Military Uneasiness Under Democrats

Liberals Should Play in the Sandbox, Not the Pillbox…

(If you don’t know what a pillbox is, it is a rather arcane reference to this…)

How does a President Elect become Commander in Chief? He puts his hand on a Bible. Or perhaps, in this case, the Bible will be shunned like so many flag lapel pins or hand over the heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.

Yeah, yeah, I can hear it now. Liberals out there saying “You don’t HAVE to put your hand over your heart for the Pledge! It is not REQUIRED! IDIOT!”

Guess what? There are a lot of things not “required” in life, that as a leader of a mass of people, you do anyway in order to show people your position or demeanor concerning an issue. That hand over the heart, to me, means “I am loyal, I love you, I will fight for you.” The flag lapel pin meant to me, “I am proud of my team. My Country.”

Is it any wonder that the military would have the sentiment that a man who disdains such actions as jingoistic should not be leading them? Is it any wonder that our service men and women would shudder a little when a man who sat for 20 years in the pews of a “Reverend” who shouted “Not God BLESS America! God DAMN America!”, only to jump ship when the press finally held his feet to the fire on the issue? And even then, he did it carefully in order not to distance himself from the blacks, and close political friends that propped up his meteoric rise in Chicago.

Military men and women, due to the nature of their “work”, love people of principle and candor. Frank, straight shooters, who act with conviction and somber aplomb.

I served under Reagan. We never worried. How does the current President Elect look, coming into office?

“When asked how they feel about President-elect Barack Obama as commander in chief, six out of 10 active-duty service members say they are uncertain or pessimistic,” said Military Times in its latest report, based on the survey it carried out among active servicemen.

Historically, it is interesting to me that the US voting populace tends to believe Dems ar better for the economy, and Republicans are better for the military or world conflict. Clearly, one can look at polls from the time that I have been alive, and see that when Democrats are in office, there is concern in the military, and when Republicans are in office, confidence goes up.

The most current news offers no reversal of that trend. I am betting we could pull some data from the archives to show why this is, but I think we really need to just listen to what Democrats have said, and done, in the last couple of years in order to understand why the best fighting force in the world doesn’t want Obama at the helm.

Various examples:

In a Democratic presidential debate last summer, Obama was asked if he’d meet the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea without precondition and during his first year in office.

“I would,” Obama said.

Since then he has frequently reiterated his belief that no preconditions should be set.

Iran’s Ahmadinejad congratulates Obama

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday congratulated US president-elect Barack Obama on his success – the first time an Iranian leader has offered such wishes to a U.S. president-elect since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Obama, an Illinois senator who leads in the number of delegates needed to secure the Democratic nomination, has repeatedly promised not just to withdraw but to have all troops out of Iraq within 16 months.

To do that, the Pentagon would have to pull one to two brigades — roughly 3,500 to 7,000 troops — out each month.

That could be done, but military officers warn that if the president expects an orderly withdrawal, the pace must be dictated by security conditions that allow the military to get its soldiers and equipment out safely. That could take years.

Obama said, “as soon as I succeed Bush on January 20, I will call in the Joint Chiefs of Staff, my national security apparatus, and we will start executing a plan that draws down our troops from Iraq. Particularly in light of the problems that we’re having in Afghanistan, which has continued to worsen. We’ve got to shore up those efforts.”

“The differences on Iraq in this campaign are deep,” he wrote in The New York Times. “Unlike Senator John McCain, I opposed the war in Iraq before it began, and would end it as president.”

The next administration could, for example, decide that only troops involved in counterterrorism missions or those linked to training Iraqi soldiers would stay in Iraq. That could mean tens of thousands of troops and all of the personnel who support them might remain.

“There’s a lot of ways you can have troops out and not have them out depending on how you define things,” Byman said. (Daniel Byman, security analyst at Georgetown University)

There you have over time the desire to “chit chat” with some of our deepest ideological enemies; timelines that are all over the place: more of the “depends on what the definition of “is” is” politics; and a clear lack of understanding of the scope and detailed nature of the problem.

And other Democrats during the last few years?

Of course, we have the General Betray US ad, put out by MoveOn.org.

John Murtha had tried and convicted the Haditha Marines. All of whom (excepting one?), if I am not mistaken, have been exonerated. Murtha wanted us out of the war, and he and Harry Reid had said, as well as other Democrats, that the war was lost, in so many words.

Of course, they fell silent when the surge worked.

And when Murtha went to Iraq, came back, and said that he was seeing real progress… what did the Democrats say?

“This could be a real headache for us,” said one top House Democratic aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “Pelosi is going to be furious.”

You see, you can’t even win when you’re winning, with the Dems. It’s all about political posturing; the next election; their prize. When you realize, as a military man (non-gender specific here) that YOUR future rests in the hands of people who put more concern in their finger-in-the-wind political future as a party than they do in truth, principle, and winning for the COUNTRY and the cause of freedom in the world, then, you can see, I think, why people in uniform are fairly uniform in their belief that Dems should not be Commander in Chief of anything green, camouflaged, that flies shoots or floats…

Liberals should spend their time on the big boy battles they are so good at- Attacking the Boy Scouts; removing “Under God” from the Pledge; Manger scenes at City Hall…

…leave the real wars to those who understand what is at stake.

Be Sociable, Share!

•