Tag Archives: US Military

Rebuttal of Robert Gates and his BS book

Eagle- America Deserves Better

Today,  a book by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates will hit the stores. Already some parts of it have been released to the media, which, depending on their political preferences, have focused on the parts favorable or unfavorable to Obama and the Democrats.

But equally (if not more) important is Robert Gates’ disastrous tenure as Defense Secretary under both Presidents Bush and Obama, which, even before Obama’s arrival at the White House, began to sow the seeds of America’s military and thus geopolitical decline.

Crucial Platforms Killed On False Pretexts

Gates calls himself “a Defense Secretary at War”, even though he has never seen one day of combat, has never been deployed to a war zone, and spent his entire “career in the national security arena” as a bureaucrat in Washington, DC. Most of his book is about how he ran the disastrous and useless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I’ll get to that later.

But first, let me tell you how Gates tried to pay for these utterly useless wars that he was singularly obsessed with: by killing the very weapons systems America needs now and will need in the future to deter and if necessary defeat China, Russia, Iran, and other potential aggressors.

Based on his singular obssession with Afghanistan and Iraq, his myopic shortsightedness, and his naive view of China and Russia, Gates killed over 50 crucial weapon programs based on the most idiotic of pretexts.

For example, he stopped the production of the F-22 fighter – the best jet fighter ever built – at a mere 187 copies, whereas the USAF had long said that at least 337 would be needed to maintain US air superiority and defeat advanced Russian and Chinese fighters, and despite clear evidence from experts such as those at the Air Force Association and Air Power Australia that ONLY the F-22 Raptor could meet that requirement.

Gates thus participated in the smear propaganda against the F-22, fired Air Force Secretary Mike Wynne and Chief of Staff T. Michael Moseley (who advocated continuing its production), forced other Air Force F-22 advocates to retire, and advised Obama to veto any defense bill containing funding for F-22 production – a veto threat that sufficed to scare Congress into deleting that funding after it had already been authorized by the House Armed Services Committee, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, and the full House.

Gates also refused to buy the F-15 Silent Eagle – the newest version of the venerable and combat-proven F-15 Eagle equipped with the newest radar and IRST system, conformal (internal) weapon bays, and stealthy from the front. He put all of America’s airpower eggs into one basket – the utterly failed F-35 program – and killed virtually every alternative to it.

That decision has proven itself to be the most idiotic any defense secretary has ever made, for the F-35 is so well-known for its cost-overruns, delays, bugs, and giant weaknesses that there wouldn’t be enough space even in a dedicated article to list them all, or even to list all references to sources narrating them.

But those cost overruns, delays, bugs, and weaknesses were already well-known in 2009, when Gates killed the F-22 Raptor. Since then, of course, the F-35 Junk Strike Fighter program’s performance has dramatically deteriorated further: the cost overruns and delays have mounted, critical systems have been deleted from the F-35 to reduce cost, and allies are now balking at buying it and looking for alternatives. Which competitors like Dassault, EADS, Saab, and others are all too happy to provide.

(What is the difference between the F-22 and the F-35? The former was designed from the start to do one thing: achieve absolute air superiority. To that end, it is has a tiny radar signature to evade radar detection, is very fast and high-flying, is very agile and maneuverable, has the most powerful fighter radar in the world, and can carry 8 missiles in its stealthy mode – or 12 when enemy air defenses are down. By contrast, the F-35 is not truly stealthy, can carry only 4 missiles, is slow and low-flying, and is so heavy and unmaneuverable that jets from the 1960s could easily defeat it. It is useful neither for air to air nor air to ground combat. It’s not capable or survivable enough for high-tech environments, and is too expensive and overbuilt for counter-insurgency operations.)

The F-22 was but one of the many crucial weapon systems Bob Gates killed, thus leaving the US military unprepared for the current military competition with China and Russia. He killed the stealthy Zumwalt class of destroyers at just 3 ships, supposedly on cost grounds, but ignoring the fact that it was precisely the reduction of planned orders from 32 to 3 ships that caused the price to spike – because economies of scale were lost. He killed the AC-X gunship, a badly-needed replacement for the USAF’s Vietnam-era AC-130 gunships, and the EP-X electronic intelligence plane, a sorely needed replacement for the EP-3. He terminated C-17 production at 221 aircraft, claiming the USAF had ordered enough of these, when the USAF was actually so short on airlifters it had to rent Russian aircraft – at higher prices than what it would pay for BUYING more C-17s.

Most worryingly of all, Gates terminated the Multiple Kill Vehicle, Kinetic Energy Interceptor, and Airborne Laser programs in 2009. The MKV would’ve been a kinetic metal “warhead” designed to shoot down enemy missiles. It was to be kind of a defensive MIRV bus which would’ve released dozens of small “kill vehicles” that would’ve shot down lots of enemy ballistic missiles all at once. (Currently, a single kill vehicle from a single interceptor can kill only one enemy missile.) This would’ve solved the target discrimination problem missile defense critics often complain about – which among the missiles or warheads are real ones and which ones are duds would’ve been irrelevant, because ALL of them would be shot down.

The KEI and the Airborne Laser, for their part, would’ve enabled the US to shoot down enemy missiles in the earliest phase of their flight, when their countermeasures have NOT been deployed yet and their deadly payloads have not yet been released. In other words, when enemy missiles are the most vulnerable. This would’ve come in handy when countering any missiles, especially the hypersonic, high-speed global range missile recently tested by China (as reported by Bill Gertz in the WFB).

But America no longer has that option – because Secretary Gates terminated both of these programs in 2009, even though the ABL program, despite its infancy, was progressing well, having passed 3 out of its 5 tests before being terminated.

So when you read Bill Gertz’s articles in the WFB, the Washington Times, on Fox News, or elsewhere about China’s global range hypersonic missiles, remember America does NOT have defenses capable of stopping those missiles, and that is thanks to Obama and Gates.

Russian and Chinese threats on the horizon

But China’s development as a huge threat to US and allied security, and as a contender to replace the US as the world’s top military power, is nothing new. It was already evident during Gates’ tenure as SECDEF.

Already during Gates’ time, there already was strong evidence that China was closing most gaps with the US military and working to create its own unique advantages. There already was solid evidence China was working to overtake the US militarily and would achieve that objective absent US efforts to maintain an edge over Beijing. Yet, Gates harbored a desire to appease Beijing as well as to drive America deeper into useless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. So he ignored all that evidence, surpressed the truth and professional advice, lied to the American public, appeased Beijing with word and deed, and killed the very programs needed to counter the People’s Republic’s military buildup.

By 2009, China already had more attack submarines, and almost as many subs in total, as the US – and was steadily replacing old ones with new, ultra-quiet ones. It already had a large nuclear arsenal. It already had two stealth fighters under development. It already had almost as many ships in total as the US Navy, had deployed a dense and modern air defense network, already wielded thousands of missiles capable of targeting all US bases in the Western Pacific, already possessed anti-satellite kinetic and laser weapons, and already had hundreds of advanced fighter aircraft.

Russia was also busy building up its military, increasing its nuclear arsenal, and developing new, cutting edge weapons.

In 2010, Russia’s first stealth fighter, the PAK FA, first flew. This aircraft, when it enters service, will render EVERY fighter in the world except the F-22 Raptor impotent, irrelevant, obsolete, and useless. It will essentially be Russia’s response to the Raptor.

In January 2011, China’s first stealth fighter, the J-20, took to the air – at exactly the time Gates was visiting China. The Gates Pentagon was caught completely by surprise by this development, even though those of us who were clear-eyed about the Chinese threat had been warning for years that the J-20 (J-XX) would soon perform its maiden flight.

At the same time, China and Russia were also protecting America’s enemies North Korea and Iran and shielding them from any consequences of their provocations and illegal nuclear programs.

Also, advanced Chinese and Russian weapons, including the forementioned fighters, will be available to anyone able to pay for them.

But whenever someone dared to call on the US to prepare itself for possible confrontations with China, Gates derided that person as ill with “next-war-itis”, and he ordered the DOD to limit itself to fighting useless “counter-insurgency” wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Under Gates, tens of billions of dollars were thrown away buying mine-resistant vehicles and nonstealthy, short-ranged, poorly armed drones like the Predator and the Reaper – which are useful only for fighting terrorists, but utterly useless against any nation state wielding any advanced weaponry.

Now that the Iraq war is long over, and the Afghan war is coming to an end, all those mine-resistant (MRAP) vehicles and drones will have to be sold to allies, stored, or scrapped.

Thanks to Gates, who stubbornly advocated staying in Afghanistan and Iraq almost indefinitely and throwing hundreds of billions of dollars at them, the US is now dramatically worse off: well over a trillion dollars has been spent fighting those wars, billions more will be spent on caring for veterans of these wars, and over 5,400 brave US troops have died for no good reason.

While Gates attempts to portray himself as a man who stood by military uniformed leaders during crisis times, his tenure in the Pentagon was actually marked by an unrestrained use of political power to surpress the truth and professional military advice in order to fund Gates’ pet projects like the F-35, MRAP vehicles, drones, and, of course, the useless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Enabling Obama’s unilateral disarmament of the US

As Defense Secretary, Gates has greatly helped Obama gut the US military – and not just through the program killings listed above, but also through his advocacy of arms control agreements that obligate only the US to disarm itself.

Gates supported the treasonous New START treaty, which obligates the US (but not Russia) to cut its deployed strategic nuclear arsenal to just 1,550 warheads and 700 deployed delivery systems – and Obama envisions even more cuts, down to just 1,000 warheads. That will necessitate, among other things, cutting at least 30 ICBMs. Gates lied to the Congress that the treaty would’ve allowed the US to maintain a sufficient nuclear arsenal and, ridiculously, claimed it would “protect” US nuclear modernization programs, which it actually threatens. He and Hillary Clinton also lied to the Congress that the treaty does not constrain US missile defenses, which it actually does.

Gates also supported the Law of the Sea Treaty, which the Reagan Administration rightly rejected and which would’ve cost America its sovereignty, subordinating it to the corrupt UN and its kangaroo maritime dispute courts, and would’ve cost US taxpayers billions of dollars in new contributions to the wasteful, corrupt UN.

Final verdict: an Obama yes-boy and a traitor

Therefore, based on the above facts about Gates’ tenure as SECDEF, an honest person cannot assess him as anything else as an Obama yes-boy, a traitor, and an utter failure as Defense Secretary. No honest person, and especially no Republican, should give him credit for anything – he does not deserve it. Gates deserves, in fact, to be tried, convicted, and executed as a traitor.

A Disgrace Worthy of a Resignation

10092013

It is unconscionable. It is rude, insensitivity, callus and unacceptable. With the news that family members of fallen soldiers killed in Afghanistan are not only being denied death benefits, but are being denied transportation to Dover AFB for the arrival of the caskets containing the remains of their loved ones, the Obama Administration has crossed a “red line” with the American people. Progressives in Washington and across the nation, you are now on notice: We – regular, rank-and-file, hard-working American every-men and -women – are not going to take the “pain” of your ideological agenda anymore.

Few things are sacrosanct among all Americans, the proper treatment and respect of the men and women of the Armed Forces – and their families – one such thing. But Mr. Obama, his administration, and the sycophants who voted for and support them have disrespected and caused unnecessary pain for these patriots, both fallen and family. Just as in the 1960s, these very same people and people of the same mindset, are once again spitting in the faces of the American soldier, this time extending that vile discontent to the survivors and their children.

FOX News reports:

It’s another ugly symptom of Mr. Obama’s partial government shutdown — and this time it impacts the families of soldiers who are dying for their country.

The Pentagon confirmed Tuesday that, as long as the budget impasse lasts, it will not be able to pay death benefits to the families of troops who’ve been killed in combat.

“Unfortunately, as a result of the shutdown, we do not have the legal authority to make death gratuity payments at this time,” said Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Defense Department spokesman.

House lawmakers, though, are planning to vote Wednesday on a bill to restore funding for the payments. And Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), on Tuesday accused the Obama administration of needlessly withholding the money…

The Pentagon says it has specific instructions from its budget office not to make payments for deaths that occurred after 11:59pm on Sept. 30, 2013.

And that’s about enough…We should all demand – demand – the name of the imbecile who made this decision (I am certain that it came from Mr. Obama’s inner-circle) and demand – demand – that person’s resignation, terminating that person’s governmental career complete with withheld benefits.

President Obama is the Commander in Chief and that position mandates a responsibility to care for the whole of the military family. This responsibility is absolute and non-discretionary. That this situation even exists must – must and without question – rest on Mr. Obama’s shoulders personally.

In fact, if one of the duties of the Presidency is being Commander in Chief, this abdication of responsibility to our soldiers and their families (they are considered military families and many live on military bases, shop at military base PXs, etc.) for political purposes should be deemed an impeachable offense; disavowing any aspect of the position of Commander in Chief must be considered a “high crime and misdemeanor.”

We, as a nation, have been subjected to the arrogance and bully-tactics of Mr. Obama’s Chicago Progressive political mindset long enough. We have been subjected to the sycophancy of a Progressive mainstream media continuously lobbing softball questions to this president; ignoring not only the execution of poor government, but scandals that – in more than one case – have cost Americans their lives. I contend that this is too high a price for a country to pay just because Progressive ideologues insists on executing the politically correct, “social justice,” Marxist transformation of our nation, purely for power, fame and fortune.

It is time to define Progressivism for what it is: a destructive force that is antithetical to our Founders’ vision of a limited government and a free people. It is also time to confront Progressivism at every level, in every governmental chamber, on every street corner and in every individual.

Progressivism is not unlike Islamofascism in that the ideology is not – not –compatible with the Natural Law right to individual liberty and the overall concepts of self-reliance and freedom. It also stands as just as lethal a threat to our nation.

That Mr. Obama has not already addressed the subject of getting the fallen soldiers’ families their promised death benefits and respectful transportation to Dover AFB for the arrival of the caskets is beyond disgraceful. If Mr. Obama had a shred of decency; an once of honor, he would have already ordered a solution to this problem from the available Pentagon funding (and yes, there is money there to satisfy this situation). That he hasn’t should result in his resignation from office…immediately.

Yes, it is that much of an issue.

War College Article’s Offensive Scenario Defames Tea Party

A recent war college magazine posting has people up in arms about the role of the military in domestic operations, and mentions the “Tea Party” as a bad actor in the scenario.

I was up on Twitter tonight when I got a tweet from Ann Barnhardt of Barnhardt.biz. Her tweet alleges that a US Army War College publication called Small Wars Journal posted an article describing a potential scenario in which the Tea Party takes over a small town somewhere in the US and forces the state Governor and the President to act, calling up the United States military into action to return law and order.

Here is Ann’s tweet, which may be a retweet from someone else.

Ann Barnhardt – http://barnhardt.biz/

Ann Barnhardt ‏@AnnBarnhardt

Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Futurehttp://j.mp/QDaeTM 

In the article dated 25 July of this year, the authors Kevin Benson, a retired Army Colonel and Jennifer Weber, a historian specializing in the American Civil War outline a potential scenario where Tea Party Patriots upset at the government’s lack of enforcement of immigration laws and departure from the Constitution take over a small town called Darlington. The Tea Party militia forms and starts check points or choke points where they stop an harass non-whites who appear to be legal or illegal aliens. The governor ran his election campaign giving tacit approval to the Tea Party and feels for political reasons he is unable to enforce the laws to stop the local militia using National Guard or local police forces. In addition, local police are co-opted by the militia and are of questionable use in stopping the militia in any case.

If you can get over the obvious offensiveness of the connection of the Tea Party to racism and right wing zealotry, I find that this scenario is startlingly accurate and well thought out. The publication, Small Wars Journal, seems to be an academic publication aimed at educating military leaders at the war college level, those officers attaining the higher ranks past lieutenant colonel. Students at our war college are bombarded with and discuss scenarios like this all the time as part of their training and are educated to think outside the box. Our military has it’s whole purpose in defending the homeland from enemies foreign and domestic and the leaders of our military have to be educated to foresee the possible scenarios. While I think it is more likely that a group of Occupy Wall Street militia would be of more danger than the Tea Party, or even a far right faction of the local Muslim Brotherhood here in the homeland, I’m not overly concerned that the authors chose to use the Tea Party as their example.

The authors make the argument that the Posse Comitatus act would not be infringed upon because of the powerlessness of the governor and the local city government because of the influence of the militia, and the proclamation of the President whose duty it is to restore order. The Posse Comitatus act for anyone’s curiosity is the act that prohibits the military from acting within the continental United States. At least that’s what everyone thinks. Actually, a quick check with Wikipedia confirms that the military can and will be used to exercise police powers to restore law and order within the limits of the Constitution.

Says Wikipedia – “The Posse Comitatus Act is the United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) that was passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction. Its intent (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) was to limit the powers of local governments and law enforcement agencies in using federal military personnel to enforce the laws of the land. Contrary to popular belief, the Act does not prohibit members of the Army from exercising statelaw enforcementpolice, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order“; it simply requires that any authority to do so must exist with the United States Constitution or Act of Congress. In this way, most use of the Army and the Air Force at the direction of the President does not offend the statute, even though it may be problematic for political reasons.”

Oh, Ok. So the authors are right.

Case in point. I was in the National Guard here in Minnesota when I was activated to aid local law enforcement during the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis in 2008. Quick reaction forces were formed and trained, soldiers were posted at checkpoints in different areas of the Cities, tactical operations posts were manned and operated as communications hubs. All branches of the service were made available to help law enforcement, including the Coast Guard. From my vantage point at the St. Paul Airport where my soldiers and I manned a checkpoint I saw Coast Guard helicopters deploy from the airfield to intercept civilian air traffic that violated the city air space. (When high ranking politicians are in town for example, the government has the authority to declare a National Emergency for political purposes and enforce a no fly zone for a specific event like the RNC.)

I also saw quick reaction forces of the State Patrol deploy from my location to deal with anarchist groups downtown who were busy throwing human urine and feces at cops and breaking windows. I saw firsthand the kind of scenario the authors of this article are talking about. Forget for a moment that they were all Leftist, as rioters in these scenarios tend to be. From what I saw, the police forces of the Twin Cities reacted to the chaos with remarkable restraint and professionalism and the military served a proper behind the scenes role, as it should be. I didn’t see any tanks rolling down main street, though I did see that the crap throwing Occupy Zombies were cornered on a bridge by city officials driving a snow plow.

My brother was an officer in the National Guard at the time in Denver where the Democratic National Convention was taking place. He was asked to take command of a quick reaction force and we exchanged notes. From his standpoint, as confirmed in a briefing I attended with the Secret Service, the knuckleheads causing problems in Denver were the exact same goofballs that came up to Minneapolis. They were, you guessed it, Leftists!

Should people be concerned that the military can be used to quash civil unrest? I think that it is always a good idea for civil libertarians to be on guard on the over reach of their government. The constitution guarantees our rights, but it also provides us as citizens with responsibilities. We always forget that part. I would also like to state emphatically the majority of the US military does not view citizens of this country as the enemy by and large. There are always horrible examples of course, but those are few and far between, i.e. the Ruby Ridge Debacle and the Branch Dravidians tragedy in Waco Texas. We as conservatives and libertarians should always be on guard to push back against government over reach and remind our government of who they work for. After all, the government should fear the people, but the people should never fear the government.

I would also like to stress that we as conservatives and libertarians should refrain from being overly reactionary in our rhetoric. Talk of revolution in this very stressful time in our history is not helpful. While many of us are outraged at the direction of our country; the failure of the government to rein in the debt, their failure to enforce immigration laws already on the books, a move by big government progressives away from republican principles and towards a socialist nanny state, and the gutlessness of our politicians on the right to stand for their principles, all of these things are cause for concern. But we should however refrain from putting gasoline on the fire by talking about rebellion.

Think about our Civil War, how brutal and awful that was! Think to about the tragedy of Manifest Destiny and the removal of Native American tribes from the land! A new revolution on this continent would be a massive Air/Land campaign with tanks and airplanes that would fracture the states one from another. The military would be torn apart as young men and women of military age try to decide which side to join. The currency of the United States would be worthless as states succeed from the Union and form their own governments. Joblessness and tumult would cascade across the country. Things would be worse not better. I predict such a skirmish would be short but brutal, leading to the direct or indirect deaths of a third or more of our population.

If you want to avoid this nightmare scenario but want to affect change in a positive way to restoring the country to a Constitutional Republic, there is only one way: peaceful activism in the political process!

No the Tea Party is not the enemy and they are not racist, by and large. Yes, it was offensive for the authors of this article to imply. Am I concerned about this kind of rhetoric being transformed into a real life scenario, yes, but I am more concerned in the over reaction of many of my fellows. Don’t waste your breath and effort on minutiae. We can win in November and return sanity to our government.

So keep the faith!

I want to leave you with this comment by a military member who responded to this article posting and keep in mind that it was one of many. I think it accurately reflects the sentiment of many of our military members who defend our freedom every day.

by JC-Marine | August 4, 2012 – 8:06pm

As a retired Marine and as a retired cop, I find the authors’ fictional scenario quite disturbing and not well thought out.

What the heck happened to the Posse Comitatus Act?

Your scenario is clearly a law enforcement action. One that can and would be handled by state and local police — and the state’s National Guard if need be.

Roll federal tanks and APCs down main street, and you would have more than your fictional, evil Tea Party to contend with. You’d have everyone from high-school kids to retired folks running around shooting up your tanks and troops, while screaming: “Wolverines!

OK. Here’s one more. Be reassured.

by Hawken | August 4, 2012 – 7:54am

Are you kidding me? the tea party, a movement dedicated to the US constitution and smaller responsible government, a movement who has zero arrests in their rallies (unlike the occupy movement), this is what the military is preparing for?

The question is not if the US military can defeat any foe, of course it can, the question is whether it should. The US military if an arm of the people and not those in power. The US military is made up of its citizens, paid for by its citizens, if an armed resistance to a over-reaching government ever arises the military will have to think carefully upon its actions and not blindly follow those in power.

With laws such as the patriot act, national defense authorization act, NSPD 51, et. al., our federal government is showing that power does corrupt.

Thank you Ann, for bringing this article to our attention.

God Bless America, the Constitutional Republic of the United States!

*The author was an Army National Guard Logistician with 19-years experience, including domestic mobilizations and one long tour in Iraq.