Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Obama And Our Military---The Fear Factor!

(Originally Published in Sonoran News, December 19, 2012)



Becky Fenger Fenger Pointing
Obama�s fear factor

Since this is my last column for a while (I am taking a break from the political arena), I want to write about something of extreme importance to our soldiers scattered in the field throughout the world. It was brought to my attention in an article by Major General Patrick Brady, U.S. Army (ret.) and a Medal of Honor recipient. It is sobering, no matter one�s beliefs regarding war, where the winner is determined by how many of our guys die versus how many of yours wind up dead.

General Brady was puzzled by the changes in battlefield aeromedical evacuation in an operation known as Dustoff, which he calls the most outstanding battlefield operating system of the Vietnam War. He credits it for saving some one million lives and resulting in unprecedented survival rates. Dustoff pilots and crew were revered by the troops, who knew that Dustoff was there for them come hell or high water.

That has all changed. General Brady tells of horror stories from our current battlefields where patients are dying because Dustoff didn�t launch or came too late. In his unit in Vietnam, the launch standard was two minutes. Today it is fifteen minutes. The changes to what was an excellent, proven system, he informs us, are a result of the Obama-Panetta Doctrine.

The basic principle is laid out by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in his response to the Obama administration�s abandonment of Americans in Benghazi: �You don�t deploy forces into harm�s way without knowing what�s going on; without having some real-time information about what�s taking place.� There you have it.

This sea change from the United States� doctrine in past wars is incomprehensible to Gen. Brady and his friends. �By that standard, there would have been no Normandy or Inchon,� he wrote. �Dustoff has been removed from the control of the professionals, the medics, and put under the control of amateurs, aviation staff officers, or ASOs.�

He thinks he knows the reason for the change, and that lies in President Obama�s lack of understanding of the military (even his discomfort and avoidance of them) and military matters. Obama can�t make decisions, Brady says, and takes an extraordinary amount of time to do so because he is so risk adverse. �He cowers from crisis decisions. He is a politician who thinks only in terms of votes, and his own image,� Brady charges. (What a resume for a Commander-in-Chief!)

It is not patient care, but risk assessment that is now the primary consideration for mission launch, with our soldiers dying as a result. �The ASOs, remote from the battle, have developed time-consuming algorithms to analyze risk while the patient bleeds,� Gen. Brady reports. He lays the blame on Obama�s aversion to risk that contributed to the massacre of Americans by terrorists in Benghazi and has heard that Obama did not even convene the Counterterrorism Security Group while the Benghazi massacre was visually and verbally available in real time.


But of course, once you bring in a group labeled anti-terrorist, Gen. Brady points out, you have to acknowledge that terror exists, something the president is loath to do. That would counter Obama�s claim that he has defeated terrorism.

With the media reluctant to pursue the issue, we will never know the full extent of the administration�s failure.

To add insult to (literal) injury, news of the new military manual for our servicemen surfaced. It�s a doozy of political correctness. Soldiers are not allowed to speak ill of Muslims, Islam or to criticize abuse of women or their other atrocities since that might anger and incite the enemy. Such nonsense is only going to get worse in the months ahead.

The last straw happened at a new restaurant I was anxious to try. As I looked at the menu, I overheard someone at the next table discussing the Benghazi killings. She said that, despite the deaths, we needn�t have Congressional hearings on the matter because, after all, �it was worth it to get Obama elected to a second term.� As I jumped up, I called the manager over and told him I was leaving, thus saving him the trouble of ejecting me over what would have happened had I stayed for my calamari.

There comes a time when a quiet exit is the best thing one can do.

I am going to do something special for our soldiers this Christmas. It is painfully obvious that, with the Obama-Panetta Doctrine, they are going to need it.
Contact Becky:

beckyfenger@(removeThis)cox.net

Copyright � 2012 Sonoran News

Well in the coming civil war this will give the Liberty loving peoples a decided advantage.

This August article is all the more frightening now post-election

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/7/the-civil-war-of-2016/

The Civil War of 2016

U.S. military officers are told to plan to fight Americans

Imagine Tea Party extremists seizing control of a South Carolina town and the Army being sent in to crush the rebellion. This farcical vision is now part of the discussion in professional military circles.

At issue is an article in the respected Small Wars Journal titled �Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A �Vision� of the Future.� It was written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army's University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert at the University of Kansas. It posits an �extremist militia motivated by the goals of the �tea party� movement� seizing control of Darlington, S.C., in 2016, �occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council and placing the mayor under house arrest.� The rebels set up checkpoints on Interstate 95 and Interstate 20 looking for illegal aliens. It�s a cartoonish and needlessly provocative scenario.

The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army�s Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that �once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.� They claim that �the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,� not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy.

The vision is hard to take seriously. As retired ArmyBrig. Gen. Russell D. Howard, a former professor at West Point, observed earlier in his career, �I am a colonel, colonels write a lot of crazy stuff, but no one listens to colonels, so I don�t see the problem.� Twenty years ago, then-Air Force Lt. Col. Charles J. Dunlap Jr. created a stir with an article in Parameters titled �The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012.� It carried a disclaimer that the coup scenario was �purely a literary device intended to dramatize my concern over certain contemporary developments affecting the armed forces, and is emphatically not a prediction.�

The scenario presented in Small Wars Journal isn�t a literary device but an operational lay-down intended to present the rationale and mechanisms for Americans to fight Americans. Col. Benson and Ms. Weber contend, �Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil.� This is a dark, pessimistic and wrongheaded view of what military leaders should spend their time studying.

A professor at the Joint Forces Staff College was relieved of duty in June for uttering the heresy that the United States is at war with Islam. The Obama administration contended the professor had to be relieved because what he was teaching was not U.S. policy. Because there is no disclaimer attached to the Small Wars piece, it is fair to ask, at least in Col. Benson�s case, whether his views reflect official policy regarding the use of U.S. military force against American citizens.

Copyright 2012 - The Washington Times

UPDATE: The standard Defense Department disclaimer was added to the article after The Washington Times drew attention to the omission.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/7/the-civil-war-of-2016/#ixzz2GSh2k29Y

Obama as anything instills fear.

Great read. Here is the LINK which is gong directly to my facebook page for my liberal Harvard educated cousins.

"Twenty years ago, then-Air Force Lt. Col. Charles J. Dunlap Jr. created a stir with an article in Parameters titled �The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012.� It carried a disclaimer that the coup scenario was �purely a literary device intended to dramatize my concern over certain contemporary developments affecting the armed forces, and is emphatically not a prediction.�

Maybe this is why there seems (to me) to be a purge of the officer ranks going on.

Truly saddening...........

MM

Think Stalin's purge of the officers corps and you'll be on track