by Andy Weddington
Monday, 21 September 2015
"I've never thought in terms of 'men do this' and 'women do that.'" Carly Fiorina
Nearly six weeks ago commentary included six basic military themed questions posed to GOP candidates Trump, Carson, and Fiorina.
The purpose of those questions obvious - they focus on the strength and leadership of our military (that is systematically being destroyed). The public has a right to know the candidate's positions (and media has yet to ask these core questions).
As good fortune would have it, that commentary, via an intermediary, made it to Fiorina's top campaign folks - an email confirmed receipt and as I interpreted a response forthcoming.
Nothing to date though Mrs. Fiorina, in sundry interviews, says she will answer any question, anywhere, anytime. And she has commented more than once about the technology available to instantaneously communicate with the citizenry - which she intends to do from the Oval Office if elected president.
Sure a presidential campaign is hectic. Understood. And mine but a small voice, if that, in the big scheme but six weeks to answer simple, elemental but insightful (as to the candidates) questions about national defense?
Of most concern is the question about women in ground combat.
Contrary to what Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus believes, (gender) diversity in ground combat units is not strength it's destructive - from degradation of strength and endurance to killing cohesion. The realities of Mother Nature - physical and psychological - cannot be overcome with training and leadership. Bluntly, that is the wrongheaded mindset of ignorance and plain stupid. And any candidate who endorses that dopey perspective is not fit to be president.
Though I missed the last GOP debate, clips I took time to watch. Mrs. Fiorina again accounted well for herself, delivered a memorable line or two and is not surprisingly moving still higher in polls. Good for her.
But, in short, I will neither support nor vote for any candidate who endorses women serving in ground combat - especially infantry and akin demanding specialties and special forces. It's not negotiable.
The questions...
1. Four Americans, including our Ambassador, were murdered during an extended, coordinated attack in Benghazi, Libya, on 11 September 2012. Their desperate pleas for help, for firepower, went unanswered for hours and hours. In the immediate aftermath (and continuing), President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, and Ambassador Rice repeatedly lied, well knowing facts and truth, about the reason for the attack and not ordering military to dispatch help. What are your thoughts on the attack; leadership's handling - prevention through coverup; and what, specifically, would you have done differently?
2. As President Obama did, would you have traded five enemy Taliban battlefield commanders held at Guantanamo Bay for one confirmed American battlefield deserter - Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, U. S. Army?
3. What are your positions on capturing, detaining, and interrogating the enemy?
4. Despite force and equipment cuts, America's military is the best educated, trained, and capable force in the world. Senior officers are seasoned experts with decades of experience. As commander in chief, will you give mission orders to the Secretary of Defense and permit field commanders to do their jobs? And, will you demand senior officers give their best military advice without regard to political concerns and without fear of retribution?
5. During the past seven years our military has been subjected to social experimentation in the name of making it appear more a small bite of America rather than as the unique capable and feared force it must be for national security. At present, politics and agendas and career concerns, not warfighting prowess, are forcing the integration of women into ground combat elements to include infantry and specialized forces. For a host of reasons this is problematic. What are your thoughts on the changes forced upon our military; good order and discipline; and combat readiness? You need not answer until after watching and thinking about the perspective (timeless testimony given in 1991 before the Senate Armed Service Committee) of General Robert H. Barrow, USMC (27th Commandant of the Marine Corps) - a Marine for 42 years and combat decorated in three wars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy--whDNNKk
6. To the President and commander in chief obedience from soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines is a given - it is required by oath. But their respect must be earned. What makes you, having never worn their uniform, think you can command and lead them?
http://acoloneloftruth.blogspot.com/2015/08/gop-candidates-marines-have-questions.html
In closing...
Mishandled email is proving problematic for a once favored woman running for president - her campaign about to crash.
Carly's on a hard drive to the Oval Office. Considering the opening quote, is silence from the campaign an indicator and might no email be contributory to a crash?
I am but one Marine of hundreds of thousands paying close attention. Patiently we await answers - from one aspiring to make our White House their crash pad.
Post Script
Still working on Trump and Carson. Though from their public comments about defense and our military a logical deduction is they would not favor women in ground combat. But I will continue to press them for direct answers to the six questions.
Posts
1 comment:
Worrisome.
Post a Comment