Tag Archives: Military personnel

America First: Military Defense Part II

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

This is a follow-up to a prior article where I outlined how our foreign policy should return to the principle of America First, which was advocated by our Founding Fathers. This article focuses on specific actions that should be taken for our defense. While I am admittedly not a military planning expert, these suggestions are based on common sense; a characteristic sorely missing in many of our current defense leadership who seem more focused on their “woke” agenda.

We are living in a dangerous time. During the Cold War, we only had to worry about the Soviet Union from the standpoint of nuclear conflict. Now with China, Russia, North Korea, Pakistan, and soon Iran, having nuclear capability, the situation is far more complex and dangerous. First: one of the things that President Reagan wisely did was to encourage the development of an effective missile defense system. This was not continued by subsequent administrations. We need to return to developing a missile defense system. If we don’t, we will be at the mercy of any rogue country that decides to launch an attack. Second: we need to establish a satellite defense system that will protect our essential satellites without which a modern war cannot be fought. President Trump’s decision to create an effective Space Force needs to be strongly supported. Third: we need to fortify and secure our electrical power grid from sabotage or direct attack. This must also include protecting the computer programs that control these systems. One of the dumbest proposals from the Left is offshore wind farms. I cannot think of anything more vulnerable than a power system fifty miles away from our shores. Fourth, we need to consolidate our current military forces. According to a recent article in the Epoch Times, we have over 200,000 military personnel scattered all over the globe. We need to refocus these deployments and encourage our allies to support their own defenses. Europe, South Korea, and Japan for example, should not be relying on us for their defense. We are 34 trillion dollars in debt!. Fifth, we need to focus on ensuring that we have the strongest Navy in the world. We should use this force as needed and then return them to proximity to our shores where their vulnerability to attack is lessoned as compared to stationing naval fleets all over the world. Sixth, we need to return to the principle contained in the Monroe Doctrine that declared the Western Hemisphere to be off limits to our adversaries. Allowing China to infiltrate countries like Venezuela and Ecuador is contrary to our interests.

The last item is dealing with the drug cartels in Mexico. The weaponization of mass illegal migration, is a direct threat of our survival as a country. The influx of fentanyl is estimated to kill 100,000 Americans each year and is now the greatest cause of death of American men between the age of 19 and 45. We fought terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq. When are we going to get serious and destroy the drug cartels? That is a fight worth having.

The above will require a refocusing of our defense efforts. However, continuing what we have been doing is no longer tenable.

America First: Defense Part I

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, PhD

In another recent article, I wrote about the importance of putting America First (as advocated by the Founding Fathers) and ensuring that we have a strong economy not dependent of other countries for essential manufactures, medical supplies and food. This article will focus on what we should be doing to protect our country from current and future adversaries.

There were two essential principles of the America First policy of the Founding Fathers. The first was avoiding foreign wars that did not directly impact on our security; and the second was to focus on ensuring that the Western Hemisphere did not become controlled by our adversaries from other parts of the world (i.e. The Monroe Doctrine). The Founding Fathers would be dismayed that some of our leaders have increasingly advocated that we are obligated to defend other countries anywhere in the world that are threatened or attacked. This progressive, globalist idea has us acting as the world’s policeman to keep the world “ Safe for Democracy” This idea, advocated by Woodrow Wilson, has led us into many wars where we actually failed, made things worse, and as a consequence are increasingly seen as weak and not a country to be afraid of offending. This is not good for our security since it invites more aggression.

A good example, was our invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of the attacks on 9/11. Instead of just identifying the enemy, hitting them with overwhelming force, and then leaving; the elitist leaders of our country decided we should turn both those countries into democracies. After wasting trillions of dollars (which we don’t have) and the lives of our patriotic military personnel, we are in many ways worse than before. Iran is in ascendance and the Taliban was left with $85 billion dollars of the finest military equipment. Also, our worst adversary, China, has taken over a military airbase we built! Of course, our leaders never asked us if this is what we wanted. They just took it upon themselves since they know best. These things would never have happened if we had followed the American First principle of our Founding Fathers.

We are perceived as so weak, that a group of Houthi rebels in Yemen attack our ships and those of other countries with impunity. This reminds me of the wars with the Barbary Pirates who captured our ships and enslaved our sailors in the early 1800s. Along with a couple of allies, we hit them hard and stopped their attacks on our ships. We should do likewise with the Houthis. Hit them with overwhelming force and stop matching them shot for shot.

As far as protecting our hemisphere is concerned, China has been steadily increasing its influence over several South American countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, Brazil and Chile. China extends loans that then make those countries dependent on their relationship with China. For example, China has loaned over $60 billion to Venezuela some of which was used for military equipment to suppress the uprising against communist dictator President Maduro. China builds its own seaports and other facilities that can be used to offset our influence in the Western Hemisphere. This is part of China’s Belt and Road project that has the objective of controlling the global world order.

In summary, it is time for America to re-evaluate our commitments and foreign policy to ensure that we are focused on what is best for America.

More Questions Than Answers

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Epoch Times posted an article about the increasing occurrence of myocarditis in our military personnel.

The article reports:

Cases of myocarditis soared among U.S. service members in 2021 after the COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out, a top Pentagon official has confirmed.

There were 275 cases of myocarditis in 2021—a 151 percent spike from the annual average from 2016 to 2020, according to Gilbert Cisneros Jr., undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, who confirmed data revealed by a whistleblower earlier this year.

The COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation that can lead to mortality, including sudden death. COVID-19 also can cause myocarditis.

The diagnosis data comes from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database.

Mr. Cisneros provided the rate of cases per 100,000 person-years, a way to measure risk across a certain period of time. In 2021, the rate was 69.8 among those with prior infection, compared to 21.7 among members who had been vaccinated.

“This suggests that it was more likely to be [COVID-19] infection and not COVID-19 vaccination that was the cause,” Mr. Cisneros said.

No figures were given for members who had been vaccinated but were also infected. The total rate, 20.6, also indicates that some members weren’t included in the subgroup analysis.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who has been investigating problems with the database, questioned how the military came up with the figures.

“It is unclear whether or how it accounted for service members who had a prior COVID-19 infection and received a COVID-19 vaccination,” Mr. Johnson wrote to Mr. Cisneros.

There are some unique aspects of the use of the Covid-19 vaccine. It has been reported that the vaccine could not be approved for emergency use unless there was no known cure for the disease. Oddly enough, despite information that ivermectin had been used successfully to treat Covid-19, the FDA would not approve that treatment. Thus, the vaccine was able to be used. Since we are no longer in a state of emergency, I wonder what has happened to vaccine mandates.

The article concludes:

Military officials hadn’t previously mentioned any data lag previously while communicating with Mr. Johnson or the public, and they didn’t incorporate the available data when they sent him another missive in mid-2022.

“Without the whistleblower’s disclosure, I doubt DOD would have ever acknowledged that it provided incomplete information to my office in February 2022 and again in July 2022,” Mr. Johnson said.

He said the DOD had demonstrated “a complete disregard for transparency” and urged officials to make clear whether it has investigated whether any of the medical conditions for which diagnoses spiked are associated with the vaccines.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

The Ongoing Purge Of Our Military

Posted on by

The Epoch Times reported yesterday that the Biden administration opposes giving honorable discharges to American military personnel who refuse to get the Covid vaccine.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden’s administration on Wednesday came out against efforts to prevent dishonorable discharges for U.S. troops who refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine.

The Office of Management and Budget said in a policy statement it “strongly opposes” an amendment to the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that bars any discharge but honorable for service members.

The provision “would detract from readiness and limit a commander’s options for enforcing good order and discipline when a Service member fails to obey a lawful order to receive a vaccination,” the office said, adding that commanders “must have the ability to give orders and take appropriate disciplinary measures” in order to have “a uniformed force to fight with discipline.”

The amendment received support from members of both parties during a markup of the act on Sept. 1. It was authored by Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), a military veteran and a doctor.

At the time, Green said he understood the need for a vaccine mandate but noted that no longitudinal data is yet available for the COVID-19 vaccines, adding that service members who decide not to get vaccinated and are ultimately discharged should receive an honorable discharge.

“I am dismayed and concerned that the Biden administration is trying to remove my amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that prevents anything but an honorable discharge for service members who refuse to get the COVID-19 vaccine,” Green told The Epoch Times in an email.

“This was a bipartisan amendment—not one Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee opposed it. Nothing is more telling of the current political climate than the Biden administration refusing to respect the rights of our military that every House Democrat on the Committee voted for,” he added.

Until someone is able to be held liable for any negative impact from the vaccine, I don’t think anyone should be forced to take the vaccine. The range of reactions to the vaccine is as wide as the range of the coronavirus–everything from sniffles and feeling tired to hospitalization. Refusing the vaccine should not result in a dishonorable discharge. This is just another example of inappropriate coercion on the part of the Biden administration.

The Second Amendment Saves Lives

Status

The New York Post posted a story yesterday about a shooting in a restaurant in Oklahoma City. A man walked into the restaurant and began shooting, injuring two people. A person in the restaurant who had a gun shot the gunman, killing him. The two people shot by the gunman are in the hospital recovering.

How long would it have taken for the police to respond to the incident? Would anyone have had a chance to call the police before being shot? How many people would have been shot before the police got there?

This is an example of the basic fact that the quickest way to stop an evil person with a gun is to have a good person with a gun at the scene. I am not supporting creating ‘the wild west,’ but there have been a few shootings recently where having an armed person at the scene saved lives.

We have the resources to put trained people in our schools with guns. There are a number of ways this can be done without breaking the budgets of the schools. One suggestion I have heard is to ask retired policemen or retired military personnel to stand guard a few days a week in return for tax breaks on their local taxes. There are other ways to do this, but that is one suggestion.

The bottom line is simple–having a well-trained, armed person at the scene of a shooting saves lives.

The Remaining Questions About Benghazi

Posted on by

Benghazi does not seem to be going away. Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line reported that 700 retired special operations military personnel have signed a letter to members of the House of Representatives, asking them to investigate the Benghazi debacle. This is the link to the letter.

The concern of the former special ops personnel is that the American policy of leaving no one behind was not followed during the attack. The Ambassador and three other people were essentially abandoned by the American government that was supposed to protect them.

The letter states:

A longstanding American ethos was breached during the terrorist attack in Benghazi. America failed to provide adequate security to personnel deployed into harm’s way and then failed to respond when they were viciously attacked. Clearly, this is unacceptable and requires accountability. America has always held to the notion that no American will be left behind and that every effort will be made to respond when US personnel are threatened. Given our backgrounds, we are concerned that this sends a very negative message to future military and diplomatic personnel who may be deployed into dangerous environments.  That message is that they will be left to their own devices when attacked.  That is an unacceptable message.

The letter asks that the House Select Committee ask the Obama Administration sixteen questions that have not yet been answered and demand answers to those questions. The families of those Americans killed in the attack deserve at least that much.

Enhanced by Zemanta