Does the Military Consider Biden Their Commander-In-Chief?

Rollo:
GS? GS-what? Where? Aren’t you aware that GS-types are famous for their laziness, inefficiencies, abuse of the bureaucratic process and people, and support of the democratic agenda. Largest union in the US? Federal government employee union.

Wife served but no mention of rank or position (junior enlisted, perhaps). REMF.

You have a cynical opinion of servicemen and you convey your distain for them. Chief’s, colonels, whatever, as you rise more and more responsibilities rest on your shoulder, and if you end up doing the DC shuffle, wars are fought daily there over budgets to ensure they get their fair share of funds necessary to train and equip their men.

Since you like to quote people, then; “Gold is good in its place, but living, brave patriotic men are better than gold.” (Abraham Lincoln). Sadly, based on your posts, I’d not place you among patriotic men.

So, better men than you daily risk much more than a GS guy getting a paper cut, yet you insult them.

Reference Eisenhower (you should read source documents and internal memos regarding his speech). You must know the subject, you must know the issues, you must know what he actually was thinking.

From someone that served a career then over 10-yrs working in the defense industry: “The business of foreign military sales provides a critical foundation to US National Security Strategy/Policy. Without a robust foreign military sales program (FMS), the US would be denied significant access and influence tools and the US defense industry would be at risk, thereby threatening US national security. A detailed examination and understanding of foreign military sales processes and motivations are necessary to fully comprehend why the US engages in foreign military sales. From this understanding specific benefits to US political interests, military capability and industry can be identified as primary motivators shaping arms sales.

The international arms trade via government-run foreign military sales (FMS) is not well understood. FMS is oft-times misrepresented in popular media, in agenda-driven reporting/monitoring organizations and ignorant people who have not studied the issue. Consequently, many people are unaware of the driving forces behind FMS and usually associate FMS with unrealistic but entertaining fantasy or simply object to such activities altogether. The subject is further confused by a myriad of Executive Branch FMS bureaucratic processes, laws, regulations, as well as Congress. President Eisenhower’s 1961 (often taken out of context) “military industrial complex” speech contributes to an enduring negative view of the defense industry. Indeed, President Eisenhower’s speech is cited as a warning about the defense industry and its growing influence among the “councils of government.” However, in context, President Eisenhower acknowledged the need for a robust defense industry and called on informed citizenry and politicos to “recognize the imperative need for this development.” The “development” referred to a healthy defense industry, in other words, we no longer could just open a factory and start to manufacture massive amounts of arms quickly during a crisis. Consequently, far from condemning the defense industry, he was recognizing its vital role in advancing US political, economic and military goals.

He also warned about academia and their growing influence and reliance on government funds.

Have a nice day, hope your world view gets better.

Cheers, and we are over, but I guess you MUST have the last word, the immature ones always do. So, have at it because I don’t know you and your opinions are of no consequence to me.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.