XBradTC

, , , , , , , , , , ,

By

XBradTC

·

Department of Deference

Exhibit A:  Considered pornographic and the cause of aberrant behavior among service men.   Banned from the AAFES magazine racks. Exhibit B:  An event which service members were encouraged to attend.   Wearing of the uniform, connoting official sponsorship, is authorized. The feminists and LBGT activists are in charge of this Nation’s defenses.  Not Chuck Hagel.  Not…

4s4kg37ldvny4y4d400full

Exhibit A:  Considered pornographic and the cause of aberrant behavior among service men.   Banned from the AAFES magazine racks.

gayprideparade-62gayprideparade-80

Exhibit B:  An event which service members were encouraged to attend.   Wearing of the uniform, connoting official sponsorship, is authorized.

The feminists and LBGT activists are in charge of this Nation’s defenses.  Not Chuck Hagel.  Not the Joint Chiefs.  All they do is enforce thoughtcrime punishments.

I am sure our allies and our adversaries are impressed.

I said so then, and was told such would never come to pass.  But it bears repeating.   Differing beliefs, the very thing we fight for, will not be tolerated by the People’s Defense Commissariat.

Tags:

  1. Quartermaster

    I wish you hadn’t posted the third pic right after the pics of the covers of Penthouse and Playboy. She is hideous by comparison. Poor girl.

    Like

  2. Paul L. Quandt

    We (the United States) soon will be in as bad shape, or worse, as we were in 1939. It is not likely that we will have the grace of time to make good our deficiencies that we did in 1942.

    Paul

    Like

  3. ultimaratioregis

    We are in far worse shape already. Without an industrial base or shipbuilding capacity.

    In 1939 we were ramping up for Cash and Carry, which became Lend-Lease. And we were beginning to build the fleet that would win the war. Had more than a hundred ships on the ways, and hundreds more behind those. Today? How many tanks, APCs, artillery pieces, trucks, aircraft, ships can we make rapidly? Hell, what about boots? Belt buckles?

    Like

  4. Paul L. Quandt

    URR:

    I am currently reading “Those Angry Days” by Lynne Olson. That is why I wrote 1939. The war in Europe didn’t start until September 1939, so help for Britain was not an issue.

    Paul

    Like

  5. Jeff Gauch

    “How many tanks, APCs, artillery pieces, trucks, aircraft, ships can we make rapidly? Hell, what about boots? Belt buckles?”

    How many do we need? There are only two countries that could pose a realistic threat to our current military. War with either of them would last a couple of hours, then the New Zealanders, Indians, and Africans get to rebuild civilization.

    Like

  6. ultimaratioregis

    How many do we need? In any conflict larger than a skirmish, the answer is always “more than we anticipated”.

    Why do people always seem to be itching for a fair fight?

    Like

  7. Jeff Gauch

    And in any conflict not involving Russia or China, we are already there. There’s nothing fair about what our current military can do to 99% of the countries out there.

    Every war is unique, how the hell did WWII become the paradigm?

    Like

  8. ultimaratioregis

    Every major war we have fought in the industrial age has required ramp-up of a great deal of military industrial capacity. The Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, and yes, even Vietnam. The anomaly is the ones that don’t. Like Desert Storm.

    Like

  9. ultimaratioregis

    But the post is about DoD “Leadership” who believes Playboy to be aberrant, and bans it, while encouraging UNIFORMED participation in gay pride parades.

    Like

  10. Quartermaster

    To me a fair fight is one I win. If it’s a fair fight for the other guy, it merely demonstrates very poor planning and prep on my part.

    I am compelled to agree, however, that the war will be won or lost very quickly. I seriously doubt we will be given the opportunity to ramp up. That’s assuming we would have anything to ramp up. The Berets the Army wears, last I heard, were made in China.

    Like

  11. Jeff Gauch

    “The Berets the Army wears, last I heard, were made in China.”

    As they should be. Presumably they’re cheaper from China than from any US supplier, which means the Army has more money to spend on things that actually win wars.

    Like

  12. Jeff Gauch

    You’re right, it is a double standard. I look forward to the day that Penthouse and Playboy are available at the NEX. But I can’t help but wonder how much of it is due to lack of demand. I mean the internet is full of pretty (for any possible definition of pretty) people willing to take their clothes off in any combination conceivable for very little money. And for those times when you’ll be away from the internet, you pre-plan and bring a portable HD full of training videos.

    Like

  13. Jeff Gauch

    Yes, but we’re no longer IN the industrial age. The fact that two of the three “anomalous” wars are also the two most recent ones indicates the future.

    In fact, I’d be willing to bet that Desert Storm will be the last purely maneuver war we fight. Everyone on the planet learned that pitting their military directly against the US Army was a sure-fire way to lose. So they immediately started working on other strategies. Even Saddam managed to learn, which is why on the rematch he had no intention of defeating us militarily, his goal was to draw us into the country and bleed us with a guerrilla campaign. It very nearly worked. It did work for the NVA and the Taliban.

    Like

  14. Bill

    Mr. Gauch, the only reason that the Desert Storm warning works is because the US has such a preponderance (some would argue dominance) of military strength for qualitative and quantitative reasons. China is expanding its military budget, along with its capabilities. Although you may say there is no one crazy enough to engage the US in a manuever type of war, that is only as long as they believe that they do not have a chance.

    Our policies are foolish and short sighted. They are allowing others to look a tht equation and think “maybe not this year, but maybe next.”

    Like

  15. Quartermaster

    No, Jeff. That something as simple as Berets are made in China is a very bad symptom of the erosion of our basic manufacturing abilities. Practically all shoes are made outside the country, along with the rest of the simple stuff. We had to go hat in hand for electronics in Desert Storm because we didn’t even have a fab in this country! We will have our heads handed to us on a platter because the government has been so short sited and run the manufacturing base off shore. Just think of what we did to shift manufacturing in ’41-’45 and realize we can’t come any where close to that now.

    While I think we will have days, or at most months, to win the next one, we have had such a draw down of men and hardware, that we may not last even a couple weeks of high intensity combat. Combat eats men and equipment faster than anyone can imagine – unless you have been there. Imagine us being chewed like we chewed the Iraqis, and think how we have set ourselves up to have that happen to us. We are well into the “less is less” regime.

    Like

  16. Jeff Gauch

    Who is going to be doing the chewing?

    And this isn’t 1991, we have several fabs in this country. There’s a huge difference between strategic supplies like guns, bullets, and shoes. Right now there are nearly 800 companies employing around 11,000 people making shoes in the US. I think you’ve bought into the hype over off-shoring. We still make plenty of things, including some very complex items. We just don’t employ as many people doing it as we used to. That’s a good thing.

    Like

  17. Quartermaster

    Jeff, you aren’t just wrong, you’re dead wrong. I just went shopping for boots. I went to the major shoe store in Asheville, and did not come across one pair of work boots made in the US. Red Wing now imports everything I saw from China. Rocky Shut down the plant in Nelsonville, OH about 10 years ago.

    That is not the only issue with loss of manufacturing base.

    Manufacturing is the way you create wealth. Not in wages because that is just a sunk cost, but the demand those wages allow is what allows manufacturing to thrive. If you combine a mendacious government as we have, with rampant, militant unionism and environmental over regulation, you get the very situation we have now. Idiots like Krugman think you can have a wealthy service economy. That’s been tried, and we call such economies third world.

    While manufacturing output in terms of money has stayed seemingly high, practically everything I require for normal life, outside of food, is made outside this country. In most areas of the country, buying only American takes extra ordinary effort, effort most are not willing to expend.

    I am aware that there are several Fabs in the US now. DOD forced them to be here. Almost all your consumer electronics , however, are made outside the country. That’s what “free trade” has given us.

    Like

  18. Jeff Gauch

    No. Your position is one completely at odds with economics. Wealth isn’t created by manufacturing, it is created by TRADE. When the factory owner trades money for materials and labor, and when he trades his products for money, he creates wealth for both himself and the other parties. There is nothing magical about putting bits of stuff together that creates wealth. Our host creates wealth every time he sits down to type. That’s why we come here. Hollywood creates wealth (though not as much as it used to) every day, producing nothing more that slightly less disorganized magnetic films.

    The third world economies aren’t characterized by services, they’re characterized by petty mercantilism. The exact same garbage you propose for our economy.

    Don’t take my word for it. Go <a href=http://cafehayek.com/?here. Read. Learn.

    Like

Leave a comment