American. The victim this time is an aid worker, Peter Kessig.

President Obama’s response? He called it an “act of pure evil.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/video/obama-beheading-was-act-of-pure-evil/vi-BBe9xJq

What now?

Let’s wait for the critics of the U.S.-led aerial bombardment campaign to demand “troops on the ground” to fight ISIL face to face, hand to hand.

My own take is that the air strikes need to continue — only with more ferocity.

The president issued the correct statement aboard Air Force One en route from the G-20 summit in Brisbane, Australia. ISIL must be destroyed. It must be bombed into oblivion.

The ironic aspect of this murder is that Kessig had converted to Islam after leaving the Army, where he served as a Ranger. Therefore, ISIL killed one of its own. How does one make sense of any of this, at any level?

Although I do not want to return to the battlefield in Iraq or join the fight — on the ground — in Syria, I clearly understand the odds against an all-airborne campaign accomplishing the mission of destroying a sophisticated, well-funded and well-armed terrorist organization.

I also know that the United States and our allies have immense firepower available to them.

They should use it … with extreme prejudice.

 

military news, national news

What a difference two generations make

2 Comments

Al Sharpton’s TV show is rumbling in the background in my home office.

Then he introduced an upcoming segment about ensuring how to find jobs for “our troops.”

Something curious occurs to me. Sharpton is a noted progressive/liberal. I’ve spoken already to the way America has changed its attitude toward veterans and military personnel during the past two generations.

Given that I don’t know Sharpton, nor can I read his mind or peer into his soul, I’ll ask the question with some caution: Would this particular progressive talk-show host have this discussion during the Vietnam War, when many Americans were (a) turning their backs on returning veterans or (b) spitting in their faces?

He would say that he never did those things back in the old days. A lot of liberals did, however.

They’ve changed. I hear many liberal and progressive commentators on the air say much the same thing that Sharpton said today. They want to honor our veterans and those who are fighting for our freedom.

I’m glad the country has changed its attitude. I also am happy to hear progressives talk about jobs programs for veterans, calling on Americans to honor them by employing them when they return from the battlefield.

It wasn’t always this way.

 

International news, military news

This SEAL is making me angry

Forgive me for the mild case of potty mouth language I’m about to inject into the blog post, but …

Robert O’Neill is starting to piss me off.

O’Neill is the former Navy SEAL who shot Osama bin Laden to death on May 2, 2011 — allegedly.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/seal-claims-killed-osama-bin-laden-expected-die/story?id=26830046

He’s now speaking to Fox News about the dangerous mission he and the rest of SEAL Team Six executed in the middle of a moonless night in Pakistan. The order given by the commander in chief was as straightforward as it gets: Kill the world’s most notorious terrorist.

They did it with cool precision.

Now comes O’Neill and at least one other SEAL who offer supposedly conflicting accounts of who — precisely — pulled the trigger on bin Laden.

O’Neill told Fox News that, by golly, he “expected” to be killed on the mission.

He said this in an interview set to air this evening, according to ABCNews.com: “‘We’re going to die when the house blows up. We’re going to die when he blows up. Or we’re going to be there too long and we get arrested by the Pakistanis, and we’re going to spend the rest of our short lives in Pakistani prison,’ O’Neill said in an interview for a Fox News Channel special set to air tonight. ”

Well, duh?

Of course the mission was fraught with maximum peril. That’s supposed to be a serious news flash?

What’s so maddening about all of this, of course, is that O’Neill is breaking a long-standing code among SEALs and, for that matter, special operations forces of all the military branches — and that includes Army Green Berets, Joint Delta Force units, and Air Force commandos. It is that you do not speak openly about these highly classified missions. More to the point, you do not take credit for the successes accomplished by the entire team.

Here goes one of those SEALs, a highly trained warrior who helped execute  a mission of intense personal danger to all the men who took part. He’s doing precisely what the code says he shouldn’t do: basking in the glory of a mission that captivated the world.

It was a team effort, correct?