Tag Archive for: Air Force

EXCLUSIVE: ‘A Huge Blow’: Decline In White Recruits Fueling The Military’s Worst-Ever Recruiting Crisis, Data Shows

Each U.S. military service saw a notable decline in white recruits over the past five years, according to data obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation, likely factoring into the military’s crippling recruiting crisis.

The Army, Navy and Air Force missed their recruiting objectives by historically large margins in fiscal year 2023, which ended on Sept. 30, as the broader American public has grown wary of military service, according to Department of Defense (DOD) statistics, officials and experts who spoke to the DCNF. Since 2018, however, the number of recruits from minority groups has remained steady — or, in some cases, increased — while the number of white recruits has declined, according to data on the demographics of new recruits obtained by the DCNF.

The data “reveals the decline of white recruits is almost entirely responsible for the recruiting crisis,” Will Thibeau, director of the American Military Project at the Claremont Institute, told the DCNF.

“A smaller proportion of white Americans serve now than ever before. This is fundamental, because complimentary increases in black and Hispanic recruits have not taken place,” he added.

U.S. troops are under attack in the Middle East, maintaining a heightened posture against a belligerent Russia in Europe, and bolstering deterrence against the People’s Republic of China. The U.S. military is weakening, unable to respond to some of the most pressing challenges to U.S. national security, according to a report released by the Heritage Foundation.

“This is a huge blow as the recruiting crisis is the worst in the history of the all volunteer force,” Robert Greenway, director of the Allison Center for National Security at Heritage, told the DCNF, referring to the plummeting numbers of white recruits since 2018.

A Dramatic Decline In White Recruits

Other demographic groups have fluctuated over those five years, but none consistently tumbled over time like the white demographic.

In fiscal year 2018, 44,042 new recruits to the Army — or 56.4% of the total — were white, according to data obtained by the DCNF. That number collapsed to a low of 25,070 — or 44.0% of the total — in fiscal 2023.

Over the same time period, black Army recruits increased from 19.6% of the total in 2018 to 23.5% in 2023, and Hispanic Army recruits rose from 17.2% to 23.5%. However, the real number of recruits from the remaining non-white demographic groups also dipped from fiscal 2018 to 2023, as the total number of new personnel the Army signed on each year fell dramatically, the data shows. None of these groups saw the same degree of decline as white recruits, however.

Military.com first reported the precipitous drop in the number of Army soldiers recruited in fiscal year 2023 from five years prior.

“What we’re seeing is a reflection of society; what we know less of is what is driving all of these things,” an Army official told Military.com. “There is no widely accepted cause.”

Click here for Army New Recruits By Race infographic.

The Army implemented new race categories in fiscal year 2023 that split Asian or Pacific Islander into individual categories and introduced multiple options combined under “Two or More” in the data obtained by the DCNF. For visual aid purposes, the DCNF re-combined Asian and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander in 2023.

While the Army may have experienced the worst of the military’s recruiting woes, the data obtained by the DCNF shows that a similar pattern exists across all branches of the armed services. White people are joining the military in lower numbers than before as other racial or ethnic groups do not demonstrate the same shortfalls.

Data for the Air Force shows that Asian recruits increased from 1,110 — or 3.7% of a total 29,831 recruits — in 2018 to 1,471 — or 6.1% of a total of 23,967 recruits — in 2023. While the number of black Air Force recruits was nearly identical during this period — 5,144 in 2018 and 5,155 in 2023 — they comprised a larger percentage of the incoming force in 2023, at 21.51%, than they had in 2018, at 17.2%, as the Air Force’s incoming classes shrunk.

White Air Force recruits, by contrast, dipped from 21,593 in 2018, or 72.4% of the total, to 15,068, or 62.9% of the total, in 2023, the data shows.

Hispanic recruits were tracked as a separate, binary measure of ethnicity. The number categorized as non-Hispanic dropped from 24,204 in 2018 to 17,913 in 2023 — a decline of 6,291. At the same time, the number of Hispanic recruits increased only slightly — from 5,627 in 2018 to 6,054 in 2023.

It was unclear precisely how many white Air Force recruits also selected Hispanic as their ethnicity, or how many Hispanic recruits selected the “white” or “multiple” race category. Data for the Space Force was not included in the DCNF’s analysis.

Click here for Air Force New Recruits By Race infographic.

In the Navy, the number of white recruits fell from 24,343 in fiscal year 2018 to 18,205 in fiscal year 2023, accounting for some of the overall drop of about 9,000 new recruits over the same time period, the data shows. The numbers of black and Asian Navy recruits increased over the same period, with black recruits increasing from 6,798 in 2018 to 7,947 in 2023 and Asian recruits increasing from 1,518 to 2,075 over the same period.  As with the Air Force data, Hispanic recruits were not included in the dataset as a category.

The ethnicity of 10% Navy recruits in 2018 was listed as “none-unknown,” but that number dropped to nearly zero by 2021, potentially clouding any true comparison of data between years. There were also small drops in recruits listed as American Indian or Alaskan Native, “multiple races” and Native Hawaiian-Other Pacific Islander.

As in the Air Force, a separate measurement of ethnicity for Navy recruits included only two categories: Hispanic and Non-Hispanic. The proportion of Hispanic recruits grew from 18% in 2018 to 25% in 2023, while the real number of Non-Hispanic recruits actually dropped from 31,977 to 22,746.

Click here for Nave New Recruits By Race infographic.

Unlike with the Air Force and Navy, the Marine Corps calculated race and ethnicity together, placing Hispanics in a separate category alongside white, African American and “other” recruits. It also included specific data for officers and enlisted recruits, further complicating any comparison between the services. However, this data appears to suggest that, although the Marine Corps has not struggled to meet recruiting objectives like the other services have, any decline in overall numbers of new recruits has been driven by a smaller pool of white Marines in the new cohort.

White enlisted Marine Corps recruits dropped from 21,455 — 58% of the total — in fiscal 2018 to 14,287 — 43% of the total — in fiscal 2023. Hispanic recruits climbed from 9,984 — 27% of the total — to 12,859 — 39% of the total. The number of black recruits did not change appreciably: 3,708, or roughly 10%, in 2018 to 3,603, or roughly or 11%, in 2023.

The “other” category for enlisted Marine recruits jumped from 1,765 to 2,574.

The largest drop in white enlisted Marines occurred between 2021 and 2022, when they declined by 3,090, accounting for most of the overall decline of 3,214.

Combining both enlisted personnel and officers, there was an overall 32.2% decline in the number of white Marines joining. In 2018, there was a combined total 22,699 white enlisted personnel and officers recruited; in 2023 it was 15,387. The number of African American Marine recruits decreased marginally — from 3,708 to 3,603 — while recruits categorized as Hispanic increased from 9,984 to 12,859, as did recruits categorized as “other” — 1,765 in 2018 to 2,574 in 2023.

Click here for the Marine Corps Recruits By Race infographic.

Behind The Decline In White Recruits

Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps officials could not explain why there has been a decline in whites recruited to serve.

“Factors influencing recruitment demographics can be complex and multifaceted,” an Air Force spokesperson told the DCNF.

Spokespeople for each of the services cited various reasons recruitment overall has fallen dramatically in the past three years.

For example, only 23% of 17-to-24-year-old Americans meet the minimum physical and academic standards for joining without a waiver and even fewer — about 10% — express a desire to join, according to an Army press release. The civilian job market may present more attractive opportunities with better benefits, while fewer members of the younger generation are familiar with the military at all, officials say.

Young Americans are also losing trust in institutions in general, including the U.S. military, the Army has said.

In a 2022 survey the Army commissioned, young people cited safety concerns and the stress of Army life as inhibitors to enlisting and also said they didn’t want to steal time away from pursuing other careers.

“Additionally, recognizing that Generation Z represents the newest cohort of service members, it is essential to meet their expectations for an inclusive workplace. As we engage with youth, a fundamental principle remains steadfast – the recruitment of qualified Americans who mirror the society the Department of the Air Force serves,” the Air Force spokesperson said.

Army officials attributed factors including drug use, obesity and a drop in white male representation in the labor market in comments to Military.com. They also blamed Republicans’ partisan attacks against perceived left-wing infiltration of the military, saying an excessive focus on “wokeness” had presented the military as an institution hostile to white people, according to Military.com.

Conservative lawmakers and media highlighting the Army’s preoccupation with diversity could contribute to the problem, some Army officials told Military.com.

“No, the young applicants don’t care about this stuff,” one Army official told Military.com. “There’s a level of prestige in parts of conservative America with service that has degraded.”

The Army did not respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment on the data.

Experts cast doubt on the Pentagon’s talking points about problems with eligibility to serve.

“All of that historically has been a challenge, and it is no different today. Those aren’t the reasons why they’re not getting recruits,” Greenway told the DCNF.

And, they don’t explain why the numbers of white recruits are falling.

“Fewer white Americans see the military as a righteous way to serve their country, but it is readily apparent the military is trying to recruit fewer white Americans in order to meet various policies of race composition in place throughout the Armed Forces. For every diversity objective, there is an imperative to reduce the proportion of white recruits. Since 2018, that’s exactly what has happened,” Thibeau said.

Race-Focused Recruiting

The military for years has prioritized reaching out to women and minority racial or ethnic groups, adding new initiatives each year aimed at increasing the proportion of underrepresented groups among the total ranks.

Pentagon officials and official documents outline the military’s goals to increase the proportion of minority ethnic and racial groups in the total ranks.

The military does not have explicit quotas for representation in the ranks. But, the Pentagon’s guiding strategic plan through 2026 sets year-over-year targets for “increased representation of racial/ethnic minorities and women” in military career fields where the breakdown is seen as out of balance. It also sets goals of having more minorities included in the pool of applicants eligible for promotion to higher ranks.

The Pentagon’s top military officer has stated that he hires “for diversity.”

“We focus on recruiting the best and brightest of America,” a Navy spokesperson told the DCNF.

“Though faced with a challenging recruiting environment, the Navy has and continues to provide several opportunities to all who choose to wear the uniform, and we will continue to build pathways for all qualified individuals to serve.”

The Air Force “seeks to reflect the broader population to ensure a well-rounded force,” the spokesperson told the DCNF.

A Marine Corps spokesperson explicitly denied the service follows diversity-focused recruitment policies.

“Marine Corps Recruiting Command does not have diversity-oriented policies. Applicants must be morally, medically and physically qualified in order to serve,” the spokesperson told the DCNF.

A shift in emphasis to criteria aside from performance, such as race, ethnicity or gender, “is going to impact the groups that would be disadvantaged by that for the perception that that they would be disadvantaged by that,” Greenway told the DCNF.

“The services are prioritizing racial goals, and when you pursue racial goals and composition, you’re going to change your recruiting policy,” Greenway told the DCNF. It also contributes to declining trust in the military as white young people who would otherwise be eligible and interested in service lose confidence they would be evaluated and promoted based on their qualification, he added.

Complaints about the military’s diversity-oriented policies emanating from Congress are more likely reflective of feedback lawmakers receive from constituents, Greenway said.

The Worst Recruiting Crisis In 50 Years

The size of the active-duty force fluctuated between 2018 and 2023, but reached dramatic lows at the end of 2023, data shows.

The DOD maintained an estimated 1,314,000 active-duty troops out of an authorized end strength of 1,322,500 at the end of fiscal year 2018, according to department statistics. The Army missed its active duty recruiting goal by 6,528 troops, while the other services slightly exceeded theirs, data shows.

Congress’ fiscal year 2024 defense policy bill capped military end strength at 1,295,700 active-duty personnel, down from an authorized 1,316,944 in 2023, when it achieved only an estimated 1,296,271, data shows.

“This fiscal year was without a doubt the toughest recruitment year for the Military Services since the inception of the all-volunteer force. The Marine Corps (active and reserve components) and the Space Force are the only Services to achieve their FY recruitment goals. The Department continues to work collaboratively to develop innovative ways to inspire service and mitigate recruiting shortfalls,” DOD said in a statement announcing the fiscal year 2023 recruitment numbers.

The Army fared worst, achieving just 76.61% of its target — 50,181 out of 65,500, according to DOD data. Only the Marine Corps and Space Force met their goals.

The Army had 485,000 active-duty troops in 2021, but it finished out 2023 with just 452,000, the smallest full-time force since before WWII. Sweeping reforms to the Army’s recruiting structure announced in October have yet to materialize.

Some steps the Army has taken so far appear to be successful. The Army’s Future Soldier Prep Course, which provides academic tutoring or physical fitness training for prospective soldiers who don’t quite meet entrance standards, has graduated nearly 9,000 Army recruits since implementation in August 2022.

The U.S. Navy missed active duty recruiting objectives for 2023 by about 20%, despite rolling out a score of initiatives aimed at relieving pressure on recruiting — including offering bonuses up to $75,000 for enlistees in certain highly technical occupations and raising the maximum age to join from 39 to 41.

It also pushed the limit of the congressionally-mandated maximum percentage for recruits who score between the 10th and 30th percentile on the Armed Forces Qualification Test, according to the statement.

Seeking to recreate the Army’s success in boosting the test scores of potential future soldiers, the Navy also implemented “Future Sailor Preparatory Courses” at boot camp to help possible recruits meet the Navy’s academic and physical standards, the statement said.

The Navy strove to take on a total of 40,232 active-duty officers and enlisted personnel, but only achieved 32,316 in fiscal year 2023, according to a press release.

The Air Force achieved only 24,923, or 89%, of its goal 27,851 new active-duty officers and enlisted troops for the fiscal year, while the Air Force Reserve fared even worse.

The Marine Corps reached its recruiting goal, Commandant Gen. Eric Smith announced on social media on Sept. 28. “I’m mindful of how challenging an environment this is and want to publicly give credit to our professional recruiters and all our Marines who uphold our rigorous standards 24/7,” he said.

In addition, the Space Force had obtained more than 99% of its proportionally small accessions goal by July.

“The Marine Corps recruits the best this country has to offer who reflect our culture and values in every demographic which is reflective of the American population,” the Marine Corps spokesperson told the DCNF.

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Investigative reporter, defense.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Like A Business That’s About To Go Bankrupt’: US Military Is Stretched Too Thin To Deal With Threats, Report Says

EXCLUSIVE: Air Force System Exists Just To Track ‘Progress’ In Diversity

RELATED VIDEO: Biden Puts U.S. Troops in Harm’s Way in Middle East | TIPPING POINT

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Air Force Academy Privately Fretted The End Of Race-Based Admissions Would Hamstring ‘Diversity’ Goals

The Air Force Academy’s top official worried the Supreme Court’s decision that race-based admissions were unconstitutional would set back the service’s “warfighting imperative” of building a racially diverse military, according to emails obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

On June 30, 2023, Lt. Gen. Richard Clark, the Air Force Academy’s superintendent, wrote a preview of the consequences that the Supreme Court’s decision striking down affirmative action could have for service academies’ abilities to judge candidates on the basis of race, according to emails the DCNF obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. Although the justices did not overtly apply the decision to military schools, the records show how the Air Force Academy scrambled to minimize the impact of the June 29 decision on racial diversity goals.

“If we lose our limited window to reshape the racial diversity of each incoming class, it would affect our ability to meet the warfighting imperative of fielding a diverse, inclusive force,” Clark wrote.

The names of recipients of Clark’s email were redacted.

Clark noted that the Air Force Academy itself has limited discretion over the composition of each year’s incoming class. Congressional appointments, when U.S. senators and representatives nominate young members of their constituencies for attendance, determine more than half of entrants, with another 25% or so allotted to athletic recruitment.

After that, the academy is only able to “shape” the remaining 10% to 20% of officer candidates, Clark said. The academy could consider a variety of factors, including their potential to become pilots — for which the Air Force is experiencing a severe shortage — socio-economic status, gender and race.

“If [the U.S. Air Force Academy] were to voluntarily comply with the Supreme Court decision, our ability to shape a diverse class would become more limited,” Clark wrote.

Two candidates presenting similar overall qualifications might be judged based on those factors, he wrote, allowing for the possibility that a candidate’s race could be the determining factor. He noted that the Air Force Academy has outperformed other services in terms of racial and ethnic diversity.

“These factors are used to design a class of diverse backgrounds in accordance with [the Department of the Air Force’s] broad definition of diversity and operational needs,” Clark wrote. “As such, not being able to consider race in a holistic review would further hinder DAF diversity, moreso than civilian universities.”

The Air Force’s definition of diversity includes race, ethnicity, gender, personal life experience, cultural knowledge, prior education, work experience and “spiritual perspectives,” department guidance states.

Chief Justice John Roberts punted the question of whether the Supreme Court’s ruling on race-based admissions should apply to service academies to a later date, noting that the military may have “potentially distinct” reasons related to national security for considering race as a factor in admissions.

Following the court’s decision, Students for Fair Admissions sued the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and the Naval Academy at Annapolis to prove their race-based admissions policies are discriminatory. In mid-December, a federal judge blocked an injunction that would have put a temporary stay on the Naval Academy’s use of race in admissions.

Department of Defense (DOD) service academy officials argued in July that the military does not entertain illegal racial quotas but does angle recruiting efforts at specific populations to meet racial, ethnic and gender diversity goals.

An email to Clark, dated Oct. 31, 2022, the day after oral arguments began, noted that the academy had worked extensively with the unnamed solicitor general, likely referring to U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar on the case to furnish her with the military’s perspective on the importance of considering race in admissions decisions. Representatives from the academy and members of other federal agencies attended two practice debates with the solicitor general, the records show.

The sender’s list was redacted, but language in the email suggests the sender was affiliated with the Air Force Academy.

“If what you’re asking me is whether we think the military has distinctive interests in this context, I would say yes,” Prelogar told the Supreme Court in October, a transcript shows. “And I think it’s critically important for the Court in its decision in these cases to make clear that those interests are, I think, truly compelling with respect to the military.”

The Air Force Academy would endeavor to remain in lockstep with its Army and Navy counterparts as well as guidance from the Secretary of Defense, Clark said in the June email.

Prior to a decision on the outcome of the case, however, the Air Force seemed confident the ruling would not meaningfully impact the Academy “since they do admission differently from Harvard/UNC,” an unnamed sender wrote in a June 29 email to Clark. That is, “as long as it didn’t ban targeting recruiting efforts.”

However, the sender noted that the Department of Defense and the academy would need some time to fully parse out the ramifications of whatever the Supreme Court decides.

The Air Force said it withheld some records from the DCNF’s request “as it is considered privileged in litigation” per United States Code, Title 5, Section 552 (b)(5) covering documents “which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency.”

The Air Force Academy did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Investigative reporter, defense.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Here’s What They’re Teaching In The Naval Academy’s Gender And Sexuality Class

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Here’s How Biden Could Embroil America In Yet Another Foreign War

  • The Biden administration could put U.S. troops on the ground in Guyana to defend the threatened democracy against a Venezuelan invasion, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
  • Although an invasion is unlikely, recent U.S. actions send a signal to Venezuela that America is prepared to intervene if Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro acts on his pledge.
  • “The U.S. should work to create strong disincentives for Venezuela to carry out any aggression, including helping to establish stronger military deterrence. It remains to be seen how compelling these disincentives will be and how Maduro will respond to them,” Daniel Batlle, an adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute and a former State Department official, told the DCNF.

The Biden administration could be compelled to put U.S. military boots on the ground to defend Guyana, a democratic South American country with a history of cooperation with the U.S., from a potential Venezuelan invasion, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has threatened to annex by force large swaths of oil-rich territory in neighboring Guyana following a manufactured referendum as troops mass on both sides of the border in a bid to consolidate support for the country’s 2024 elections. A full-scale invasion resembling Russia’s attempt to conquer Ukraine is unlikely, but possible, placing pressure on the U.S., and international partners, to respond in defense of a democratic country, the experts told the DCNF.

The Biden administration would want to intervene to show it will “credibly defend its friends against external aggression,” just as it has done with Israel and Ukraine, Evan Ellis, a research professor of Latin American studies at the U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, told the DCNF. “Once we make that commitment, it sends a very strong signal that we can’t just walk away from.”

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has pledged “unwavering support” for Guyana’s sovereignty.

Other experts questioned the administration’s commitment to defending democratic partners in light of sweeping sanctions relief Biden offered Venezuela in the fall of 2023 in exchange for yet-unfulfilled promises to conduct legitimate elections and free political prisoners — which could further embolden Maduro.

“It is unclear what precisely is motivating the current administration in its policy toward Venezuela, but it is clearly not democracy, human rights, or electoral freedom. I do not see how anyone, including the Maduro regime, will take American threats seriously when they offer sanctions relief under such insane conditions,” former Deputy Special Representative for Venezuela Carrie Filipetti told the DCNF.

U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) has made conspicuous shows of force as Maduro carried out a national referendum on the annexation question. Such displays are “firm, clear signals” from the U.S. that if Venezuela takes action, “it will not be unopposed,” Ellis told the DCNF.

SOUTHCOM and the Guyana Defense Force (GDF) conducted flight operations in country on Dec. 7, according to the U.S. Embassy in Guyana.

“This exercise builds upon routine engagement and operations to enhance security partnership between the United States and Guyana, and to strengthen regional cooperation,” the embassy said in the statement.

In an unusual step, U.S. Air Force special operations later showed several videos of an AC-130J Ghostrider gunship, equipped with precision-guided missiles and cannons capable of “measured, but ruinous fire” that can rip people and armored vehicles to shreds, training against targets.

Guyanese President Irfaan Ali and Maduro met Thursday to hash out an agreement on where the border line should be drawn, and both sides agreed not to use force, the Associated Press reported. But they did resolve the issue.

“I have made it very clear that on the issue of the border controversy, Guyana’s position is non-negotiable,” Ali said in a national broadcast, indicating that any negotiations over the territory are likely to be fraught.

Maduro claimed sovereignty over the territory encompassing two-thirds of Guyana, which also includes the coastline near two massive offshore oil deposits, according to The New York Times. The claim depends on a referendum held to shore up his control over domestic politics and built on an internationally-unrecognized pretext of historical control over Essequibo.

On Dec. 5, Maduro ordered state-owned oil companies to begin granting licenses and doing exploration in Essequibo, the Financial Times reported.

He likely won’t order an invasion, experts told the DCNF. The Venezuelan military is afraid of revealing systemic deficiencies, but more importantly, Maduro could put his regime at risk by becoming embroiled in protracted fighting through inhospitable jungles against guerilla forces.

And, there’s the possibility of U.S. involvement, most likely alongside other countries.

“Maduro could essentially stumble into hostilities, whether it’s sending troops to the border or something that sparks military action, and that’s always a risk,” Ellis told the DCNF.

“The U.S. has to be careful of portraying the image that it is acting unilaterally in South America, especially in a militarized manner,” Aileen Teague, a professor at Texas A&M University who studies U.S. history and relations with Latin America, told the DCNF. “Working through diplomatic channels is the United States’ best option for success. ”

Any American-led intervention would not take place without extensive coordination with regional and global partners, including Brazil, which has massed troops on the border to ward off Venezuelan aggression, the experts said.

The GDF comprises of just 3,000 troops compared to Venezuela’s estimated 130,000 active duty and 1.6 million paramilitary troops.

But the U.S. can “wreak havoc on those Venezuelan forces within that jungle environment by  taking advantage of the ability to control the air and do select targeting,” Ellis explained, to “essentially make the few roads that are there impassable” for the Venezuelan military and supply lines.

“You basically turn an occupying force very quickly into a lot of Venezuelans trapped in a jungle,” he said.

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Investigative reporter, defense.

RELATED ARTICL: EXCLUSIVE: Illegal Venezuelan Migrants Continue To Pour Into US Despite Biden Admin Beginning Deportation Flights

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Even Veterans Are Steering Their Families Away From America’s New Woke Military

Veterans are pushing their family members — who represent an overwhelming majority of new recruits — away from military service, deepening U.S. armed forces’ recruitment crisis, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

Nearly 80% of new recruits have at least one family member with a service record, but these family members are increasingly questioning whether the potential costs of military service — which include rising rates of post-traumatic stress disorder, suicide and a reliance on welfare programs — are worth it when compared to a career in the private sector, particularly following the fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban, the WSJ reported. The military has faced significant criticism from GOP lawmakers over its focus on “woke” initiatives, which they say prioritize diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and deepen the recruiting crisis by alienating potential recruits.

“We’re left with the gut-wrenching feeling of, ‘What was it all for?’” asks Navy veteran Catalina Gasper, who was injured in a Taliban attack in July 2019 that has left her with lingering brain damage. “I just don’t see how it’s sustainable if the machine keeps chewing up and spitting out” the nation’s youth, she said.

Gasper said that she and her husband, an Army veteran with over two decades of service, used to talk to their children, now aged 7 and 10, about joining the military, but now she intends to ensure her kids never join, according to the outlet.

Just 9% of Americans aged 16-21 expressed a willingness to consider a military career in 2022, down from the pre-pandemic norm of 13%, the WSJ reported, citing Pentagon data.

Recruiters are facing the twin challenges of both historically low fitness eligibility and interest among young Americans, and the deepening crisis has led the Navy this week to begin having recruiters work six-day weeks in an “all-hands effort” to boost recruitment. The Navy utilized an active-duty drag queen — Yeoman 2nd Class Joshua Kelley, stage name Harpy Daniels — as a “digital ambassador” from October 2022 to March 2023 in a bid to “explore the digital environment to reach a wide range of potential candidates,” a Navy spokesperson told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The lowest-ranking service members make less than $2,000 per month, and while this may be offset by the military paying for food and housing, some 20,000 active-duty soldiers are currently on food stamps, the WSJ reported. Various service branches are issuing large bonuses both to new hires and experienced veterans in a bid to boost both recruitment and retention.

“To be honest with you it’s Wendy’s, it’s Carl’s Jr., it’s every single job that a young person can go up against because now they are offering the same incentives that we are offering, so that’s our competition right now,” Sgt. Maj. Marco Irenze of the Nevada Army National Guard, told the WSJ.

AUTHOR

JOHN HUGH DEMASTRI

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Navy Making Recruiters Work 6-Day Weeks As Enlistment Crisis Deepens

U.S. military has gotten ‘hyper-politicized’ and ‘sexualized’

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

NDAA Fails to Stop Biden’s Purge of Military

“An inappropriate use of taxpayer funds, and should be discontinued by the Department of Defense immediately.”


Unsurprising.

While Republicans rolled back some of Biden’s military cuts and managed to end the vaccine mandate for the military, they failed to reinstate military personnel forced out due to the mandate, they did nothing about wokeness in the military, which at this point is so great a threat that spending hundreds of billions on weapons systems is practically surplus to requirements if there will be no one reliable to operate them.

And the military purge of “extremists” launched by Biden’s political operatives has not been checked.

The “big win” here is a non-binding statement criticizing the political purge of opponents.

The final bill largely eschews issues related to the Pentagon’s efforts to root out extremism, but the Senate Armed Services Committee’s report accompanying its version of the bill calls for those plans to be curtailed, though the language is nonbinding.

The report language was added by Republicans with the backing of Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). It argues that the low instances of extremism in the ranks “does not warrant a Department-wide effort.” It further argues that the Pentagon anti-extremism effort “is an inappropriate use of taxpayer funds, and should be discontinued by the Department of Defense immediately.”

Which everyone is free to ignore.

This is a lawless administration whose Treasury and State Department are in violation of federal law by refusing to comply with SIGAR, the watchdog on Afghanistan. The Biden administration has responded to court setbacks on its student loan bailout or open borders by doubling down.

Senate Republicans get to claim that they did something by way of a non-binding statement in a report.

Mission accomplished.

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: This Week In Jihad with David Wood and Robert Spencer

RELATED ARTICLES:

Afghan officials smuggled $1,000,000,000 out before Taliban takeover as Biden poured in billions more

Sharia in Minnesota: Instructor fired for including painting of Muhammad in course on Islamic art

New Jersey: Hamas-linked CAIR wants January to be ‘Muslim Heritage Month’

Canada: Islamic conference features hate-filled, pro-jihad, pro-Sharia, anti-Semitic Muslim clerics

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The U.S. Military is Shrinking — the Numbers are Alarming

President Obama has fundamentally transformed the United States military from a global fighting force into a social change petri dish incapable of dealing with growing global threats from the nation states Russia, China, Iran and North Korea and even the Islamic State JV team.

The Middle East is exploding because the Obama foreign policy is based upon smart power rather than real power.

The Obama administration now seeks dialogue and engagement with those who wish to do us harm. Negotiation is part of diplomacy. What Americans see is our stature decline in an ever more dangerous world. What are enemies see is an opportunity to advance their national interests at the expense of America.

The below video by Dennis Michael Lynch explains the decline and fall of the U.S. military by the numbers and from a historical perspective.

Today our U.S. Air Force pilots are flying aircraft that are older than they are. Today the sea born U.S. Navy is commanded by officers who are much younger than the ships under their command.

Watch this short NEWSMAX TV analysis of our incredibly shrinking military:

American president Theodore Roosevelt, in a letter to Henry L. Sprague of the N.Y. City Union League Club dated January 26th, 1900, wrote, “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” This proverb advises using the tactic of caution and non-aggression, backed up by the ability to do violence if required. This proverb became Roosevelt’s foreign policy.

The greatest challenge for the next president will be restoring America’s big stick. 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Donald Trump Has a Coherent, Realist Foreign Policy

It’s a Crazy, Crazy World out There

Presidential Candidates ‘Should Oppose Forcing Women to Register for Selective Service’

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, Family Research Council Action’s Executive Vice President, released the following statement regarding comments made during Saturday’s presidential debate in which several candidates expressed support for requiring women to register for Selective Service:

“Some of the presidential candidates appear to be espousing the politically correct position that women should be required to register with Selective Service. In supporting this draft registration policy, these candidates demonstrate a serious misunderstanding of the imperative for combat effectiveness and of the American people. Ask the question of why America, since the passage of the Selective Service Act, has never required women to register for the military draft. Americans do not want the government to send our daughters into battle against their will, and it is frankly shocking that any Republican candidate for president would not oppose the suggestion in the strongest terms.

“The real issue is whether we should place women in Infantry and Special Operations units where the mission is to close with and destroy the enemy. Removing the restrictions on the types of jobs women may hold means necessarily that some women who are drafted will be involuntarily assigned to units that will be directly engaged in combat with enemy ground forces. Every candidate who wants to earn the trust of the American people should oppose the Obama administration’s policy that is paving the way for requiring our daughters to go to war against their will,” concluded Boykin.

Girl Sues Draft for Only Registering Males by Ilya Somin

A recent lawsuit filed by a teenage girl in New Jersey (in conjunction with her mother) challenges the constitutionality of male-only draft registration, arguing that it violates the Constitution because it discriminates on the basis of sex [h/t: Elie Mystal of Above the Law]:

A New Jersey teenage girl has brought a federal class action against the Selective Service System, claiming its refusal to consider women for the draft is discriminatory.

“With both males and females available for such roles today, the two sexes are now similarly situated for draft registration purposes and there is no legitimate reason for the government to discriminate against the female class, so equal protection applies,” the complaint states. “Further, with both males and females available for such combat roles, there is no reasonable basis for infringing the associational interests of the female class by preventing them from registering.”

Noting that she will turn 18 this year, E.K.L., as she is named in the complaint, says she attempted to register for the draft on the website of the Selective Service by filling out the online form.

Once she clicked “female” during the online registration process, however, the website prevented her from registering….

E.K.L. and her mother call it undisputed that the Military Selective Service Act creates a sex-based difference.

Banning women from the pool of potential recruits is not rational given the role females currently play within the military, according to the complaint.

“If the two sexes can fight and die together, they can register together; if not, then no one should have to register,” the complaint states.

More information about the lawsuit is available in this article.

predicted that such a case would arise back in early 2013, when the Pentagon made women eligible to serve in nearly all combat roles (though I expected it to be brought by men forced to register for select service, rather than by women excluded from doing so).

The Supreme Court previously upheld the constitutionality of male-only draft registration in the 1981 case of Rostker v. Goldberg. However, as I also pointed out in that post, that ruling was partly based on the theory that women would not be as valuable draftees as men in an era when the armed forces excluded women from most combat positions.

Obviously, that logic is no longer valid. I also noted other reasons why the Court might overrule or at least severely limit Rostker if the issue came before it today:

Lower courts applying Rostker could therefore still conclude that male-only draft registration is constitutional, though Rostker is ambiguous enough on the amount of deference due [to federal government] that the issue is not a slam dunk.

If the issue gets to the Supreme Court however, I’m far from certain that Rostker wouldn’t be overruled or severely limited. As compared with 1981, the idea of women serving in combat is far more widely accepted by both elite and public opinion. And sex discrimination in draft registration is likely to seem like an outdated relic of the days when women were barred from numerous positions in the military.

If the Pentagon sticks to its new policy on women in combat, I think it’s likely that some male plaintiff will bring a new challenge to the Selective Service registration system, and that plaintiff will have a good chance of succeeding. Like most other constitutional law scholars, I think that Rostker was a dubious decision, and would not shed many tears if it were overruled.

For reasons outlined by Steven Calabresi and Julia Rickert, there is also a good originalist case for courts taking a strong line against sex discriminatory laws.

I would add that, since 1981, the Supreme Court has taken a tougher line against sex-discriminatory laws and policies. Most notably, it invalidated the exclusion of women from the Virginia Military Institute in the 1996 case of United States v. Virginia. The exclusion of women from a military college is not exactly the same as their exclusion from draft registration. But the two situations have obvious similarities.

There is a chance that this case will end up being thrown out on procedural grounds. A court could potentially rule that women exempt from draft registration don’t have standing to sue because they don’t actually suffer any harm as a result (draft registration is usually considered a burden, not a benefit).

This is one of the reasons why I thought a case would be more likely to be brought by men subject to draft registration than by women exempt from it.

Also, a court might deny the plaintiff’s bid to certify the case as a class action on behalf other similarly situated women. But if the case does go forward, there is a real chance it will ultimately result in the invalidation of male-only draft registration.

To avoid misunderstanding, I should emphasize that I do not support either drafting women or forcing them to register for a possible future draft. But I also oppose drafting men. Conscription is both a severe infringement on individual liberty, and tends to reduce the quality of the military relative to an all volunteer armed forces.

Ultimately, the best way to avoid conscripting women is to not have conscription – or draft registration – at all. By taking that step, we could simultaneously reduce the likelihood that the draft will be reimposed in the future and eliminate one of the last bastions of open sex discrimination in government policy.

In my view, a decision striking down male-only draft registration is more likely to lead to the abolition of draft registration altogether than to its extension to women.

This post originally appeared at the Volokh Conspiracy. 

Ilya Somin

Ilya Somin is Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law. He blogs at the Volokh Conspiracy.

Men and Women in U.S. Armed Forces Treated Worse Than People on Welfare

This past week or so has been a little trying for me and my family. I saw first hand how a nation takes care of its own. Oh sure, you may think I am referring to the welfare state. People who get money from the taxpayer to help pay their rent, their food bill, their energy bills, their phone bill and maybe even help pay for a car. Sure it is important to help those who really are in need and are down on their luck. Sure it is important to give these people a hand up.

All to often, however, what we taxpayers end up giving via our various layers of government is nothing more than a hand out. But these are not the people I am referring to.

I am referring to the people who risk their very lives to provide us with safety and freedom. I am talking about those who volunteer to lay down their lives so that the rest of us may live our lives fully and in peace. I am talking about our military veterans. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard people who do not know the truth talk about all the “free” health care that the military gets. Truth is, its not so free. Never has been. There is always a price. A double price. A financial price for sure but also a human price. A sacrificial price. Let me be boldly clear on this. A nation that does not take care of their own Military Veterans will not remain a nation for long.

You see, every time in history when a nation forgets or mistreats those that actually do the fighting to keep the enemy at bay will soon not have those individuals willing to sacrifice everything. Then you end up with a draft.

A conscription of those who do not wish to be a part of the military and who do not wish to sacrifice everything they have including their very lives, in defense of the homeland. This is when you have desertion in large numbers on the battle field. The non-volunteer soldier thinks that what they do will not be rewarded or appreciated by the general public so they decide not to risk their own lives for such ungrateful citizenry and they flee.

Today, in the United States, we are doing this to our men and women of the military. Those that populate the Army, the Navy, the Marines, the Air Force and even the Coast Guard. These people put everything on the line yet they get little pay in return. They often get poor medical treatment at substandard facilities. We have seen the news reports of how bad the VA Hospital system is yet you probably think they are still getting their care for free. Well, they don’t get that substandard care for free. Yes the vet has to pay at least a portion of his care out of his own pocket. His own pocket!

Yet the welfare mother gets far better treatment at the local clinic. Their welfare benefits sometimes are greater than the compensation given to our military. In fact, we treat our military with such disdain that often times, young military families are forced to apply for and obtain Food Stamps and other welfare programs. These are ambitious and well trained individuals who eventually see the light and realize that the citizenry do not care for them at all. They are treated worse than dogs in some cases. They decide they will not put their lives and their families’ lives in jeopardy for such an ungrateful mass. They decide to leave the service, often as early as they can. Taking with them their experience, their training and their dedication and never to return.

You may say that they volunteer to do the job and that they know the risk. But let me ask you, what will you do when nobody, and I mean nobody is willing to volunteer to do that job? Will you volunteer? Why not? Most likely it will be because you know how poorly you treated those who came before you and thus you would never subject yourself to such treatment.

You elect the officials who treat our military vets with disdain and dishonor and only you can elect officials who will reverse that trend. After all, if you don’t start believing that our veterans deserve all we can give them, you soon won’t have anything at all to keep because you won’t have a free nation that allows you to have what you have.

So let me ask you, if you won’t volunteer to keep you, your family, your neighborhood, your state, your nation safe and free, then who do you think will? Maybe we should demand better treatment and pay for those that do volunteer and so we will always have those that will volunteer.

The alternative, well lets just say, you would not volunteer for the alternative.

RELATED VIDEO:

RELATED ARTICLES:

After Deaths of Veterans, Federal Agencies Stonewall Probe of ‘Candy Man’ Doctor

Study – Are Veterans Subjected to Social Indifference?

Obama’s Policies degrading the “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. Armed Forces

By evaluating an overwhelming amount of evidence that has been building for 6 ½ years, the obvious conclusion personnel with extensive military experience will come to, is that Obama’s military policies have been degrading the finest U.S. military fighting force in history. Over the last 6 ½ years, the U.S. Armed Forces has been hollowed out by Obama, his Social Experiment On Diversity has severely fractured unit cohesiveness, his “Politically Correct Policies” have negatively affected unit morale, and the  “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. military is being degraded. Tip of the spear combat units are being compromised by preventing military combat veterans, with a great deal of combat experience, from providing their invaluable operational experience being considered and evaluated, in the debate within the Obama administration, over whether female military personnel should be exposed to hand to hand combat against highly trained enemy infantry units and enemy special operations personnel. None of the below highlighted actions, which have been degrading the “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. Armed Forces, for the last 6 ½ years, could have been instituted without the willing support of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who should have resigned, rather than execute Obama’s below listed policies that have been degrading the U.S. Armed Forces.

The Flag and General Officer Corps have been prevented from opposing and challenging the hollowing out of the U.S. Armed Forces and the degrading of the “Combat Effectiveness” of the US  military by the occupant in the Oval Office. A total of 195 Flag, General, and Senior Military Officers, who may have disagreed with Obama’s “Politically Correct Policies’ and his “Social Experiment on Diversity” that was negatively affecting unit cohesiveness, the moral, and the “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. Armed Forces, were purged. Senior enlisted military personnel who utilized their right to complain thru the chain of command about many of the new policies, to express their concerns, were also been purged, and in some cases were court martialed and dishonorably discharged.

The U.S. Army is being reduced to the manning level that existed prior to WWII. The U.S. Navy is being reduce to the number of ships it had prior to WWI down from President Regan’s 584 ship Navy to Obama’s 284 ships Navy today (1/3 of those ships are going thru shipyard availability and modernizations programs). Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert told lawmakers that the Navy would need a 450-ship fleet, in order to meet the global needs of combatant commanders.  The most effective long range offensive missile in the U.S. Navy arsenal, the Tomahawk Missile (TLAM), is being scrapped by Obama. The TLAM  combines accuracy, range lethality, mobility defense against being jammed, is relatively low cost, and is simple to fix and change targets.

When the Navy reordered 980 TLAMs to bring its inventory current, with the most up-to-date models, not only was the request denied by Obama’s civilian appointees at DOD, the decision was taken to completely end production of all TLAMs in fiscal 2016. No orders for the TLAM will be allowed to be placed after autumn 2015, and there is no replacement missile system under development or in the works to take its place.

NO STRATEGIC JUSTIFICATION HAS BEEN OFFERED TO THE US NAVY BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO ACCOUNT FOR THE CANCELLATION OF THIS VERY EFFECTIVE WEAPON. The TLAM’s usefulness as a weapon system in combat will expire in 5 years.

In violation of a Federal Law which requires the President to seek approval from Congress in advance of the release of prisoners from the Naval Prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (GITMO), Obama released 5 dangerous Radical Islamic Taliban Terrorist Generals from GITMO for an Army deserter, Sgt Bowe Bergdahl. According to an elected Combat Veteran For Congress, Representative Duncan D. Hunter, Maj-USMCR (D-CA-52), a ransom was paid in February 2014 to an Afghanistan middleman by Spec Ops personnel which was another violation of Federal Law by Obama. Obama doubled down and released 5 more dangerous terrorists from GITMO while Americans were distracted by the massive press reports of Obama’s Executive Order preventing ICE from deporting 5 million Illegal Aliens, an in effect cancelling all deportation except in some very special cases. The occupant of the Oval Office then released an additional 6 dangerous terrorist from GITMO, labeling then as refugees—now terrorists are designated as refugees by Obama. Those releases are an assault on the U.S. military who captured them, sometimes at a loss of life, because they will soon be killing American servicemen again.

The “Justification” given by the Obama administration for the exchange of 5 dangerous Radical Islamic Taliban Terrorist Generals was “We leave no military personnel behind”:

(1)   Obama and Hilary Clinton left 4 Americans behind, including 2 Navy SEALs, to be murdered in Benghazi by Radical Islamic Terrorists, while there were armed aircraft less than 2 hours away that could have saved their lives, but the US Armed Forces was prevented from rescuing of the 4 Americans, because Obama refused to execute “Cross Border Authority” which would have been required to authorize a military rescue mission—violating the. Sacred trust  “We leave no military personnel behind.

(2)   Obama left Sgt Andrew Tahmooressi, USMC behind (an Iraqi War Combat Marine Veteran suffering from PTSD) to be tortured in a Mexican prison for over 7 months; his only crime was to mistakenly cross the wide open southern border because of bad signage on the US side of the border— violating the. Sacred trust  “We leave no military personnel behind”:

(3)   Since January 2012, for over 1600 days, Obama has left Sgt Amir Hekmati, USMC behind (an Iraqi War Combat Marine Veteran) to be tortured in an Iranian prison; his only crime was to seek and obtain permission form the Iranian Government, in advance, to visit his dying grandmother—- violating the. Sacred trust “We leave no military personnel behind”.

In January of 2013, the Obama administration announced its decision to make female military personnel eligible for assignment to direct ground combat units by January 2016, including the infantry. The Obama civilian appointees in the Pentagon are forcing the U.S. Army to insert women into the one of the most grueling training regimens in the entire military establishment, the U.S. Army Rangers. They are planning to reduce the physical requirements for military personnel to qualify as a Ranger so that women will be able to pass the rigorous training and qualifications; that will negatively affect the “Combat Effectiveness” of one of the most important tip of the spear units in the Army.

A study was conducted by the British Ministry of Defense, which tears to shreds the case for women in close ground combat. One of the findings of the study was that under conditions of high intensity close quarter battle, “team cohesion is of such significance that the employment of women in this environment would represent a risk to the “Combat Effectiveness” and there would be no gains in terms of “Combat Effectiveness” to offset it.” The question is whether women should purposely be placed in situations where they must close with the enemy, one on one,  in extremes of physical endurance, climate, and terrain, brutal and violent death, injury, horror, and fear, just to satisfy the “Politically Correct” feminist agenda.

Obama is planning to compromise extremely high standards of tip of the spear units that have resulted in outstanding combat results for the last 75 years, Obama’s compromise of those tip of the spear units will be destruction to the “Combat Effectiveness” of units like the U.S. Marine Corps Infantry, US Army Rangers, the Green Berets, Delta Force, and U.S. Navy SEALs, and will disrupt the “Warrior Spirit” and “Ethos” so carefully nurtured over the years by the finest military force in the world.

China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, and the American people are fully aware that the military strength has been systematically degraded by Obama for 6 ½ years, and believe that the National Security of the United States has been severely compromised by Obama’s hollowing out of the U.S. Armed Forces, and by Obama’s willful intent to ignore the external military threats to the Republic. At the same time, during those 6 ½ years, China, Russia, and Iran have been building modern conventional and nuclear military weapons systems——the US military has not be able to keep pace because of sequestration and being bogged down fighting al Q’ieda,  the Taliban, and ISIL. While ISIL expands, is prosecuting the genocide of Christian, and developing sleeper cells in all 50 states, Obama does very little (ISIL recently stated they now have 71 trained Radical Islamic Terrorists operating in the U.S.).

Obama is keeping his promise, made to Russian Prime Minister in an overheard comment on an open mike prior to the 2012 election, when he said that his hands would not be tied after the election. Russia continues its invasion of Ukraine after its successful the naked aggression and conquest of Crimea; that has all but been ignored by Obama and Ukraine’s request for major defensive weapons systems for over 2 years have fallen on deaf ears in Washington. Russia announced it is shipping S-300 anti-air missiles to Iran to prevent Israel from striking its nuclear weapons development facilities; Obama’s only comment was that he is not surprised. Russia is upgrading its Naval base in Cuba, while Obama removes Cuba from the U.S. State Department’s list of state sponsored terrorist nations and recognizing Cuba while Cuba is supporting the terrorist activities of FARC and Venezuela in South America

The Department of Homeland issued a bulletin to all police agencies in 2009, naming all military Veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan as potential terrorist.  At the same time Obama is allowing hundreds of thousands of Muslims to enter the U.S. thru the UN Muslim Refugee Resettlement Program while preventing intelligent analysts from checking their backgrounds for possible ties to ISIL and Al Q’ieda Radical Islamic Terrorists. At the same time, the Greek Catholic Relief Agency has stated over 300,000 Syrian and Assyrian Christian refugees are being prevented from entering the U.S.

Obama has imposed new and dangerous Rules Of Engagement (ROE) for the U.S. Armed Forces executed by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, and retained by his replacement General Martin Dempsey. Each year since 2008 when the new ROE took effect, 2049 more military personnel per year have been Wounded In Action, each year, for 5 years (a total of 10,245 more personnel have been wounded and/or maimed for life), an increase of 378%.  Each year since 2008 when the new and “dangerous” ROE took effect, 368 more military personnel have been Killed In Action, each year, for 5 years (a total of 1840 more personnel have been killed), an increase of 458%.

Obama has been launching attacks on the profound religious beliefs of Christians in the U.S. Armed Forces, in violation of the Freedom of Religion guaranteed to every American in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Chaplains are having their sermons and even places where they can pray censored to be sure they are Politically Correct. Chaplains reading letters from Cardinals to their parishioners in the pulpit have been prevented from doing so. Military personnel are prevented from having bibles in their work places.  Chaplains are being prevented from offering bibles to patients in military hospital rooms, unless they specifically ask for them. Base commanders on military installations are prevented from allowing bibles to be placed in the base hotel rooms. The massive 6 ½  year assault on Christians in the US Military by the Obama Administration is outlined in the video that can be watched by clicking on this link from the Thomas More Law Center;  http://bit.ly/HAfq8Z. It is a dangerous and extreme anti-Christian program being driven by Obama himself against members of the US Armed Forces; Obama has not stopped this unprecedented assault.  What would President George Washington, President Lincoln, President Teddy Roosevelt, President Truman, President Kennedy, President Eisenhower, and President Reagan have to say about Obama’s shameful assault on “Freedom of Religion” in the U.S. Armed Forces?

Open homosexuality in the US Armed Forces has been decreed by Obama, in violation of General George Washington’s 238 year old US Military Regulations. Gay Rights Political Events are now held on U.S. Military bases in violation of U.S. Military Regulations which prevent any political activities on any military installation. U.S. Military Color guards and military personnel in uniform have been ordered to march in Gay Rights parades (apolitical event) in violation of U.S. Military Regulations. The civilian appointees of the Obama administration in the Pentagon, have been trying to cover up the fact that 10,400 straight military male enlisted personnel have been sexually assaulted by gay male military personnel in their barracks and on their ships—creating retention problems, and that thousands of straight female members in the military hae been sexually assaulted by lesbian military personnel.

Poster in Officer’s Club, Vandenberg AFB, CA:

During the 2010, 2012, and 2014 elections, the Obama administration, through Attorney General Eric Holder, actively encouraged State Secretaries of Democratically controlled states, to disregard Federal Voting Laws that required the timely mailing out absentee ballots to active duty military personnel, so they can receive the ballots on time, in order to return them on a date specific, so they can be counted on election day.  As a result, hundreds of thousands of military votes have never been counted, denying members of the U.S. Armed Forces their basic fundamental American rights to vote.

Although the Veterans Administration is supposed to support the interests of military veterans, yet it has slowed down the process of allowing veterans to file claims for benefits to the point where veterans are waiting for months and even years to have their claims processed.  When veterans go to the VA, because of new regulations imposed by Obama, they are being asked if they own firearms, if they have ever been depressed, and if their spouses handle the family finances which is against privacy laws. Then that information is being used to declare them mentally incompetent and deny them their Constitutional rights to own, purchase, or possess firearms in accordance with the 5th and 2nd Amendments to the US Constitution. Eric Holder’s Justice Department has put them on a list of Americans who are prevented from owning firearms in violation of their 2nd Amendment rights. Many Veterans cannot get help with their medical issues, and have to wait hours on the phone to get any response at all; an average of 23 Veterans are committing suicide each day.

The Army ROTC cadets at Arizona State University were recently humiliated by being forced to walk around on campus in full military uniforms wearing Red Pumps for an event called “Walk A Mile in Her Shoes” to raise awareness of sexual violence against women on college campuses. As reported by the Washington Times, in 2014, the Army encouraged participation in the April 2015 event.  However: this year, the ROTC candidates at ASU were faced with a volunteer event “that became mandatory.”  Or, they were “voluntold” they have to participate or be faced with discipline action. The Cadets were forced to walk around out of uniform (because they were not wearing military boots) in violation of Army Regulation AR670-1, entitled Wear and Appearance of Army Uniform and Insignia—“A military member must wear his or her uniform in a way that projects an image of discipline and order and is prohibited from wearing a combination of civilian and military clothing.”

A twelve month survey of internal data of personnel in the U.S. Army from the period through early 2015 was obtained by “USA Today”, it shows starling negative findings of their very low morale, including in the findings are the following:

  • More than half of some 770,000 soldiers (52% or 403,564 soldiers) are pessimistic about their future in the military, agreeing with statements such as “I rarely count on good things happening to me.”
  • 48% or about 370,000 soldiers are unhappy in their jobs, have little satisfaction in or commitment to their jobs, and would have chosen another if they had it to do over again. Only 28% felt good about what they do.
  • More than half reported poor nutrition and sleep. Only 14% said they are eating right and getting enough rest.
  • Two-thirds were borderline or worse for an area called “catastrophic thinking,” where poor scores mean the soldier has trouble adapting to change or dwells on the worst possible things happening.
  • Nearly 40% or about 300,000 soldiers didn’t trust their immediate supervisor or fellow soldiers in their unit or didn’t feel respected or valued. Only 32% felt good about bosses and peers.

General Martin Dempsey has been trying to push the U.S. Marine Corps to lower standards for women in order to let them pass the Infantry Officer’s Course, regardless of how it will affect the “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. Marine Corps. If a lower standard for Infantry Officers is forced upon the US Marine Corps, it would result in weakening the infantry arm of the U.S. Marine Corps needlessly, in order to comply with Obama’s “Political Correctness.”  Senator John McCain told Fox News’ American Newsroom, “General Dempsey is the most disappointing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that I have ever seen. and I have seen many of them.  He has supported the plan to completely withdraw from Afghanistan. He’s basically been the echo chamber for the president, and one of the reasons why we are in the situation that we’re in, in the world today…..is because of his lack of either knowledge or candor about the situation in the Middle East, and it has done great damage.”

The real threat to the National Security interests of the United States and the American citizens is the internal threat, the occupant of Oval Office who has repeatedly said he doesn’t want the United States to be the only Superpower in the world..

Please watch this very important video:

We strongly encourage you to read the article below.

The Washington Times

U.S. military decimated under Obama, only ‘marginally able’ to defend nation

By Rowan Scarborough – The Washington Times

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

The U.S. military is shedding so many troops and weapons it is only “marginally able” to defend the nation and falls short of the Obama administration’s national security strategy, according to a new report by The Heritage Foundation on Tuesday.

“The U.S. military itself is aging. It’s shrinking in size,” said Dakota Wood, a Heritage analyst. “And it’s quickly becoming problematic in terms of being able to address more than one major conflict.”

President Obama’s latest strategy is to size the armed forces pledged in 2014 so that the four military branches have sufficient troops, ships, tanks and aircraft to win a large war, while simultaneously acting to “deny the objectives of — or impose unacceptable costs on — another aggressor in another region.”

In other words, the Quadrennial Defense Review says the military can essentially fight two major conflicts at once. It could defeat an invasion of South Korea by the North, for example, and stop Russia from invading Western Europe or Iran from conquering a Persian Gulf state.

But Heritage’s “2015 Index of U.S. Military Strength” took a look, in detail, at units and weapons, region by region, and came to a different conclusion.

“The U.S. military is rapidly approaching a one-war-capable force,” said Mr. Wood, a former Marine Corps officer and strategic planner. “So [it is] able to handle a major war and then having just a bit of residual capability to handle other minor crises that might pop up. … But it is a far cry from being a two-war force.”

“The consistent decline in funding and the consequent shrinking of the force are putting it under significant pressure,” the report concluded. “The cumulative effect of such factors has resulted in a U.S. military that is marginally able to meet the demands of defending America’s vital national interests.”

The index report is part scorecard, part research tool.

It grades the Army, which is shrinking from 570,000 soldiers to 440,000 or lower, and the Navy, which is failing to achieve a 300-ship force, as only “marginal” in military power. The Air Force’s fleet of fighters and long-range bombers is judged “strong.”

Heritage says the military cannot fight two wars at once.

The report said the Army historically commits 21 brigade dombat teams to one war. Several years ago, that left just 21 more brigades for a second war and none for strategic reserve.

But the problem is more acute. The Army announced in 2013 it may go as low as 33 brigades, far short of the 50 brigades Heritage says are needed.

The Army has been battered by automatic budget cuts known as “sequestration.” A bipartisan budget deal provided some relief last year, but the slashing could come back in 2016 without another agreement.

Gen. Raymond Odierno, Army chief of staff, has said that if the active force is squeezed down to 420,000 soldiers, it could not carry out all global commitments.

The Navy would need 346 ships to carry out two large campaigns, Heritage said, but its fleet is only 284.

At the report’s release, Rep. J. Randy Forbes, Virginia Republican, talked of all the technological advancements that led to complete air superiority in the 1991 Desert Storm operation over Iraq.

Today, the House Armed Services Committee member said the Air Force “would say we are dangerously close to no longer being able to guarantee that air dominance that we could guarantee in Kuwait.”

“If you listen to the Army, they will give testimony they can no longer guarantee. You talk about two wars — they testified they can’t guarantee that we could win one war,” Mr. Forbes said. “The Navy will tell you if we get to 260 ships, we cease to be a superpower; we become a regional power.”

The Pentagon’s base budget, minus overseas war costs, has decreased under Mr. Obama, from $527 billion in 2010 to about $496 billion in each of the last three budgets. The president is asking for an increase in 2016 to $534 billion.

“The enemies that we have out there, and competitors, are making very smart investments accounting for their strategic objectives and interests,” Mr. Wood said.

Oppression of Christians in U.S. Military is Triggering their Exodus

America has a Judeo/Christian ethos; 90% of Americans believe in God and 50% of them go to church and synagogue every week.  Christian members of the U.S. military are wondering long and hard about joining and/or making the U.S. Armed Forces a career. This concern by Christians to possibly avoid a U.S. Armed Forces that oppresses Christians appears to fit in with Obama’s Social Experiment On Diversity, in order to minimize Christian influence in the U.S. military.  The Social Experiment On Diversity that has been changing the make-up of the US Armed Forces is seriously eroding unit cohesiveness, unit morale, and  the “Combat Effectiveness“ of the U.S. military.

Chaplains are having their sermons and even the places where they are allowed to pray controlled and censored to be sure their statements are “Politically Correct” and in keeping with the what the Obama civilian appointees in DOD want them to say. Chaplains have been prevented from reading letters from their Cardinals in the pulpit to their parishioners. Chaplains have been prevented from giving bibles to patients in their hospital rooms. Catholic Chaplains who don’t believe in the use of birth control pills and abortion are prevented from preaching their religious beliefs in the pulpit. Army Ranger Chaplain Joseph Lawton was punished and served with a “Letter of Concern” for referring to solace and comfort he receives in his darkest moments by reading the Psalms of King David in the Old Testament of the Bible, while he was conducting a suicide prevention seminar for Combat Veterans suffering from PTSD.

The Defense in Marriage Act, a Federal Law, has been violated and disobeyed by Obama, and Holder without repealing it. Chaplains who support that Federal Law because of their religious beliefs have been discriminated against. Obama’s civilian DOD appointees have been intolerant toward Chaplains who do not believe in same sex marriage, supposedly in the defense of tolerance, to make them comply, which is not only hypocritical, but is bigoted. So if a Chaplain’s well held religious beliefs don’t allow him to support same sex marriage, he is threatened with career ending punishment which would result in his failure to be promoted, and/or would result in his removal from the U.S. Armed Forces. That treatment of Chaplains and Christians who agree with their Chaplains beliefs have been discriminated against and oppressive by the civilian appointees of the Obama administration at DOD.

Military personnel are prevented from having bibles at their desks in their work place, and military base commanders have been instructed not to allow bibles to be placed in base hotel rooms.

Open homosexuality in the U.S. Armed Forces has been approved by Obama’s Executive Orders, in a major “CHANGE” to General George Washington’s 238 year old U.S. Military Regulations. Last year because of the “CHANGE” of General George Washington’s Military Regulations, the U.S. Armed Forces authorized the recruiting of a large influx of gay males and women to join the U.S. military for the first time in U.S. history.  Last year 10,400 straight members of the US Armed Forces were sexually assaulted in their barracks and aboard their ships. The Navy has had straight female enlisted women sexually assaulted in their barracks and aboard their ships by lesbian crew members; and nearly 9, 000 female members of the US Armed Forces were sexually assaulted last year.

Gay Rights Political Events and gatherings are now being held on U.S. Military bases and in the Pentagon in violation of U.S. Military Regulations which prohibit political events of any kind. U.S. Military Color guards and military personnel in uniform are now being ordered to march in Gay Rights Parades (a political event) in violation of U.S. Military Regulations, while at the same time, members of the U.S. Armed Forces have been prevented from attending Christian events in their uniforms.

In 2014, at the Iron Mountain VA Hospital in Wisconsin, Chaplain Bob Mueller, relayed an unsettling experience he experienced in a conversation he had with one of Obama’s civilian appointee in the Veterans Administration, when he said “a couple of months ago, an order came down from Washington, D.C. to all Chaplains in VA Hospitals across the nation, ordering them to cover all icons associated with Christianity in VA Hospitals, like photos of Christ, crosses, and stained glass windows, because there are Christian symbols in stained glass.” Chaplain Mueller was told to “stop talking about Jesus, and to stop reading the scripture out loud.”  He said that the Obama administration has issued the same orders “to cover all things associated with Christianity” to all VA Chapels across the country.”  Click here to read Chaplain Mueller’s report.

The Flag and General Officer, who have always practiced and supported Judeo/Christian ethics, who opposed the hollowing out of the U.S. Armed Forces, and policies that degraded the “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. military by the occupant in the Oval Office, have been systematically eliminated over the last 6 years. A total of 195 Flag, General, and Senior Military Officers, who disagreed with Obama’s “Politically Correct” destructive military policies, and his executive Order that changed the U.S. Military into first major military force in the world that openly gay, a new and destructive policy that has negatively affected unit cohesiveness, the morale, and the “Combat Effectiveness” of the U.S. Armed Forces, have been purged by General Dempsey—those that remain have been conditioned not to defend Christianity.  Those 195 purged Senior Officers would have opposed the on-going attack on Christians in the U.S. Armed Forces, but they are no longer there to defend the Chaplains and the enlisted Christian personnel.  Senior enlisted military personnel who also practiced and supported Judeo/Christian ethics, and disagreed with an openly gay military, tried to utilized their right to complain thru the chain of command, and to express their concerns about the “Social Experiment on Diversity”, have also been purged, and in some cases have been court martialed and dishonorably discharged.

Although the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution guarantees Freedom of Religion, Christian members of the U.S. Armed Forces have had their religious rights systematically violated and oppressed, as previously discussed above and in the below listed article.  The suppression of Christianity in the U.S. Armed Forces is triggering an exodus from the U.S. military of many Christians who wanted to make the U.S. military a career when they joined.  After their first tour of duty, while witnessing how Chaplains and their Christian religious beliefs were oppressed, they have turned against making the U.S. Armed Forces a career.  The elimination of thousands of Christian personnel from the U.S. Armed Forces with their well held religious beliefs and ethics in the ranks, and having them replaced will personnel with a different set of beliefs in keeping with Obama’s beliefs, will change the nature of the U.S. Armed Forces.


WND RADIO

CRACKDOWN ON CHRISTIANS TRIGGERS EXODUS FROM MILITARY

‘They’re starting to wonder, is this going to be a place where I’m welcomed?’

GREG COROMBOS

Greg Corombos is news director for Radio America.

A leading defender of Christians in the military says the crackdown on the free religious expression of Christians in uniform is increasing despite Pentagon assurances to the contrary, leading active-duty personnel to re-evaluate their careers and young Americans and their parents to reconsider service at all.

Recent discipline for military chaplains dispensing biblical counsel have made national headlines, but a recent piece in the Washington Times suggests enlistment numbers are in danger of dropping as well.

Liberty Institute represents chaplains in two high-profile cases as well as several other personnel reprimanded for their free expression of Christian beliefs. Senior counsel Michael Berry said the American people are paying attention and getting increasingly worried about what’s happening in the military.

“A great deal of Americans of faith, which is still a majority of our country, are looking at the environment and climate within our federal government and military more specifically and seeing case after case, report after report,” Berry said in an interview with WND and Radio America.

He said the growing number of stories is causing committed Christians to ask some uncomfortable questions.

“They’re starting to wonder, ‘Is this going to be a place where I’m welcomed? Is this going to be a place where I’m tolerated? Am I going to be required to keep my faith in the closet, so to speak?’ Or are they going to be allowed, which has always been the practice in our country up until this point, to freely exercise their religion in accordance with their sincerely held beliefs as the Constitution allows?” asked Berry, a military vet who made his own difficult decision to leave the armed forces as he saw religious liberties eroding.

“I was on active duty, and I began to see the writing on the wall,” he said. “I realized this is not the military I grew up in. This is not the military that I was raised to believe in and to support. It’s changing, and I realized it was time for me to make a move.”

And Berry is not the only one thinking long and hard about military service as the right career path.

“I’ve had a lot of mothers and fathers ask me. They say, ‘Mike, I served and my son or daughter wants to follow in my footsteps. But, as proud as I am of my military service, I’m not sure I want my son or daughter to be serving in our military anymore, given what’s going on,’” Berry said. “That’s very scary for our country if that kind of conversation and dialogue is now happening.”

It’s difficult to get solid numbers on the impact religious freedom restrictions are having on recruiting and retention. Berry said the military almost always keep mum about drops in recruiting and retention and it never breaks down the reasons for the declines.

“It doesn’t behoove the military to report that they’re having problems with retention,” he said. “A group like a chaplain’s corps is not going to say, ‘We’re having a hard time attracting new chaplains’ because that doesn’t present them in a very favorable light.”

Read more.

America’s Military Power in a Steep Decline

“Eliminating the terrorists of today with force will not guarantee protection from the terrorists of tomorrow. We have to transform the environments that give birth to these movements…It may be training young people so they can get jobs…it may be working to eliminate corruption and promote the rule of law…”

The Obama administration proposal that a jobs program be created for the militants in the Middle East was met with appropriate derision because what the jihadists need is killing. That’s what they are doing to Christians, Jews and others in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The quote above is by John Kerry, the Secretary of State, and to be fair, his February 18 Wall Street Journal commentary began by saying “The rise of violent extremism represents the pre-eminent challenge of the young 21st Century. Military force is a rational and often necessary response to the wanton slaughters of children, mass kidnappings of schoolgirls, and beheading of innocents. But military force along won’t achieve victory.”

Kerry is wrong. History as recent as the mid-20th century is proof enough that the military defeat of Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan was the only thing that ended the threat they represented. He was also wrong when he told a congressional committee that the world is a safer place these days when it is clear to anyone it is not.

We are being led by people who live in some alternative universe where pixie dust and unicorns exist.

The real question the Obama administration has to answer is why, since he took office in 2009, has he been systematically reducing the military power of the United States? By pulling our troops out of Iraq he created a vacuum filled by the Islamic State (ISIS) that now threatens the entire Middle East and parts of North Africa. He has since curtailed plans to pull most of our troops out of Afghanistan.

soldiers in dust stormOut of sight of Americans, however, the key personnel, the leaders on which our military depends, have been subject to a purge. General Paul Vallely (Ret) has warned that “Since Barack Obama has been in the White House, high ranking military officers have been removed from their positions at a rate that is absolutely unprecedented,” adding that “He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

In late February, 84 former U.S. government officials, retired U.S. military leaders, and national security experts sent an open letter to the House and Senate leadership asking them to work together to end the harm that the Budget Control Act and sequestration is inflicting on our Armed Forces.

They deemed the trillion dollars of required defense spending cuts “a grave and growing danger to our national security…as threats intensify across the globe.” The cuts “are undermining the readiness of our forces today and investment in the critical capabilities they will need tomorrow.”

“In the last three years, the Army’s strength has been cut by nearly 100,000 soldiers. The Navy’s contingency response force is at one-third the level of what it should be. Less than half of the Air Force’s combat squadrons are fully ready. Approximately half of the Marine Corps non-deployed units lack sufficient personnel, equipment, and training.”

These were facts set forth in the National Defense Panel’s July 2014 report. It warned that if sequestration takes effect in fiscal year 2016, the U.S. would be facing an “immediate readiness crisis.”

putin 2This lack of readiness was the subject of a Wall Street Journal commentary, “Europe’s Defense Wanes as the Putin Threat Grows” by Ian Birrell, so it is not just the United States that lacks sufficient troops and weapons in the event of a war. Birrell noted that “With fewer than 100,000 full-time troops, Great Britain now has a smaller army than during the mid-19th-century Crimean War.” Other members of NATO have cut their defense budgets in recent years. He warned that “As we fight this new Cold War, Western leaders need to relearn the old lessons of crisis management and deterrence that defeated Mr. Putin’s Soviet predecessors—and relearn them quickly.”

Recall that Secretary Kerry has gone on record saying that “climate change” is the greatest threat the U.S. and the world faces. Little wonder that Chuck Hegel resigned as the former Secretary of Defense given the pressure he was under from a White House indifferent to the real problems and threats the U.S. faces.

In 2014 the Pentagon released a “Climate Change Adaptation Forecast” and any defense funds diverted to this plan were just that much less than needed for our troops in the field and the real needs of the U.S. military. Are they supposed to be fighting melting ice bergs or staying ready for potential military threats from China or Russia?

An example of the idiotic political correctness, scarce Pentagon resources are being diverted to a plan to generate 50% of the Navy’s energy needs from “alternative sources” by 2020, including $3.5 billion for biofuels. You cannot fight a global war if the Navy cannot swiftly and easily acquire oil to run its ships that are not nuclear-powered and fly its aircraft.

At the same time, the U.S. has been reducing its stockpile of nuclear arms. The State Department’s Rose Gottemoeller, under-secretary for arms control and international security, recently told a group “The U.S. commitment to achieving the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons is unassailable.” She noted that the nation’s stockpile of active weapons is down 85% from maximum cold war levels, falling to 4,804 in 2013 from a high of 31,255, adding that “We still have more work to do.”

This completely ignores nuclear nations like North Korea who have bad intentions toward the U.S. and their neighbors and it runs completely contrary to the U.S. negotiations with Iran that would permit it to become a nuclear armed nation.

This is worse than diplomatic schizophrenia; it is a plan for national suicide.

Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, recently told Congress that Russia and China have placed their highest priority on building up and maintaining strategic nuclear forces.

If you want to know what is wrong about the entire approach to our nation’s military needs, consider that since 2009 when Obama took office, the Pentagon’s civilian workforce has grown about 7% to almost 750,000, while active-duty military personnel have been cut by approximately 8%.

At the same time, dozens of military-equipment and weapons programs have been canceled, including a new Navy cruiser, a new search-and-rescue helicopter, the F-22 first-generation fighter, the C-17 transport aircraft, missile defense and the Marine Corps’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.

We are not prepared to fight a war and now you know why.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Decapitating the U.S. Military

Many Americans were shocked by the Islamic State video of the beheading of the photo journalist James Foley. Perhaps they had already forgotten the decapitation of Wall Street Journal journalist, Daniel Pearl in 2002. Most certainly, the memory of the murder of nearly 3,000 on September 11, 2001 with the destruction of the World Trade Towers has begun to recede.

What most do not know is that decapitation is a requirement in the Islamic holy war and holy book, the Koran.

“So when you meet in Jihad in Allah’s cause those who disbelieve, smite their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them…” (Surat 47, al-Qital—the Killing–, Ayat 4.

“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks and smite them over all their fingers and toes.” – Surat al-Anfel (The Spoils), Ayat/Verse 12.)

If I were a jihadist who wanted to undermine the capacity of the United States of America to both defend itself and/or to wage war on those who regard us as their enemy, I would welcome what is currently occurring to weaken our military. It is exactly what President Obama and a compliant Congress has been doing for some time now.

In the name of the “sequester”, an across-the-board reduction in federal spending, the military has suffered the most despite being the single key factor to defend the nation and to project our power to protect our allies.

An August 26 article in Politico reported that the five leading U.S. defense firms, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing’s defense unit, and Northrop Grumman, have eliminated 70,000 jobs since 2008 through layoffs, buyouts, attrition, or, as Boeing did, moving employees to the commercial side of its business. “There’s little momentum in Congress to undo the current caps on discretionary federal spending and, facing a war-weary public, U.S. officials are pledging to avoid sending combat troops to today’s hotspots, including Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine.”

As reported by Bloomberg News in July, “The U.S. Navy can’t meet its funding needs for surface warships and a new class of nuclear attack submarines from 2025 to 2034 according to the service’s latest 30-year shipbuilding plan.” The Navy is just one element of the Pentagon’s current five-year funding plan “in an era of declining defense spending.” It will impact the need for new submarines, the planned full production of F-35 fighter jets, and a new long-range strike bomber.

In March The Washington Times reported that “President Obama is seeking to abolish two highly successful missile programs that experts say have helped the U.S. Navy maintain military superiority for the past several decades.” Obama wants to eliminate the famed Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs. Why?

We have, however, billions for a variety of welfare programs, those devoted to “environmental research”, and countless other examples of sheer waste.

In January, commentator Mike Snyder raised the question, “Why are Dozens of High Ranking Officers Being Purged from the U.S. Military?” He noted that “Since Barack Obama has been in the White House, high ranking military officers have been removed from their positions at a rate that is absolutely unprecedented. Things have gotten so bad that a number of retired generals are publicly speaking out about the ‘purge’ of the U.S. military that they believe is taking place.”

Retired Major General Paul Vallely was quoted as having said, “He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon, and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

Recognizing the threat that the Islamic State represents, even Secretary of State, John Kerry, has spoken of the need to destroy it, but he has for too long been saying that “climate change” is the most serious challenge the world is facing.

The U.S. has a full range of enemies such as Iran which since 1979 has declared the U.S. its enemy and continues a program to make its own nuclear weapons. Additional challenges include Russia’s actions in Russia in the Ukraine and China’s military power.

In July, Rowan Scarborough, a Washington Times columnist, warned that “An independent panel appointed by the Pentagon and Congress said that President Obama’s strategy for sizing the armed services is too weak for today’s global threats.” The National Defense Panel called on the President to “dump a major section of his 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review and write a broader strategy that requires the military to fight on multiple fronts at once.” That alone would require a larger military than we have now; one that is the size it was prior to World War Two!

How stupid is the Obama-Kerry climate change policy? In June, The Washington Times reported that “Some critics say such alarmist reports are causing the Pentagon to shift money that could be used for weapons and readiness. It is making big investments in biofuels, for example, and is working climate change into high-level strategic planning.”
The article quoted Sen. James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, as saying “The president’s misguided priorities with our national security can be seen in the $1 trillion defense cuts he has put into motion since taking office and then using the limited defense budget to support his green agenda.” Everything the President has said about climate change has been a lie.

President Obama has taken steps to open the military to homosexuals, a practice that was avoided for most of the nation’s history because of its effect on morale and he has advocated women in combat units in the name of “diversity.”

Questioned about it in 2013, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Joint Chiefs Chairman, referred to the requirement to introduce a “critical mass” or “significant cadre” of women into previously all-male units. Wars are not won by diversity. They are won by men who meet the physical standards and requirements of combat.

In May, The Washington Times reported that “These days, the U.S. military is only taking twenty percent of the applicants who walk into their local recruiter’s office intent on enlisting in the armed forces” noting that “the tough environment for potential recruits is due in large part to troop reductions in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the Pentagon’s plans to cut the size of the active duty Army.” Cut the size? At a time when we may need “boots on the ground” again in Iraq and a possible incursion into Syria?

Whether it is weapons systems needed by the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard, the Obama administration has waged its own war on America’s capacity to meet the needs of our national security currently and in the years ahead. It has waged an effort to alter the makeup of our military personnel, to reduce portions of it, and to eliminate many top officers to lead it.

It isn’t just the Islamic State’s American hostages that are being decapitated. It is the U.S. military.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

I Fought For You

A moving, patriotic tribute to our military, past and present. Thank you for your service! This video was produced by The Sound Tank.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/AgYLr_LfhLo[/youtube]