1 Comment

Trying times for sure. The left labels good and well intentioned efforts as racist, bigoted, extremist, and they may even try to get you labeled a domestic terrorist when nothing could be further from truth. Partnering with someone you don’t personally know and trust can be dangerous since their words and deeds can naturally be thought to represent yours. If the left can make those labels stick then they will attempt to take away some freedoms in an effort to silence you. I’m only advocating caution. But you are absolutely right about organizing and supporting fires. I’m just not sure how much a vet or a retired SM knows about what’s really going on, in the active force. I’m one of those people and while I’m selective in what I read, I believe very little of it because everyone has their own agenda and almost none of it has to do with verifiable readiness.

What did we look like the last time we won, unconditionally won? Maybe we ought to look and act more that now. Maybe the National Security Act of 1947 hasn’t been in our best interest after all, in terms of budgeting, readiness, and war fighting.

Maybe the whole notion of diversity and inclusion, going back to the point where we stopped winning wars, actually doesn’t contribute to a better fighting force. Even though I think very highly of anyone who wants to and does serve in the military. Can the case be made that more diversity and inclusion will/won’t win the next war and how come having that discussion is out of bounds?

Come to thinking it, while the Navy seems to relieve commanders every few weeks, we don’t seems to relieve commanders anymore for incompetence or lack of aggressiveness. Rather today, it’s about inappropriate relationships or a harsh command climate where subordinates have been reduced to tears. To tears??? WTAF?

Anyway…sorry not sorry for the long post.

Expand full comment