Congress passed, and the president signed, a bill that allows the military to arrest and indefinitely detain, gitmo style, USA citizens las New years Eve.
This of course puts the army in the position of the Roman legions who could then, as is the case now, take over the government.
Now comes an article form an active duty mid-level officer, telling us who the good generals are, and who the bad ones are. He names names as to "who lost" Iraq and Afghanistan. Wow. That did not take long. The soldiers are calling for who they want to lead us. Lead us all.
Note he does not say our invasion of those countries are wrong, he is just mentioning his fave generals.
Nor does he note where we get our generals. The president nominates who he wants, and the congress either confirms or denies them. Our generals are political appointees. The president can fire any general he has appointed. Any time he wants. That is civilian control.
The officer above names current good-guy generals. What about the past good guys? There has never been a Bush war where the standing general for the given theatre did not object to the war plans of a Bush. In every instance that general was relieved of command. Congress ought to have called those generals in and asked "how come?" Note the officer above is not talking about generals to smart to get into stupid wars, the officer want generals who win wars.
Note he also presumes we would have won those wars if we just had the right generals. Where have we heard that before?
Nor does he note the founders of this country were against a standing army, because, umm... inevitably, in history, there comes a military takeover.
This of course puts the army in the position of the Roman legions who could then, as is the case now, take over the government.
Now comes an article form an active duty mid-level officer, telling us who the good generals are, and who the bad ones are. He names names as to "who lost" Iraq and Afghanistan. Wow. That did not take long. The soldiers are calling for who they want to lead us. Lead us all.
Note he does not say our invasion of those countries are wrong, he is just mentioning his fave generals.
Nor does he note where we get our generals. The president nominates who he wants, and the congress either confirms or denies them. Our generals are political appointees. The president can fire any general he has appointed. Any time he wants. That is civilian control.
The officer above names current good-guy generals. What about the past good guys? There has never been a Bush war where the standing general for the given theatre did not object to the war plans of a Bush. In every instance that general was relieved of command. Congress ought to have called those generals in and asked "how come?" Note the officer above is not talking about generals to smart to get into stupid wars, the officer want generals who win wars.
Note he also presumes we would have won those wars if we just had the right generals. Where have we heard that before?
Nor does he note the founders of this country were against a standing army, because, umm... inevitably, in history, there comes a military takeover.
No comments:
Post a Comment