“Marine Commandant General David Berger and senior Marine officials wanted to immediately support the Marine reservist as the Marine Corps Times article gained traction online Tuesday evening and was picked up by other major news outlets.”
Are you fucking shitting me? This female Marine posts nude pics and now the freaking Commandant of the Marine Corps is supporting her ill conceived choice?
Recruits are heavily influenced by their drill instructors, and top leaders want to be sure new Marines aren't leaving boot camp with negative views of women.
Maj. Gen. William Mullen, head of Training and Education Command, said he asked the commanding general of the Marine Corps' West Coast all-male recruit training depot to look at the way drill instructors are speaking to their recruits about women.
"We are concerned with some of the things that male drill instructors are saying to their male platoons about females," he said during an interview here this week.
Don't get this guy. He's solid as hell. He's squared away. But apparently he's political.
These statements he's made lately?
Full retard.
Ya know what Drill Instructors tell their recruits about women Marines? They tell them not to fuck with them. They tell them that they could get a sexual harassment charge or worse.
Why?
Because they know they're dealing with 19 year olds with raging hormones.
Quite honestly the DI's are trying to save careers and lives by cautioning their recruits for life in the fleet.
Oh but if this wasn't enough he talked earlier in the week (didn't report on it here) that the Marine Corps is talking about mixed gender boot camp. To those of us that have gone before what does he tell us to do? Deal with it!
This UK SF soldier is going in alone to fight 4 terrorists. He will kill 2 of them. He will save many lives. He has been awarded the 2nd highest medal for valour. Just when you think this country is screwed a hero reminds you we have amazing people doing amazing things#proudpic.twitter.com/nG3rHdApP5
The Democrats chose to elevate Kent and Taylor precisely because they were nonpartisan professionals, hence could speak in terms that might win independents and Republicans to impeachment. But nonpartisan is not the same as nonpolitical. As their testimony made clear, Kent and Taylor very much have a political agenda: They are advocates for a hawkish foreign policy that wants to use Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia. The diplomats used the limelight impeachment gave them to sell this policy to the American public as if it were the only approach a patriot could take.
The problem is, this policy is eminently worth challenging—and also a distraction from the real issue of impeachment. There are all sorts of reasons why a president might want to be cautious about overcommitting to Ukraine, a country that has a disputed border with a nuclear superpower.
As Republicans like Devin Nunes and Brad Wenstrup were quick to point out, Barack Obama resisted a push to send military aid to Ukraine after the Russian invasion of Crimea. Nunes and Wenstrup brought this up with the intent to prove that Trump was more in accord with the foreign policy establishment on Ukraine than Obama was. But the proper way to frame this is to note that presidents have a perfect right to reject the counsel of foreign policy hawks and act in measured ways if they see fit.
The whole question of proper Ukraine policy is a distraction, created by the Democrats’ desire to hold impeachment hearings on an issue where they could align themselves with the national security establishment and win over independents and conservatives.
Trump should not be impeached because he upset the national security establishment. Presidents have not just the right to disregard that establishment but, in fact, would usually be wise to do so. Nor should Trump be impeached because he undermined a Ukraine policy that has bipartisan support. After all, outside the consensus in Washington, there are many others who disagree with that policy. Even the fact that Trump runs a messy White House where goons like Giuliani are elbowing career diplomats isn’t really a good reason to impeach him. Giuliani is repugnant, but there’s ample precedent for a White House with private back channels. During the Kennedy administration, the president’s brother Robert Kennedy used a back channel with the USSR to help de-escalate during the Cuban missile crisis.
This article perfectly captures my disquiet with the impeachment hearings.
It's been all about Trump's disagreement with the National Security apparatus. A cabal that's been wrong about damn near everything for the last 20 to 30 years.
Those so called brains don't just need to be pushed back against, they probably need to be charged with treason and put on a wall and shot. That's how much damage they've done to our nation. They're shadowy figures that actually have little to no accountability for their actions or the lives they've wrecked.
As far as the corruption the article goes on to discuss?
Kinda hard to square that circle when the crime just didn't occur. This one is easy. I give it a couple of more weeks of headline news and then everyone will tire of the drama and move onto something else. Another issue that can divide the public and for the Dems, hopefully galvanize their base.
This Squad Equipment Carrier gives me chills. If I was going up against a unit on patrol utilizing a gear carrier (especially one carrying a heavy gun) the first thing I wanted have my guys focus fire on wouldn't be the troops but the carrier.
Once that's gone then the rest are presumably easy pickings. These things breed laziness. I can bet that we'll start seeing the habit of combat loads being reduced to silliness. 3 mags and your weapon. The rest of the stuff on your person will be either pogey bait, cell phones and maybe first aid kits.
All the stuff you need to fight and win should/could be destroyed in the opening minutes of a fight.
Holy fucking shit. Not only did the Russian mercenaries beat a man with a sledge hammer, then behead him. They hung the headless body up then lit it on fire..... speechless pic.twitter.com/0wT8TZCTtf
Someone needs to get these guys under control (if it's real). This is uncalled for and beyond the pale.
Russian MoD needs to step up with a quickness!! This should be chargeable if not by the Syrian Govt (who I assume they're acting on behalf of) and if not then by Russia!
The Pentagon’s chief weapons tester said the next-generation F-35 jet continues to fall short of full combat readiness targets and, despite some progress on reliability issues, all three versions of the fighter are breaking down “more often than planned.”
None of the Air Force, Marines and Navy variants of the Lockheed Martin Corp. fighter are meeting their five key “reliability or maintainability metrics,” Robert Behler, the Pentagon’s director of operational testing, said in prepared remarks Wednesday before two House Armed Services Committee panels.
The circle will be broken. You can't keep pushing the can down the road. Eventually they will have to come to terms with this jet being in development for 20 years yet still not meeting basic readiness requirements.
Question.
Name another program that would be allowed to fail on such a consistent basis yet still have supporters?
I can't think of one.
Payloads over platforms.
The F-35 has stunted US missile development. We have sacrificed our tomorrows for today. It's pathetic. We need long range anti-air, long range air to ground and long range anti-ship missiles to meet the future. But we've failed to put them into place because certain "mafias" inside the US military are so wedded to penetrating manned air.
My briefing in this week's @TheEconomist on the future of aircraft carriers. It looks at the long-running debate over their vulnerability to precision missiles, the shrinking range of their air wings & wider implications for the Pacific balance of power https://t.co/IlIwMZNALppic.twitter.com/gCUlCqYkaQ
This is getting tiresome but it illustrates the point that the former CNO laid out.
PAYLOADS OVER PLATFORMS!
1. Why is it always a comparison of naval air striking mainland China? If that were to happen then we're into WW3. Full stop. This is a FALSE NARRATIVE!
2. The solution is relatively simple. It involves a mix of UAVs and long range missiles.
The carrier isn't dead yet. But if it is, I haven't seen the REAL reason why.
