IFFY...
IFFY...
He will be their commander in chief. They will need to respect and obey him accordingly, as distasteful as they may find it. Their oath is to the Constitution, which puts them under the President’s command.
Well, imagine that.
BUCK EWE, FARKY!
Disgusting how the media hides this important information for the election of every liberal democrat.
He will overcompensate by acting irrationally trying to gain the confidence of the military. His perceived “strength” will get us in trouble.
Would you want to be in Barak Obama’s army?
Recruiting could become a problem.
What? Six in 10 troops have misgivings about an incoming C-in-C with Marxist leanings who will introduce open homosexuality to the military, slash their funding to pay for stimulus packages, deny them victory in Iraq (or at least not acknowledge it), and likely at some point place them under UN command and make them subject to the World Court?
How dare they?
I bet one place Comrade Odinga - er, excuse me, Cousin Obama - is going to start sending them is to Africa, to enforce his will and the will of whatever party he is supporting there. We have never ever had a president who was so involved with foreign politics, particularly third world foreign politics, and I think this will emerge as a major problem.
"Yo, troops...!"
6 out of 10??? That is awfully low. I bet the numbers are higher, it is just that some of them won’t say how much they disdain the Marxist.
Also iffy.
I witnessed what the Clinton years did to the Army. It really does hurt morale, when you know the CIC has no respect for you whatsoever.
We got through it, though.
Obama? Well, If I were still in the Army, I would want to KNOW he was legitimately qualified to be president (I’m talking about the birth certificate here).
To all the black service men out there:
I hope you like your new bunk mate Biff! Better not plan a blanket party, cause that would be a hate crime.
Even at the worst times in the Soviet Union, there was one type of protest still left, and there was nothing even the brutal KGB could do to stop it: inefficiency.
It has even been suggested that while there was no attempt at disaster in the Iranian hostage rescue mission, the contempt for Jimmy Carter and his draft-dodging SecDef Harold Brown was so great, that many of the mid-range officers and NCOs were quick to abort the mission when things went south.
Nothing unethical, mind you, but they saw no reason to throw away their lives on an improbable mission ordered by spineless and duplicitous civilian leadership. Loyalty of subordinates is strained when superiors make their disdain for their subordinates known.
Bill Clinton. BH Obama. Two more men who demand loyalty without offering any. Who expect others to risk their lives solely because they are pawns, and sneer at them as being fools for having honor. Neither of these two men would dream of serving others, only themselves.
I do not expect mutiny, nor do I encourage it. But I cannot deny inefficiency to those of good judgment when their lives are at risk is far better than those asking them to risk their lives.
My husband has been in Iraq since September. After the election he said they were told in no uncertain terms “if you don’t have anything nice to say, keep quiet!”.
Needless to say it has been incredibly quiet among the ranks.
I feel so bad for them. He’s considering calling it quits in the Reserve soon although he had initially hoped to retire at O-6. Perhaps he can fly under the radar for a while and it will be a blessedly short 4 years.