The Crisis in the Armed Forces

The Crisis in the Armed Forces

The Crisis in the Armed Forces
August 28, 2024

Sailors wave two American flags during a colors observation ceremony at Officer Training Command Newport, Rhode Island, Aug. 17, 2021. (U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist Byron C. Linder)

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Will Thibeau
Real Clear Wire

Part I of Identity in the Trenches: The Fatal Impact of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion on U.S. Military Readiness.

In August 2021, the world watched as American forces scrambled to evacuate Afghanistan as the Taliban reclaimed power. The panicked withdrawal reached a tragic climax on August 26, when 13 American service members (and more than 100 Afghan civilians) were killed by a suicide bomber in the Kabul airport, where security was a U.S. responsibility. Four days later, when the last military planes took off from that same airport, hundreds of American citizens were left behind. A month later still, when the secretary of Defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the CENTCOM commanding general were called before Congress to account for the failure, they neither offered explanations nor accepted responsibility. The message was clear: Incompetence would be the new norm for the U.S. military — a predictably lethal status quo.

The Afghanistan debacle was dramatic, but it was only one small part of a much larger picture. The United States Armed Forces were once the envy of the world, in large part because we selected the best of the best, and instilled in our fighting men an unshakeable military ethos. Both the ethos and the selection, however, have been in steady decline as the Department of Defense succumbs to a dangerous ideology: that of group quotas, or forced outcome equality for identity groups based on race and sex.

Critics of the current state of affairs in our Armed Forces waste precious breath on disturbing but minor issues like reading lists, drag shows, and TikTok trends. This paper serves as a call for focus and precision on the prevalence of race and sex-based quotas, and the accompanying collapse in professional standards, in the fight to reclaim the integrity of the institution of the military.

Quotas, by one name or another, have been defense policy since 1965 when Secretary Robert McNamara decided to make the Pentagon the leading edge of the effort to adhere to the principles and policies of the Civil Rights Act. This history is important to understand because it clarifies the mission ahead.

The military is often perceived by well-meaning Americans as the last holdout in the progressive march through the institutions. In reality, however, it was among the first American institutions to formally embrace the radical logic of group quotas: that any body must proportionally represent the demographics of the nation, or else enjoy the presumption of wrongdoing and discrimination.

To recover from this institutional overreach, Congress and the executive branch need to commit to a few specific policy changes alongside a bold reorganization of the military personnel process and the structure of the Joint Staff. The policy solutions in this paper do not amount to an exhaustive list of the range of actions to confront DEI, but instead define the minimum necessary action to rebuild the military’s institutional health.

Before we can recommend policy, or even analyze history, we must come to understand the military as an institution. The prevailing consensus seems to regard our warfighting forces as just one more institution in civil society, bound by every social norm of the country they stand to defend. This is the logic by which group quotas are justified. The United States military, however, cannot serve its basic purpose unless it is set apart.

The Military as an Institution, Defined

When a citizen enlists in any of the service branches, he goes through a period of intensive training meant to melt away the effects and the mindset of civilian life, and to forge Americans into soldiers, sailors, airmen, or marines ready to devote their lives to the mass application of violence on behalf of American interests. This training must sweat and bleed the individual who reported for duty, because the DoD knows the life of American citizens, formed in individualism and liberalism, does not make for an easy transition to military service. Policymakers would do well to acknowledge this civil-military distinction.

The American military is a professional fighting force built on competencies and values not commonly found in civil society. Thankfully so, for we do not raise our children under the presumption of a violent life, and most do not even consider joining the military.

Because the stakes of military operations are so high, the military must define itself by a commitment to the professional factors that make servicemembers and units more effective. Even though the years of all-out war are beyond our memory, the perils of an uncertain future make the stakes of military policy unquestionably high.

Some would have us believe that a diverse military is somehow the cornerstone of our national security, all the while minimizing any effect of DEI in practical application for men and women in uniform. This position contradicts itself; either the military’s efforts at diversity serve a critical national need, or they are so insignificant that they are not worth their costs to the services’ culture and the government’s bottom line.

When it comes to policy, the military must maintain a strict separation between values unrelated to the military profession and those values necessary to maintain an effective force. Like a drop of ink in a glass of water, the faintest hint of ideology outside the scope of the military profession will degrade the whole force’s effectiveness. Historical examples from eighteenth century France to the Soviet Army of the late Cold War attest to the reality of this threat.

At stake is much more than the relative quality of military units. A military consumed by politics and identity threatens the very integrity of our republic. In other sectors of society, the consequences of shirking the primacy of merit amount to a bad hire as university president, or maybe a missed revenue projection for a given fiscal quarter. In the military, the stakes are obviously higher.

Nowhere are the consequences of hiring anyone but those selected for their professional qualifications higher than in the wars our military may soon fight. In May of this year, the Daily Caller reported on the Air Force’s efforts to diversify flight school. The Air Force created classes that mirrored the race and gender demographics of the nation. This manipulation of the most critical talent of our military produced consecutive flight school classes below sustainable levels, far below average. This brutal case study is a harbinger of things to come in a military whose organizing principle is diversity rather than merit.

DEI is just that in the military: an organizing principle with specific manifestation in the prevalence of identity-based quotas and the attendant collapse in standards. Future Defense officials, lawmakers, and interested Americans must have a clear understanding of the current personnel and policy landscape to meaningfully effect change.

The Centrality of Quotas

Race and sex-based quotas are the driving force behind the U.S. military’s turn to wokeness. These policies may not be as dramatic as drag shows hosted on Navy vessels, nor as direct and undeniable as DoD-mandated diversity seminars, but they are by far the most consequential of the military’s missteps away from merit and toward political ideology.

A “quota” can be any policy that sets metrics, goals, or standards meant to artificially alter the race or sex composition of an organization. In practice, quotas are rarely as explicit as we might expect: DoD leadership rarely (if ever) admits to making this or that personnel decision based on race or sex. It is, however, the only logical conclusion of the principles on which the DoD operates — principles that have long been held dear by the military bureaucracy, but that are readily dismissible if we consider the sole purpose of our Armed Forces to be fighting and winning our nation’s wars. In today’s military, the success or failure of a unit in the eyes of the DoD is often determined not just by mission readiness (the old standard of competence) but by the new, political mandate of “proportional representation.”

The Department of Defense Strategic Management Plan for Fiscal Years 2022-2026 makes this clear, touting the Pentagon’s intent to base personnel policy on the “breadth and depth” of the nation. The Strategic Management Plan was compiled and promulgated by Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen H. Hicks — a Biden appointee, and herself the highest-ranking female in DoD history.

Though the provisions of the Strategic Management Plan are never explicitly admitted to as “quotas,” the implications are clear. Performance Goal 4.2.3 for the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD P&R) is to “inculcate DEIA principles” throughout the entire Department of Defense. In Performance Goal 4.1.2, the Office of the Secretary of Defense mandates that DoD components increase the representation of “racial/ethnic minorities and women” in “underrepresented career fields” in order to meet stated objectives.

In an institution where many critical units are composed almost entirely of white men, it would not be hard to find “underrepresentation” in numerous career fields — and, in seeking to correct it, to undermine military readiness.

The formal planning and taskers associated with DEI goals throughout Hicks’s plan amount to a Pentagon mandate for demographic change across the military. The Department of Defense promoted these orders with a blanket mandate for “equity” and no mention of a necessary adherence to the system of merit DoD leaders purport to uphold.

In evaluating the “total workforce” of the DoD, Deputy Secretary Hicks’s report puts the quotas in the fine print. It is apparently important that the DoD promote women and racial minorities at certain percentages. Strategic Objective 3.2 for a “Safe and Supportive” environment outlines the importance of meeting these numeric standards for the sake of “progress.” Here, again, clear targets for numerical representation are shrouded in obfuscation to provide deniability for Pentagon leadership.

In the military, individual and unit performance reviews depend on adherence to all kinds of policies dictated from above. It is all but certain that every component and military department has established mechanisms of adherence to Deputy Secretary Hicks’s new “DEIA” mandates. Policymakers and concerned Americans should not let an absence of Congressional oversight, reasonable reporting standards, or public disclosure obscure these realities.

Performance Goal 3.2.1 leaves no room for doubt. The DSD directive states specific promotion and selection quotas for racial minorities and women. There is no nuance based on duty position or mission requirements — only a Department-wide directive to select critical personnel policy to fulfill diversity objectives.

The Status Quo, and the Reality of Change

Whatever the reasons, it cannot be said that the U.S. military is naturally diverse. This is not a fact to celebrate or mourn, but a reality to observe. Considering the extent of DEI efforts in the last 10 years alone, and the stubborn persistence of these disproportionate demographics, it follows logically that actually moving from the status quo to the DoD’s desired race and sex quotas — i.e., directly proportionality with the broader population — would require intensive DEI practices at an almost unimaginable scale.

As of the 2020 United States Census, men make up 49.6% of the overall population. The 2022 U.S. Military Demographic Report, meanwhile, counts over 82% of the active military as male. In the officer classes of all branches of the military in 2022, just over 80% were male, along with 82.9% of enlisted personnel.

The branch that exhibits the greatest gender disparity is the Marine Corps, where just over 90% of active service members were male. The gap is even wider in the highest ranks: In the Marine Corps specifically, over 96% of the highest-ranked generals were male. The Navy had the next highest disparity, with over 93% of its highest-ranking officers as male. The Air Force had the lowest percentage of male generals with an O7-O10 rank at just over 88%.

Similar disparities exist among the top ranks when it comes to race. In the United States at large, 75.3% identify as white, compared with 68.8% of uniformed service members. When organized into the enlisted and officer classes, white members of the military make up 75.1% of all officers and 67.4% of all enlisted members.

Within the highest ranks of the generals, the O7-O10 pay grade, over 87.9% across all the branches identify as white. At these ranks, only 12.1% consider themselves as minorities, with African Americans being the most substantial at 7.7%. Compare this against the 31.2% of the force at large that identifies with a minority group, and the 17.3% of all service members who identify as black or African American.

Those who argue for group quotas see these realities and assume that they must result from some kind of built-in racism. They argue that consideration of race, rather than merit alone, is necessary to correct this perceived injustice. In practice, the military leadership’s stated “diversity goals” — a now-popular byword for race– and sex–based quotas — by necessity become mandates for discrimination. Today, white men and women make up almost 80% of Air Force officers. Current Air Force policy dictates reducing that proportion by almost 15%. How could that reduction possibly be achieved except by systematic application of racial prejudice?

Only in light of these facts can we understand just how radical the idea of a quota-based military really is. To achieve its desired end state, the DoD will not (and cannot) consider race or gender only in rare edge cases. It must be a whole-force strategy, leading to double-digit reductions in the male and white proportions among key military positions, especially at the highest, most consequential ranks. Merit, operational needs, and the military ethic will be, at best, secondary considerations.

If our Armed Forces continue down this path, it is all but guaranteed that the competency crisis will reach a breaking point. Given the nature of the institution, that break is certain to be lethal, and likely at a devastating scale. The fall of Kabul, the collapse of function in flight school, the now regular rehearsals of DEI ideology from unaccountable Pentagon leadership — these may be only the beginning of a new, and dangerous, era.

Will Thibeau is an Army Ranger veteran and director of the American Military Project at the Center for the American Way of Life. This article was first published at TomKlingenstein.com.

This article was originally published by RealClearWire and made available via RealClearWire.

The post The Crisis in the Armed Forces appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Guest Contributor

President Trump Tells Dr. Phil in One-on-One Interview ‘God Saved Me’ (Video)

President Trump Tells Dr. Phil in One-on-One Interview ‘God Saved Me’ (Video)

President Trump Tells Dr. Phil in One-on-One Interview ‘God Saved Me’ (Video)
August 28, 2024

Dr. Phil McGraw interviews with President Donald Trump.

TV personality Phil McGraw, known as Dr. Phil, interviewed President Donald Trump.  The two discussed a variety of topics but had a powerful albeit somber moment when McGraw pressed Trump on the assassination attempt against the President during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 23.

Dr. Phil: How do you answer? Why were you spared?

President Trump: So there had to be some great power because you just can’t say millions to one, millions to one. I used to say a million to one. It’s much more than that because, again, you have to pull down the sign. There has to be a reason to go right. And I never go right. There’s no reason. And not only go right, it’s for about an eighth of a second. It’s not just right. It’s out of all the time that on this planet, it’s one eighth of a second, right?

So I shouldn’t be with you.

Dr. Phil: Is there a purpose? Is there a reason you think you were scared?

President Trump: I mean, the only thing I can think is that God loves our country, and he thinks we’re going to bring our country back. He wants to bring it back.

It’s so bad right now what’s happening when you look at the crime, the horrible things that are happening inside our country, and it can be solved. It can be solved fairly quickly.

It has to be God.

How can you say it’s luck when it’s 20 million to one? It’s just not possible that I was in that position. It’s the only position where that bullet could have missed.

Dr. Phil: And you believe in God?

President Trump: I do.

Dr. Phil: You believe God’s hand was in this that day?

President Trump: I believe so, yeah. I do.

Dr. Phil: And you talk about the country. You believe you have more to do. You weren’t done. You were spared for a reason.

President Trump: Well, that, I guess. We’ll have to.

Watch:

The post President Trump Tells Dr. Phil in One-on-One Interview ‘God Saved Me’ (Video) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Margaret Flavin

Disabled Veteran Cited for ‘Liquid Littering’ After Blowing Bubbles in California

Disabled Veteran Cited for ‘Liquid Littering’ After Blowing Bubbles in California

Disabled Veteran Cited for ‘Liquid Littering’ After Blowing Bubbles in California
August 28, 2024

“The Bubble Pirate” found himself being treated like a true criminal after attempting to bring joy to children at a California public park.

But Sandy Snakenberg, a 63-year-old disabled homeless veteran and self-styled “bubbleologist,” was only blowing bubbles when he was cited on Aug. 24 in San Diego’s La Jolla Cove.

Rangers with San Diego Parks and Recreation cited Snakenberg with “liquid littering.”

That’s right: In California, a wonderland where the streets are paved with the fecal matter and used needles of the burgeoning homeless class, a bubble-blowing disabled veteran is the one being nailed for littering.

The city, of course, claims the “Bubble Pirate’s” crimes are worse than they appear.

“In this instance,” a city spokesperson told KGTV-TV, “park rangers attempted to educate the individual numerous times that the residual substances from the bubbles are in violation of the City’s municipal code as it relates to littering.

“The individual uses up to six gallons of liquid per day, with the residual chemicals ending up in the lawn areas, which can cause damage to the grass. After witnessing numerous violations and receiving complaints from other park users, Rangers issued the lowest level citation available.”

The city claims it received complaints from the public about Snakenberg and the residue from his bubble solution, resulting in a citation when rangers investigated.

Snakenberg says the city is wrong and that his homemade solution is an innocuous dilution of food-grade and non-toxic materials. The “pirate” also disputes the six-gallon waste figure in the government’s claim.

“I explained to them I am full compliance,” Snakenberg told KFMB-TV. “I am registered with San Diego Parks and Rec. I have insurance.”

Despite his status as an injured and homeless veteran, Snakenberg says he doesn’t use programs available to him, instead supporting himself solely on his 501c3, Bubble World.

The Bubble World truck doubles as Snakenberg’s home, and is how he travels and earns the tips that sustain him.

The “Bubble Pirate” remains defiant in the face of the law, however, vowing to continue public performances despite the continued citations rangers have promised to throw at him.

“The park Ranger enforcement division has finally approached me with an ordinance (littering prohibited fluids) in order to present me with a citation that I WILL be appearing for,” Snakenberg wrote on an Instagram post showing the citation.

“Not to worry. This Bubble Pirate will be continuing public performances at La Jolla cove when I am not otherwise engaged at other events. And (as the officer communicated) will likely get more citations.”

A video from 2018 shows the “Pirate” in action, sending children crazy with a broadside of bubbles.

If only Snakenberg had decided on a more appropriate activity for California, perhaps relieving himself on the sidewalk or throwing a used hypodermic needle onto a playground, he could have avoided legal troubles entirely.

Instead, this “pirate” is fighting to keep the government from bursting his bubble, and his livelihood.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Disabled Veteran Cited for ‘Liquid Littering’ After Blowing Bubbles in California appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Jared Harris, The Western Journal

Liberal Media Gloats About Hundreds of Former ‘Republican Aides’ Endorsing Kamala Harris – List is Full of John McCain Interns and Volunteers!

Liberal Media Gloats About Hundreds of Former ‘Republican Aides’ Endorsing Kamala Harris – List is Full of John McCain Interns and Volunteers!

Liberal Media Gloats About Hundreds of Former ‘Republican Aides’ Endorsing Kamala Harris – List is Full of John McCain Interns and Volunteers!
August 28, 2024

The liberal media has been pushing a story that over 200 former Republican aides have endorsed Kamala Harris over Donald Trump.

However, these so-called aides are not quite the political heavyweights they would like you to believe.

Among those circulating the story is the supposedly neutral political news site The Hill.

In a post that went viral on the X platform, the outlet announced that “more than 200 George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney aides” had endorsed Harris’s campaign.

In their letter of endorsement, the group said that the prospect of a Trump presidency would be “simply untenable.”

“At home, another four years of Donald Trump’s chaotic leadership, this time focused on advancing the dangerous goals of Project 2025, will hurt real, everyday people and weaken our sacred institutions,” they wrote.

“Abroad, democratic movements will be irreparably jeopardized as Trump and his acolyte JD Vance kowtow to dictators like Vladimir Putin while turning their backs on our allies.”

However, closer inspection of some of the signatories makes a mockery of the entire letter. Among those whose name is attached to the letter include interns who worked on their various campaigns dating back as far as the year 2000.

Perhaps most laughable of all is the inclusion of Frank Gifford Scholley, who was a mere volunteer with John McCain’s unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2000.

Another, by the name of Chelsea Henderson, volunteered with McCain’s 2008 campaign, in which he won the Republican nomination but lost in a landslide to Barack Obama in the general.

Among the other media outlets pushing the laughable story include USA Today, CBS News and even The New York Times.

Meanwhile, Trump is winning endorsements from independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard and the mercurial billionaire Elon Musk.

RFK Jr. Reveals the True Meaning Behind the Term ‘MAGA’ After Endorsing President Trump

The post Liberal Media Gloats About Hundreds of Former ‘Republican Aides’ Endorsing Kamala Harris – List is Full of John McCain Interns and Volunteers! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Ben Kew

WATCH: California Liquor Store Worker Flips the Tables on Laughing Group of Thugs Brutally Assaulting Him When He Exercises His Right to Bear Arms

WATCH: California Liquor Store Worker Flips the Tables on Laughing Group of Thugs Brutally Assaulting Him When He Exercises His Right to Bear Arms

WATCH: California Liquor Store Worker Flips the Tables on Laughing Group of Thugs Brutally Assaulting Him When He Exercises His Right to Bear Arms
August 28, 2024

Credit: vongottem Instagram

A horde of laughing bullies on bikes got a taste of their own medicine late last week after a law-abiding citizen turned the tables on them by exercising his 2nd amendment rights.

As The Daily Mail reported, thugs riding bikes in Oakland, California got into a dispute with one of the employees at a liquor. The thugs then began assaulting the employee.

As The Gateway Pundit readers know, these situations do not end well for the innocent citizen. But on this occasion, the protagonist prevailed when he retrieved his firearm and forced the thugs to retreat.

The Oakland Police Department told DailyMail.com that the incident occurred at 4:15 pm on Saturday outside of Golden Hours Liquor on the 3200 block of International Boulevard.

Footage captured on Instagram shows the incident began with the worker, who was dressed in a black T-shirt, arguing with a man in a red hoodie who then violently slapped him across the face. The employee then loses his hat after another thug slaps him multiple times.

Dozens of guffawing bikers then jump on the seemingly helpless worker, land several punches on him, and back him into the store entrance.

Then a remarkable thing happens. Despite getting viciously beaten, the worker, with his back bent, manages to grab his gun and sends the cowards fleeing in terror.

WATCH:

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Most Worried About (@vongottem__)

The worker follows the assailants and points his weapon at the group. Admitting defeat, the bullies who followed him got on their bikes and raced off.

Others decided to stay at least temporarily while the employee waved his firearm. He is then seen shoving a thug in a gray hoodie to the pavement.

More people then clear the area, not wanting to risk ending up on the sidewalk or in a coffin.

Police told the Daily Mail they “located evidence of a shooting,” but no one sustained gunshot wounds. No arrests were made, either.

The Daily Mail reported it is not clear what sparked the heated confrontation. But what is clear is the incident would have had a far different ending if the vigilant employee had not retrieved his firearm.

The post WATCH: California Liquor Store Worker Flips the Tables on Laughing Group of Thugs Brutally Assaulting Him When He Exercises His Right to Bear Arms appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Cullen Linebarger