Category Archives: military news

‘Take the oil,’ Trump says; how, sir?

large_article_im2557_Middleeastoilproduction

Donald Trump said the following over the weekend …

“You know, if you stop transportation, I mean, you’re talking about the blood – the blood of the world and we’re going to have to be very, very strong … We’re going to have to take away the energy, the fuel, the money from ISIS.”

It’s a position he’s stated several times while running for the Republican presidential nomination. I do not yet know the answer to this question: How does a President Trump (perish the thought) plan to “take away the energy”?

The Islamic State is getting it from sources in the Middle East. It’s likely some form of black market transaction process. Or it could be done up front and in the open.

Either way, Trump’s assertion that we must take the oil, seize control of it connotes a serious military involvement that the candidate — so far — has said would be a mistake. In the same conversation he had Sunday morning with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Trump described the Middle East as a “quagmire.”

I don’t know about you, but I haven’t heard a politician ever suggest it is in the country’s best interests to thrust our cherished young American men and women into a quagmire.

So … how would Trump propose to take that oil?

Talk to us, Donald.

 

One more point about Dr. Carson and West Point …

west point 2

The Internet didn’t exist in 1969 when Dr. Ben Carson reportedly had discussions with someone about whether he should get a “scholarship” to enroll at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

As I have always understood it, enrollment at any of the service academies requires a nomination from the applicant’s congressman or woman, or a senator from the individual’s home state.

The issue, then, has continued to swirl over whether Carson, a leading Republican presidential candidate, actually was offered a “scholarship” to West Point. He says a lot of things about it. Critics say he’s being — at minimum — disingenuous.

I found a website that lays out how one does it now.

Here is the link

It still involves submitting an application and a nomination from a member of the House of Representatives or a U.S. senator. The applicant also must score high enough on SAT and ACT tests to quality. Media outlets have reported that Carson never submitted an application to West Point.

Dr. Carson was living in Detroit at the time. He was active in the junior ROTC program at Southwestern High School, achieving the highest ROTC cadet ranking possible.

Did that get the attention of someone in Congress from the Detroit area, or from his home state of Michigan, to nominate young Ben for admission to West Point … and is there a record of it — anywhere?

Hey, I’m just trying to do my small part to help clean up this mess.

I’m out.

‘Cadet Carson’ never suited up

deadstate-Ben-Carson

The vetting of the latest Republican presidential front runner has begun.

It’s gotten a bit bumpy for the noted neurosurgeon.

Politico reports that contrary to what he’s written about himself, Dr. Ben Carson never was offered a scholarship to the U.S. Military Academy. He didn’t even apply for admission, Politico reports.

Carson, though, says he was told when he was 17 years of age that if he applied, he’d be offered the full ride. Who told him? He said it was Army Gen. William Westmoreland, who had just finished commanding U.S. forces in Vietnam.

So … did the good doctor lie, fib, “misremember,” or what?

Carson’s record is under scrutiny more than ever now for a simple reason. He’s among the leaders of a still-packed GOP presidential field of candidates.

If he made it all up, then he’s likely guilty of something approaching stolen valor … you know, when folks make up war stories about themselves. It’s more or less what former NBC News anchor Brian Williams did when he claimed to have to been shot down by an Iraqi rocket-propelled grenade in 2003; oops, didn’t happen, we found out later.

Still, one shouldn’t be allowed to get away even with “misremembering” such details about one’s life when he seeks to become president of the United States of America.

It kind of reminds me of when Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton once said he didn’t remember getting a draft notice. Interesting. As one who did get such a notice from Uncle Sam, I can speak for others who did as well that you do not forget getting such a letter.

Dr. Carson has some serious explaining to do. His campaign now says he didn’t get the scholarship or the appointment to West Point.

Now, let’s hear from you, Dr. Carson. Did you make it up?

 

Should the president return that Peace Prize?

barack obama

Barack H. Obama campaigned for the presidency vowing to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

His election in 2008 prompted the Nobel Committee to award him the Peace Prize the following year with the hope of a peaceful future in those two countries. The new president accepted the prize while acknowledging the unusual context in which the committee awarded it.

I never thought I’d say this, but I have to wonder if President Obama has ever considered giving the award back.

Why? Well, consider that that he vowed to end both wars. They haven’t ended. Now he’s about to commit a handful of U.S. troops into a third country to engage in the battle against the Islamic State.

Obama faces dilemma

The president recently announced that he would keep troops fighting in Afghanistan past the time he leaves office in January 2017; our commitment in Iraq remains, despite the pullout of frontline combat troops. Now this, the deployment of Special Forces to assist the Kurds fighting ISIS in northern Syria.

He took office while the country was fighting in two countries. He likely will leave office with the nation fighting in three countries.

This is not the legacy that Barack Obama ever wanted, but it’s part of the legacy he will leave the next president of the United States.

I get that circumstances have changed since he took office as the so-called “transformational” president. The Islamic State has exploded onto the scene. Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad has brutalized and murdered hundreds of thousands of his people. The Iraqi military has fallen far short of its mission to defend the country against Islamic State murderers. The Taliban has fought back in Afghanistan.

Yes, we killed Osama bin Laden. We’ve continued to hunt down and kill terrorists all across the Middle East and South Asia. And we’ve known all along that the Global War on Terror would not end in the conventional way, with one side signing a peace treaty to end the hostilities. We are fighting an elusive and cunning enemy.

However, all that hope that Barack Obama brought to the presidency has dissipated as he heads for the final turn of his two terms in office.

I’m not going to say President Obama should give back the Nobel Peace Prize, although I wouldn’t complain out loud if he did.

 

Special forces to Syria? What’s next?

islamic-state-syria759

It’s been said many times that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

Syria’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, is our enemy. So is the Islamic State, which also is Assad’s enemy. Thus, Assad becomes our “friend” because the United States and Syria oppose the Islamic State?

My head is spinning.

President Obama has just performed a major pivot on Syria. We’re sending about 50 special operations forces to Syria to assist the government in fighting ISIS. Does that mean we’re getting engaged in a ground war in Syria? The president says “no.” I’m not so sure.

We’re putting “boots on the ground” in a place that’s been involved in a bloody civil war for many years now.

I don’t like this change of direction.

The issue of who’s our friend in the Middle East is complicated enough as it is. By my reckoning — and I’m sure many others — we have one true ally in that region: Israel. Many other nations’ leaders say they’re with us in the fight against ISIS. By and large, they have been — at best — not totally reliable.

So now we’re going to reverse ourselves and commit a handful of ground troops to this terrible conflict. Are they going to be frontline forces? The Pentagon says no and that they won’t necessarily be thrust directly into harm’s way.

What will the nation’s reaction be when we get word of the first person killed in action?

And … for what? To assist a brutal dictator who our own president has said should be removed from power?

 

 

VA scandal far from ‘overstated’

veterans affairs

Hillary Rodham Clinton could not be more wrong than she was the other night when she said that the Department of Veterans Affairs health care scandal was “overstated.”

You’ll recall the VA matter. Veterans seeking medical care in Phoenix were made to wait for too long for the care — and then some of the died while waiting.

Meanwhile, the VA cooked the books, so to speak, and hid that information from agency watchdogs in order to protect the medical staff at the VA medical center in Phoenix.

Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki had to quit and the agency went under the microscope to correct the hideous situation that resulted in the veterans’ deaths.

News flash to Hillary: None of it — zero — was “overstated.”

Veterans should be offended by what the Democrats’ leading presidential contender told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow the other evening. I know I am.

Yes, Clinton is right to say that most veterans get good health care. I can attest to the quality of care I am getting in Amarillo at the Thomas Creek VA Medical Center. Then again, I enjoy good health.

My hope is that when I do need some specialized care that it will be available to me in a timely fashion. I damn sure don’t want to die waiting to receive it.

Most veterans do receive good care. The veterans who have died because of too-long wait times, though, did not.

For the Democrats’ leading presidential candidate to suggest it’s all “overstated,” overblown and overplayed is dishonest on its face.

Hillary Clinton: the only grownup in the room

hillary clinton

I didn’t watch every single moment of the House Benghazi Select Committee hearing today.

And as I write this blog post, it’s finishing up.

I do, though, want to make one point: The only grownup in the room among the principals involved in this hearing was the former secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Democrats and Republicans on the panel went after each other like hyenas fighting over a carcass. Meanwhile, Clinton managed to stay above all that.

As for what I’ve heard among the questioners grilling Clinton, I need to say that I heard nothing new in either the questions or the answers given by the lone witness.

Which leads me to the source of the tension between committee members: the motive for the hearing in the first place.

Democrats allege that Republicans who control the House of Representatives have gone after Clinton over the Benghazi tragedy for a single purpose: to blow her presidential campaign out of the water. Indeed, many of the questions coming from the GOP side of the dais veered repeatedly into territory that’s been covered repeatedly during the several previous congressional hearings.

Democratic members, though, didn’t acquit themselves well, either, as they bitched repeatedly about their GOP colleagues’ conduct during this entire sorry episode.

“Benghazi” has become political shorthand for an incident that resulted on Sept. 11, 2012 in the deaths of four brave Americans during a firefight at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Clinton led the State Department at the time.

Three years after the fact and after countless hearings, testimony, investigation and posturing … Congress has found nothing.

The Benghazi panel’s conduct today shouldn’t make Congress proud.

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s dignity, though, throughout this hearing demonstrated something quite different.

And commendable.

 

Where was VPOTUS on the bin Laden raid?

bin laden raid

Vice President Joe Biden is known for a lot of things: authenticity, verbosity, good humor, commitment to public policy.

He’s not known as a prevaricator.

Still, if the vice president is going to run for the top job — and I’m not yet convinced he’s going to do so — he’s got to clear up a serious matter.

What was his view on the raid to kill terrorist leader Osama bin Laden? Was he for it or not?

Biden is sending a mixed message regarding the bin Laden raid, which in May 2011 ended with bin Laden being shot to death by a Navy SEAL commando in Pakistan.

It’s been reported that he wanted to wait “for two more things” to occur before sending in the commandos and that he gave that advice to President Obama. Now he says he was for it all along.

I see some language-parsing on the horizon, which doesn’t answer the question about what he endorsed and when he endorsed it.

If he was in favor of the raid at the beginning, but wanted to wait for further confirmation that bin Laden was holed up in that big house in Pakistan, then it’s OK to say so.

Let’s not play games, Mr. Vice President. Give it to us straight.

Then you can let us all know whether you want to run for president.

 

Jade Helm has ended … we’re still free!

jade helm

They’ve sounded the all clear in central Texas.

Jade Helm has ended. President Obama’s allegedly threatened takeover of Texas didn’t materialize.

We can sleep better tonight.

If there ever was a moment in which the governor of our great state couldn’t embarrass himself more, it was when Gov. Greg Abbott responded to that idiotic Internet gossip that Jade Helm — a long-planned military exercise — was some kind of harbinger of a federal takeover of Texas.

What did the governor do? He ordered the Texas National Guard to “monitor” the activities of the Army, Marine Corps and Navy special forces that were conducting exercises in Texas.

Jade Helm concludes

It’s what they do. They practice military maneuvers to prepare them for actual combat.

But some right-wing freaks decided to launch a conspiracy in cyberspace that contended that it was all part of some plot to declare martial law or some such nonsense.

Can you say “black helicopters”?

Well, the exercise has ended. The Texas National Guard can go home. The governor can concern himself with actual threats to the state, such as, oh, illegal immigrants or red tide on the Gulf Coast.

 

‘Sniper’ family excluded from ceremony?

chris_kyle_-_h_-_2015

A curious development has popped up regarding a ceremony that honored the memory of the “American sniper,” the late Chris Kyle.

Kyle’s brother and father have stated on social media they weren’t invited to the ceremony in which Texas Gov. Greg Abbott awarded Kyle the Legislative Medal of Honor.

Kyle was the Navy SEAL who has been credited with more kills in battle than anyone on U.S. military history. He returned from four tours of duty in Iraq, but was murdered at a gun range here in Texas. His story became the subject of the film “American Sniper.”

The governor bestowed the state’s highest military honor to Chris Kyle … and it is richly deserved. But the hero’s father and brother are not invited? Huh?

According to the Texas Tribune: “We as the Kyle family (my parents, my wife and our kids) knew nothing about this and were not invited to the ceremony,” Jeff Kyle, Chris Kyle’s brother, wrote on Facebook. “It’s kinda funny how the family isn’t asked to be involved!”

Chris Kyle’ widow, Taya, accepted the award from Gov. Abbott.

The governor’s office hasn’t yet responded to the report.

I hope the governor’s staff has an explanation for it. Is there an estrangement between Chris Kyle’s widow and the hero’s brother and father? Is it an honest oversight? Is it a deliberate snub … which I rather doubt?

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/28/kyle-family-says-it-wasnt-invited-abbott-ceremony/

Let’s get to the bottom of this curious story, shall we?