Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Democrats Don't Get it!

Been a while since I blogged, so time to rev up the verbal chainsaw and shove the bar where it needs to go.
Today's verbal target: Barack Hussein Obama, aka IL Douche or His Royal Islamic Highness.
Reason: Military budget cuts.

   Today, General Raymond Odierno, the Army Chief of Staff said America needs to rethink defense cuts and the military budget. Here's the link:U.S. Army Getting Too Small

   Now that you've read it, here's my opinion.
   The first responsibility of ANY government is to protect its borders, embassies and national interests.
   Pay attention, Barack. School is in session.
   Repeat after me. "A leader is responsible for what his subordinates do or fail to do."
   We sure could use a properly sized, trained, equipped and balanced military right about now. Our borders are WIDE open. Il Douche does not want to discuss BENGHAZI (and how we "could not get there in time"). Our national interests are under attack. WHO is ultimately responsible for national security?
   The Commander in Chief, Barack Hussein Obama.

   Since His Royal Islamic Highness does not have a military background, I will do my best to educate him in what a proper military consists of.

   America must have a properly sized military. To my mind, a properly sized military means you have sufficient units to handle whatever national commitments you make without "breaking the troops."
   Example: If we send a division to Iraq, there needs to be a total of two divisions "earmarked" for the mission. One division on the ground. One resting, refitting, and gearing up for the deployment. It's that simple.

  Properly trained means each unit is thoroughly and expertly trained for its designated mission. NO CUTTING CORNERS.
   EXAMPLE: Army tankers, MOS19K. Each tanker receives extensive training as part of "One Station Unit Training" that turns out properly trained tankers after 12 weeks.
   When the new tanker joins his unit, he is assigned to a crew and trains exclusively with them in simulators. He will work on his tank and master his job.
   When the tank crew goes to the field, they will drive in all conditions and fire all weapons. This is EXPENSIVE, but you can only teach so much in a simulator. You MUST get your hands dirty, disturb the local wildlife and make loud noises.
   Politicians MUST refrain from deciding to cut training budgets. Marksmanship and vehicle use are often the first cut. You wind up with tank crews who can't hit the broad side of a barn and who can't employ their vehicles tactically. Crews that fail these standards are known as DEAD. I bet if politician's kids were in those tanks, training standards would stay high and there would be a decent budget for training.

   The troops MUST have the best equipment available and the money to maintain it properly. I'm not talking about buying every gee-whiz device on the market. I'm talking about giving the troops the best equipment available to perform the mission.
   EXAMPLE: M1 Abrams tank.
   During the Cold War, we figured we would be fighting off hordes of Soviet tanks in Europe. As those Communist baby-bangers had 50,000 tanks, we had to have BETTER tanks to offset their numerical superiority.
   Thus, the Army said "we NEED a new tank," gathered experienced tankers who came up with the "ideal" tank. Naturally, the civilians balked at the concept of spending millions PER tank. The Abrams is NOT fuel-efficient, and the politicians on the LEFT side of the aisle freaked because their "experts" from the LEFT side of society said the Abrams couldn't do what its designers said it could.
   Cost of training would be frightful because the Abrams was not merely a new tank--it pretty much revolutionized the concept of tank warfare. The Left wing grumbled, tried to get budget cuts, tried to get the Abrams program ended, etc.
   Desert Storm shut up the critics. The Abrams superior range, electronics and mechanical reliability ate the Iraqi Army's tanks for a snack. Having that tank (and other awesome weapons) is one reason American casualties were incredibly low.

   Now we will discuss "properly-balanced" forces.
   To my mind, "properly-balanced" means one service is not overly favored or neglected. A superpower like the United States cannot afford to throw too much money at one service--or neglect any. Each service plays a vital role and neglecting a service in favor of the "theory of the week" will bite America in the ass in the end.
   EXAMPLE: After WW2, it was believed atomic weapons would be able to adequately safeguard America from the Communists. The Air Force was given the responsibility for providing the nuclear umbrella. When the Korean War started, the nearest unit, the 24th Infantry Division was the occupation force in Japan. They did not have money to train for war and when they went to Korea, they paid for the politician's budget cuts in blood. Air power alone did not stop the North Koreans and Chinese forces. It took ground forces with air and naval support to stop the invasion.

   As Democrats clearly don't "get it," it falls to we, the people to elect leaders who DO get it.
   When you go to the polls this November 4th, remember one silent lesson from history.

    Those that do not prepare for war often become slaves of those who do prepare for war.


No comments:

Post a Comment