Posted on 07/16/2015 5:14:31 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
“Where do we find such men?”
That memorable line comes from James Mitchner’s Korean War novel, The Bridges of Toko-Ri. It refers to intrepid aviators lifting from a carrier, flying into untold danger. They know they may not return. They launch anyway. In boldness unfathomable to many, they willingly, artfully fly into peril. They are warriors, men of rare talent, intellect, and courage – a combination essential for victory.
Needed warriors are now being purged from the U.S. military. If America went to war right now with China or Russia, we could lose because of these purges. We’re losing top-level warrior-leaders to make the crucial differences in battle. They’re being systematically drummed out as politically incorrect. When the going gets tough, political correctness (PC) is useless. Then the brilliant, wily fighters, the coolest heads, the most courageous warriors, are needed to lead regardless of social views or record.
Today, in large measure, our fighting forces are led by briefcase-carrying busybodies, yes-men more interested in enforcing political beliefs and social change than leading in battle. They care more about their careers than what’s happening to the military and thus the country. Just last week, a new downsizing of the army was announced – without a protest.
Warriors are not prized. They are criticized and ridiculed. Up-and-coming warriors who admire the purged want to emulate them, see what’s happening, and are exiting as a result.
“Soldiers like George Patton or Curtis LeMay are no longer wanted,” writes LCOL Greg Lee, USMC (ret.) in a well-circulated internet forward. “The fundamental job of the military, ‘kill bad people and break things,’ has become critically hampered by ‘rules of engagement’ [and policies] who’s [sic] guiding logic is political outcome, not successful combat.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
To quote many of our warriors: “If they shoot at me I will shoot at them.”
Isn't it against the rules of war (Yeah I know) for a solider of one side to pretend to be a solider of the other side? Those are some really low class trooper asking for food. I'd have hanged them had I been in command.
bump for later
“general policy”
I am sure you will find a ‘stated” policy to that effect. But the actual policy, “a hard war” was different. I started to read a history book about the martial law enforced in the South during the Civil War and I literally could not finish it. The Federals convinced themselves - viewed the war in the South as a crime-in-process and acted accordingly.
I don’t know about you, but I will fight to death to protect home and hearth. I may not fight as effectively as a male, but that is because I was and am expected to play with Barbies and wear beautiful pink dresses, just like you were taught to apply makeup instead of firing a gun.
When the time comes, the Army of Texas will not allow REMFs in their ranks.
I was on active duty from 76-84. It was a challenge, no doubt about it.
I was speaking of the military not the frontier..
Pretty sad when a woman can fire a gun at home but not in the military. Don’t you find that odd?
No
I believe this is also why Obama has been waging a war on military vets in many ways including putting them at the top of every potential "domestic terrorist" list. He has repeatedly tried to deny them rights to carry firearms on the basis that they have PTSD and therefore are mentally unfit to possess firearms. He knows that in any attempt to impose martial law the vets would be the natural leaders of any organized resistance.
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.