NOTE: This is an essay written by Bullright and published on his blog “Right Ring” on Oct. 10th. I liked it so much I’m cross-posting here for our readers to enjoy. See if you don’t agree.
In a recent conversation I had with Pepp on various topics, I came to a conclusion. I won’t speak for Pepp, she is very capable. It was surrounding Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran (and little Israel thrown in) and Obama’s foreign policy. All that matters is the conclusion which even stunned myself. I’m no fan of Obama or his foreign or domestic policies.
I suddenly realized that, in this volatile world with all that is going on, from Russia to the Middle East, I cannot foresee even the worst things happening in the world, where Obama could take any kind of action, that I could ever support anything big or small that he does using our military. That is a heck of a revelation.
The rule is usually in times of crisis you support the commander-in-chief. But I can’t think of a situation bad enough or simple enough that I could fully support. I am dead serious, though it was a matter of reasoning that out. Sometimes things come out in discussion with someone you wouldn’t realize outside of having that conversation.
There are a number of reasons. I’ll try to outline some of the majors:
A) He would not be trusted and would either throw our efforts or soldiers to the wolves, or under the bus in the situation.(for whatever motives)
B) He cleansed the ranks of many good career generals with experience, knowledge and backbone loyal to their oath.
C) He would not rely on best advice of the Pentagon or those in authority to know.
D) He would change the mission once engaged to some other purpose.
E) He would intentionally change the rules of engagement to suit his ideology.
F) His loyalty to the US cannot be counted on in any situation.
G) He is influenced or led by other interests outside USA’s interest.
H) He’s sided with others, opponents or enemies, while in direct military action.
I) He’s made deals with enemies to the US against our interests and security.
J) He would not be in it to win on behalf of US; other interests take priority.
K) He won’t stand up in the end for US interests or our security.
L) He would overrule or change the plans on a dime himself, for subverted reasons. Everything is fluid, he’s flexible to himself and his political interests.
M) He could and no doubt would undermine our military’s objectives for his own personal reasons, or others. (or his ideology)
O) He does not honor his oath or uphold the Constitution in the US as it is.
P) His words are meaningless anyway, and his credibility is zero.
There are probably more. That’s the point. I don’t know of a situation where he or his motives could be trusted to do the right thing if required, and if people depended on it.
So, there is my basic conclusion, tough as it is to think about. Maybe others have already gone through that process. At least some in our military should have walked through the possibilities already. Thus, it is not a matter of trusting our military to do the right thing or be successful. He intervenes in that process into the mission. Intentional failure?
When a lot of people see it the same way, that’s a problem. And when our allies and enemies read it the same way, it’s definitely a real problem
Now I can’t say it would be completely intentional, who can read the diseased mind, but I can say he just cannot be trusted. This, of course, means from the simplest of presidential actions of diplomacy, to treaties, to full-blown military action — anything. That’s mine.
I’m sorry to say that I agree completely with Bull. It’s taken close to seven long years of Barack Obama to finally convince me that I cannot trust our president and commander-in-chief to act in the best interests of our United States. As a timely example, I just read today that for the first time since 2007, we won’t have an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf. The USS Theodore Roosevelt was removed late Thursday, supposedly for “maintenance,” but no replacement was sent. Military officials had previously warned of the aircraft carrier’s removal and its negative impact on U.S. capabilities in the region.
Now, I’m no military expert, but it seems that the Middle East is more dangerous than I can ever remember and it doesn’t seem like it’s the right time for us to be weakening our presence. My perception is that for years, in every way, Barack Obama has been gradually weakening our military strength and ceding more and more parts of the world to our enemies.
Answer me this: what would he be doing differently if his agenda was to intentionally withdraw the U.S. from our previous position as the world’s preeminent superpower and relegating us to just another subservient member of the UN?
I’ve already arrived at my answer … what’s yours?