Entries Tagged as 'Military'

The Rules of Engagement

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is blasting Julian Assange for the release last week of some 76,000 documents his WikiLeaks site obtained from an informant relating to the “killing of thousands of children and adults” in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr Gates said in a Pentagon news conference:

Mr. Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is, they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,

Mr Assange stated:

Secretary Gates could have used his time, as other nations have done, to announce a broad inquiry into these killings. He could have announced specific criminal investigations into the deaths we have exposed. He could have announced a panel to hear the heartfelt dissent of U.S. soldiers, who know this war from the ground. He could have apologized to the Afghani people.

But he did none of these things. He decided to treat these issues and the countries affected by them with contempt. Instead of explaining how he would address these issues, he decided to announce how he would suppress them.

This behavior is unacceptable. We will not be suppressed. We will continue to expose abuses by this administration and others.

If in fact the US military is responsible for the types of conduct alleged by Mr Assange, and the Joint Chiefs and Department of Defense have knowledge of this conduct (or actually condoned or ordered it) I can certainly understand why Mr Gates would have made such remarks — and the fact that no investigation into this matter has been launched by the US would seem to indicate (once again) that the US military plays a much different game than they publicize or propagandize.

It’s clear to see why our government keeps secrets from it’s citizens — the question really is how much more have they not disclosed?

Originally posted 2010-08-06 02:00:47.


I’ve seen a number of initiatives from Boeing that are targeted at trying to get a US DOD contract for supplying tankers to the US Air Force.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Boeing as a potential supplier for tankers (though I would like everyone to review why we need to build tankers period); but Boeing seems to be forgetting that with government contracts, it’s the lowest bidder who wins.

Boeing talks about American jobs, know-how, unfair competition from Air Bus (well, Boeing probably thinks any competition is unfair)… but they don’t highlight the fact that they simply aren’t competitive.

Welfare capitalism to large is just another form of socialism — and part of the “trickle down” philosophy (the question is how much get’s skimmed of with huge executive bonuses and how much really does trickle down).

We need to think global; and keep moving forward to creating a global economy and global society rather than trying to make sure the grass in our own yard stays the greenest (of course we can talk about this on a state-by-state basis just as easily as a nation-by-nation basis).

I say, the the low bidder win; and let’s make sure that the defense budget is treated with the same scrutiny and cuts that other budgets are — waste is waste, and “saving” our troops (who were put in danger by a lie by George W) just isn’t a reasonable excuse to keep spending on destruction.

Originally posted 2010-04-29 02:00:45.

The Peter Principle

So Wednesday I read an article that the brigade, battalion, and company commanders in 13 July 2008 attack on Wanat, Afghanistan had been reprimanded following a re-investigation of the matter by Marine Lt Gen Richard Natonski.

Initially the three were not subjected to any disciplinary action; but an independent investigation by Lt Gen Richard Natonski was order after numerous complaints.

After the reprimand for the three officers who were said to have made critical operational mistakes, the soldiers refuted the charges and the US Central Command reversed the decision and cleared the three of any wrong doing.

Seems strange, until you realize that the battalion command, then a lieutenant colonel had been promoted to a full colonel after the incident — apparently not only did he not do anything wrong, but he must have done something right.

Dr Laurence J Peter and Raymond hull could have used this as a case in point to support The Peter Principle.

No Punishment For Officers In Deadly Afghan Battle on NPR

Originally posted 2010-06-26 02:00:31.