May 162013
 

This is one of the most disgraceful and disrespectful things I have ever seen a Commander in Chief do to denigrate one of our uniformed service members:

Obama makes Marine hold umbrella for him

WTF?

The men in our armed services don’t need no stink’n umbrellas. See this Soldier?

Justin Zimla, Tomb Gaurd

A lone Tomb Sentinel, 3d U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard), walks his tour in humble reverence during Hurricane Irene in Arlington National Cemetery, Va., Aug 27.

And these Soldiers?

The Old Guard during Hurricane Sandi

These are real men. This is real commitment. This is real love of country and of the brothers with whom you serve and for those who served before you.

Notice what these Soldiers— standing the most sacred and the most honored of posts during a hurricane — do not have? That’s right, no umbrellas. And why not? It’s against regulations for them to do so.

Just as it is for Marines. According to Marine Corps regulation MCO P1020.34F of the Marine Corps Uniform Regulations chapter 3, a male Marine is not allowed to carry an umbrella while in uniform. And in case you think Obama has the authority to override this regulation, he doesn’t:

The Marine Corps Manual, the guidebook that defines protocol for officers and enlisted Marines, in section 2806 paragraph 2, specifically states “The Marine Corps Uniform Regulations, published by the Commandant of the Marine Corps, shall be binding on all Marines. No officer or official shall issue instructions which conflict with, alter, or amend any provision without the approval of the Commandant of the Marine Corps.

But of course the main reason that Marines and Soldiers don’t need umbrellas is because they’re real men who know they will not melt if a bit of rain falls on their head or uniform.

And more than that, there isn’t a Marine out there who would ask another man to hold an umbrella over his head for him.

But Obama is not a man. And this picture clearly shows how little respect or regard he has for the men who are there to protect his fucking worthless life, not to be props or servants.

The Marines, Soldiers, Sailors, and Airmen who serve beneath this narcissistic douchebag already despised him. This picture is only going to make it worse.

Apr 042013
 

Who could have seen this coming (oh, that’s right…I did).

Which means that the political pressure from the “everybody must be equal” camp to lower the standards (much as the tests to become firefighters and police officers has been steadily lowered to achieve the desired “diversity) will be significant.

Via the Free Beacon:

The only two women to participate in the Marine Corps Infantry Officer Course (IOC) failed ongoing tests to determine which infantry positions should be available to women, according to the Marine Corps Times. . . . The two women both volunteered to participate in the IOC. Two other women had previously volunteered in September but also failed.

Women and men are different. Men, for the most part, are bigger, faster, and significantly stronger than women. These are traits integral to being an infantry solider. And few jobs in the world have more dire consequences for the lowering of standards than that of infantry soldier.

Mar 192013
 

The greatest war correspondent of our day — and one that rivals the greatest our country has ever produced — Michael Yon has published this fantastic piece by G.S. Newbold, Lieutenant General, USMC (Ret.) on the Seven Myths of Women in Combat.

Obama has a clear hatred of the US Military: both the men and women who serve as well as their mission. And destroying it in anyway he can is one of his primary goals while in office. From the large and obvious (defunding the hell out if), to the actions that destroy moral and hurt recruiting/retention efforts (eliminating tuition assistance for active duty Soldiers), to the more subtle: allowing women the choice of serving in the infantry.

Gen. Newbold spells out in very clear language while this experiment in social engineering (and make no doubts about it — that is precisely what this is) is a bad idea by demolishing some popular myths about “women in combat.”

The first of which is “It’s about women in combat.”

No, it’s not. Women are already in combat, and are serving well and professionally. The issue should be more clearly entitled, “Women in the infantry.” And this is a decidedly different proposition.

The next 6 points made by the General — who served 32 years as a Marine infantryman, commanding units from platoon to the 1st Marine Division. His final assignment before retiring in 2002 was as director of operations for the Pentagon’s Joint Staff — address why women in the Infantry is just a bad idea.

Having served as a Combat Medic in a Support Battalion that had a large number of female Soldiers — having trained side-by-side with female soldiers in our Combat Medic AIT (women who were not held to the same physical standards as their male counterparts), I can assure you that having most of these women serve as the sole combat medic in a platoon (often the case) would get people killed. To include the female medic.

The new rules for allowing women in the infantry includes the caveat that they meet the “minimum” physical qualifications of male infantry members. Gen. Newbold slaps this one down as a setback for truly talented and capable female Soldiers in their quest for promotion and leadership roles:

Myth #3 – “If they pass the physical standards, why not?”

Physical standards are important, but not nearly all of the story. Napoleon – “The moral (spirit) is to the physical as three is to one.”

Unit cohesion is the essence of combat power, and while it may be convenient to dismiss human nature for political expediency, the facts are that sexual dynamics will exist and can affect morale. That may be manageable in other environments, but not in close combat.

Any study of sexual harassment statistics in this age cohort – in the military, academia, or the civilian workplace — are evidence enough that despite best efforts to by sincere leaders to control the issue, human instincts remain strong. Perceptions of favoritism or harassment will be corrosive, and cohesion will be the victim.

And Myth #5 – “Opening the infantry will provide a better pathway to senior rank for the talented women.”

Not so. What will happen is that we will take very talented females with unlimited potential and change their peer norm when we inject them into the infantry.

Those who might meet the infantry physical standard will find that their peers are expected, as leaders, to far exceed it (and most of their subordinates will, as well).

So instead of advancing to a level appropriate to their potential, they may well be left out.

Exactly. During direct ground combat, I don’t want the solider with whom I’m sharing a position to have barely met the “minimum” standard of physical capability. And if you’re scoring a 180 on your PT test, you’re not going to be a platoon or squad leader on your own merit.

And this final point is truly the meat of why women should not be permitted to serve in Infantry units:

Direct ground combat, such as experienced in the frozen tundra of Korea, the rubble of Stalingrad, or the endless 30-day jungle patrols against a grim foe in Viet Nam, is the harshest meritocracy — with the greatest consequences — there is.

And psychology in warfare is germane – the force that is respected (and, yes, feared) has a distinct advantage.

Will women in our infantry enhance a psychological advantage, or hinder it?

The simple and honest answer is “hinder it.”

Mar 182013
 

A must watch, via Michael Yon ( who served under Col. Howard for a short while):

“Never Surrender Your Weapon. And Face the Enemy.”

Words that are still applicable today, and in fact, are especially relevant in our battle against our own Federal government’s increasing infringement of our 2nd amendment rights.

I am humbled to be counted among the ranks of the Army brotherhood with such a man.

Mar 082013
 

It has been just over a month since Chris Kyle was murdered. An artist in Florida began work on this statue just two days after Chris’ death.

Currently it is a clay statue which will be cast in bronze over the next few months. Mrs. Kyle will view the clay statue for the first time today. My screen grows blurry just thinking of that moment.

A video report on the arrival of Chris’ statue can be found here. More photos of the event can be found here.

Contact information for this project, and if you would like to donate to help with the approximately $85,000 in costs, is below:

E.F. (Gene) Sweeney, Executive Director Business Affairs, www.americanpatriotsinart.com. Facebook Page: American Patriots in Art LLC. Direct Phone: 770-330-7683.

Feb 122013
 

UPDATE II — This post by Lindsey at Red, White, and True wraps it up better than I ever could have, because she had a much more personal and unique perspective on the entire event — Lindsey is the wife of one of Kyle’s former SEAL teammates (who also served as one of the pall bearers for Kyle), and took part in both the memorial service in Dallas and was part of the procession down to Austin.

UPDATE - Here’s a video report by local Austin KXAN news. At the one minute mark, you get a big ol’ face full of my now out-of-control beard:

Ex-Navy SEAL Chris Kyle laid to rest in Austin

I’m about to jump on my bike and head over to the Texas State Cemetery, where I’ll join hundreds (if not 1000+) of my fellow Patriot Guard Riders to help honor CPO (SEAL) Chris Kyle, who is being laid to rest about noon today.

The procession, reported to be one of the longest in state history, left Midlothian, Texas around 8:30 a.m., and is slowly making its way down I-35 en route to Austin. There are numerous reports and pictures via Twitter that the highway and overpasses along the route are lined with tens of thousands of Texans, who are braving the cold, wet rain to honor this hero and his family.

Yes it is, Michael. Yes it is. Better than anywhere else, and it ain’t close.

Very thankful that Kyle is being buried at Texas State Cemetery. He doesn’t automatically qualify for burial there, so he either had to a  receive a Governor’s proclamation, subject to review and approval by the committee, or by order of the committee, only if…

…the committee finds that the person made a significant contribution to Texas history and culture in the following fields: air and space, agriculture, art and design, business and labor, city building, education, industry, justice, military affairs, law enforcement, oil and gas, performing arts, philanthropy, ranching, religion, science and medicine, sports, and writing. (Texas Government Code, Chapter 2165, Section 256, subsections d and e)

I’m assuming it’s safe to say that Kyle made more than just a “signification contribution” to military affairs. I’ve sent in a request for comment from the Governor’s office to see which it was. I’ll update when I hear back.

Some #ChrisKyle tweets I found noteworthy this morning:

I’ll have an update when I get home from the funeral later this afternoon.

Feb 112013
 
Chris Kyle memorial billboard

God bless Chris Kyle, and God bless the Texas responsible for putting up these bill boards on the procession route.

The memorial services for CPO Chris Kyle are being held today in Dallas, TX. I wish I could be there to day to pay my respects, but I’ll have that opportunity tomorrow.

Early in the morning, before the sun rises and most likely in a cold, steady rain, I will ride in silence to Waco, Texas, where I’ll join hundreds, if not thousands, of my fellow Patriot Guard Riders (PGR).

At about the same time as I’m leaving my house, the North Texas PGR will be leaving Dallas, where they will be escorting Kyle’s procession from heading south to he’ll be laid to rest in the Texas State Cemetery.

In Waco, I’ll meet up with members of the CenTex PGR and some fellow Austin PGR members, and we’ll relieve our brothers from the North Texas PGR, and complete the escort mission into Austin.

Having ridden on too many of these PGR missions for our fallen heroes, I already know how heavy the day will weigh on me. And even then, I won’t be prepared sufficiently for the occasion. I’m moved nearly to tears now just thinking about it.

More at Twitchy:

Texans hold memorial tribute and 200-mile procession for American hero Chris Kyle

I could barely read this note from Chris’ kids, which is on the back of today’s memorial program, witout tears welling up in my eyes:

If you live in Texas and are able to, you should try to find a spot on the side of the road to watch tomorrow’s procession. Get there early, bring a flag, and be prepared to stand and show your respect when the procession roles past. And if you have kids, pull them out of school and bring them with you, and use this as an opportunity to teach them things they are not learning in school: respect, honor, sacrifice, and patriotism.

Sadly, I noticed today that our nation’s Flag, nor the flag of Texas, are flying at half-mast for this remarkable hero.

How sad and pathetic is it that Obama ordered flags flown at half-staff for the crack-head Whitney Houston, who killed herself with drugs, while not affording the same respect to one of the greatest warriors our nation has ever produced.

CORRECTION — Someone on Twitter informed me that it was Gov. Christie that ordered flags flown at half staff for Whitney in New Jersey, and not Obama. Regardless, shame on Obama for not ordering them flown at half staff nationwide for this hero, and shame on Gov. Perry for not ordering them flown at half staff here in Texas.

Shame on you, Mr. Obama.

There is a reason that the men and women in uniform today, and millions more who used to wear the uniform, overwhelmingly despise and disrespect you.

Feb 032013
 

Chris Kyle

Rest in peace, brother.

We’ve lost a tremendous American patriot and hero. Chris Kyle, considered the “most lethal sniper” in US military history (with more than 160 confirmed kills), was murdered yesterday at a gun range just southwest of Ft. Worth, TX.

He was at Rough Creek Lodge’s shooting range near Forth Worth, Texas, with another man.

Both were fatally shot.

Witnesses said a gunman opened fire on the men at around 3:30 yesterday afternoon before fleeing in a pick-up truck belonging to one of the victims, according to a local newspaper.

The newspaper said a 25-year-old man was later taken into custody nearby and that charges were expected. The motive for the shooting is unclear.

We know now that the killer was Eddie Ray Routh, a former Marine that Kyle was trying to help deal with his PTSD.

I agree with Michael Yon, that now is not the time for politicizing this tragedy:

It is unseemly to politicize this today, and I will drop it there.

It is also unseemly to immediately speculate that PTSD was the cause of the shootings. This knee-jerk speculation happens every time vets are involved.

PTSD seldom leads to premeditated violence. This knee-jerk speculation is like seeing a shooting in the news and blaming it on polio. “Yep, another shooting. Must be polio again.”

I have enjoyed hearing Chris talk at times (not to me personally but interviews) and I am sure that he would frown on people blaming such acts on PTSD, which blame/speculation hurts our veterans. Many employers will not want to hire vets if they think they are apt to “snap” from PTSD.

In the real world, PTSD does not lead to mass shootings, and often there is no evidence of PTSD in shooters. Most of the mass-killers never were in the military. Columbine was an example. The murderers were high school students.

More likely, the killings derived from simple anger or uncontrolled rage, or crime of some sort. Not PTSD. Even if someone with severe PTSD kills intentionally, it does not automatically follow that PTSD was the culprit. Could be anything. Lovers’ spat. Revenge. Anything.

Importantly, many people who go to wars do not suffer PTSD. The chief cause of PTSD in the US is traffic accidents. Is there a pattern of people who suffer PTSD from accidents committing murders based on a car crash? If someone commits a violent crime, should we ask if he has been in a car crash?

In any case, I am taking a chance that Chris would have said something like this, and so I tried to say it for him. If his close friends disagree, I apologize in advance for being presumptuous.

Rest in peace, brother. Your duty is done.

Jan 252013
 
Female Soldier in Iraq

In a war zone with no clearly defined “front line,” this female Soldier is in combat already. But that doesn’t mean we should put her in an infantry unit.

There is nothing equal about the implementation of Leon Panetta’s unilateral decision to allow women to serve in front-line combat units.

Giving women the “choice” to serve in a front-line combat unit means that you have also given them a choice NOT to serve in those types of units. Male soldiers, on the other hand, are afforded no such choice: if you’re assigned to a combat unit, and that combat unit goes to war, you can go with them or you can go AWOL.

That’s not gender equality.

Having served in a medical unit as a combat medic, which was comprised of ~35% women, I have first-hand experience in serving directly with women soldiers. Many of whom were absolutely prepared, qualified, and capable of serving anywhere their male counterparts did.

And many who were not. And why were they not prepared? Because the Army does not require women to train to the same physical standards as their male counterparts are held to.

War is hell, and physically taxing beyond anything you think you might know. It requires not just great stamina, but also exceptional physical strength. And the Soldiers you serve with depend on you to be able to pull not just your own weight — but if it comes to it, someone else’s weight. Literally.

As a combat medic, part of our training included carrying patients. Sometimes this was a four-person litter carry, over great distances. Sometimes it was a two-person carry. And sometimes we were called upon to lift a fallen Soldier by ourselves.

Many of the female medics in my unit were simply not capable of lifting another Soldier and moving them to safety.

If women want to serve on the front lines — which I support — then make sure that they are qualified and capable of doing so. Make them train to the same physical standards that their male counterparts do.

Michael Yon, who knows as much, and likely more, than just about anybody else about modern warfare, hits this perfectly (via his Facebook page):

Many people are weighing in, and some ask about my view. Since 2005, I have constantly defended the truth on this matter by saying that women are in real combat every day. That goes from Apache, Blackhawk, Kiowa pilots (numerous have been hit), to true ground combat.

Not just in vehicles, but real life infantry ground combat, with real firefights, bombs, the works. Just like the movies. Bullets flying and the women are out there. I got the pics and video many times.

This goes all the way down to platoon level. They operate as medics, civil affairs, intel, female engagement teams, and no doubt other jobs. I have seen this in serious fighting Iraq with both British and US forces, and I have seen women in serious firefights in Afghanistan, again with both British and US forces. That they are in combat every day, and have been for years, is a FACT. Anyone who says otherwise is lying or uninformed.

However…the idea of making women into grunt (infantry) Marines, and US Army Rangers, etc., is a huge mistake. Some women can likely handle it, but as one Marine said here today, it will lead to unneeded deaths of young men and women.

As example, when we take casualties, it is often necessary to carry the casualties a long distance to a helicopter landing zone. If you take five casualties, in many situation you will need 30 men to carry them, and it is not always flat easy ground.

Sometimes they have to drag the wounded out of the line of fire. Happens all the time. This is daily business, not some rare occurrence. They must be dragged body armor and all, to cover, then medics break out the stretchers.

A wounded, immobile Marine with full kit is a heavy beast, and time is crucial when he is bleeding and bullets are flying.

After he is on the stretcher, you might have to go down or up treacherous slopes, at night. This sxxx is HARD. Or through the obstacle courses of the vineyards in Helmand and Kandahar. Those walls and vineyards can be hard even for unwounded people.

If you take five or ten casualties, the entire unit might be involved in carrying them. This is grueling work, and you do not have the luxury of weakness. Weakness simply means death.

If you are willing to admit that this is going to happen, and are still good with sending women to infantry units, you have made the decision that it is okay to die to forward women’s rights, and I respect that decision so long as you are honest that you are willing to let people die. But to deny that people will die is a flat lie, and that is not respectable.

I think one of the commenters at Yon’s page is exactly right as to the real purpose of this move at this time: “I think it’s also cowardly of Panetta to do this on his way out. The Left wants the military hobbled as well as sad stories of wounded/killed women to polarize public opinion.”

Yep.

_____________

MORE: Lt. Col. (retired) Allen West, who knows a good deal about the military, war, and combat preparedness, is opposed:

“Unless the Obama administration has not noticed, we are fighting against a brutal enemy and now is not the time to play a social experiment with our ground combat forces,” he wrote. “President Obama, as Commander-in-Chief, should be focused on sequestration and the failure of his policies in the Middle East. This is the misconceived liberal progressive vision of fairness and equality which could potentially lead to the demise of our military.