Just saw this via CJ Grisham and I'm here to say I support this Commanding Officer.  It's nice to see an officer stand up for what he thinks is right rather than what he thinks will help his career.  This is a rare thing in today's military and I wish we had more officers like this.

Officer won't sign order for troop indoctrination
Asks to be relieved of command over repeal of 'gay' ban in military

President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military.

An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference.

Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality.

The soldier sent the following letter to his commanding officer:

Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy

1. I respectfully request to be relieved of Command of XXX Squadron, XXX Cavalry prior to new policy implementation subsequent to the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." My personal religious beliefs and moral convictions do not permit me to treat homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, compatible with military service, any more than adultery, illicit drug use, or criminal activity. I believe this lifestyle runs counter to good order and discipline in military units, and I refuse to sacrifice my belief system, protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, in order to fall in line with the command policy that will logically follow. This new policy will undoubtedly include mandatory sensitivity training as well as same-sex partner inclusion in Family Readiness Group activities and integration into the full spectrum of other military benefits, as well as a whole new category of discrimination standards and investigative procedures. I will not, as a commander, put my signature on a training schedule or other document recognizing or legitimizing any of these things that contradict my personal beliefs.

2. I would like to remain in the XXX Army National Guard until I am eligible for retirement (at 20 years and 0 days), which would be in the late summer of 2012, but on grounds of my religious beliefs, I will not attend sensitivity or behavior modification training consequential to this policy change, even if it means disciplinary action. I regret that I cannot continue to serve in the military further, but feel that my efforts would be insincere because my heart will no longer be in it."

Read the rest of the rest of the article at World Net Daily

Labels: Bravo Zulu, Common Sense, Warriors

This is an extremely well written article by Dr Lawrence Sellen.  The issues Dr. Sellin discusses are leadership issues that permeate the military at all levels.  It's a culture that is so ingrained that in my opinion it will not change unless external forces make it happen.  The CJCS and and individual heads will never be able to turn the proverbial ship without being forced to do so by the congress and thus the Commander-in-Chief.  And they will never do so unless "we the people" force them to do so.

The most powerful statement was this:

"The time is long overdue to take a serious, comprehensive look at the manner in which wars like those in Afghanistan and Iraq are conducted. No program is sacred. Only the lives of our soldiers are. It is never the wrong time to do the right thing."

I go back to the theme, why are we in Afghanistan?   What enemy is currently there that threatens our national interests?  If you argue Al Qaeda I am going to disagree with you.  AQ is not operating against our forces in Afghanistan and they are not a "state sponsored" organization (or are they).  You can say the Taliban because they permitted AQ to reside in Afghanistan but once again...nope.  The Taliban is fighting to eliminate an enemy force from their lands.  We have no business fighting the Taliban in an effort to bring a "civil society" to Afghanistan.  It is none of our business, it is wasting the lives of our most valuable warriors and helping to sink our country further into debt.

It is true that the soldier on the ground wants peace.  He is the one paying the price on a daily basis.  He pays the price when the theater commander limits the use of force.  He is the one that pays the price because he is not permitted to destroy a mosque containing munitions and enemy fighters.  He pays the price because he is not permitted to shoot the enemy as he watches him place an IED that later kills a fellow soldier.  He pays the price because those who aren't doing the fighting limit the use of force.

If we go to war, fight the war to win, period.  Forget this BS about winning the hearts and minds and coin.  Destroy the enemy and then go home and get out of the messy business of death that war is.

Our military force is the best the world has ever seen.  They have a mission to close with an destroy the enemy.  They will always seek an enemy in order to do what they do, it is inherit to the institution.  The problem is, the civilian leadership of our country as outlined in the constitution decides who the enemy is by declaring war.

I can only conclude that we have witnessed exceptional cowardice with our military leadership as well as civilian leadership.  Why you ask?   Well let's get back to the Al Qaeda issue.  I said they are not a state sponsored organization but that may not be a true statement.  They are certainly a state funded organization.  The question is does being state funded mean you are state sponsored?  I would say so.  We know that AQ is in large measure funded and in large measure manned by Saudi Arabia and citizens there of.

This then raises the question, why are we not going after the heart and blood of AQ, Saudi Arabia?  Why do we continue to raise war and sacrifice our warrior lives in Afghanistan?  Why do we placate Saudi Arabia  I can only conclude that our civilian and military leadership are cowards or they have alternative motives.  Neither one is a good thing.

I say cowards because if AQ is a threat to our country then the congress should properly declare war and the military should root out and destroy those that support and sustain the enemy, no ifs, ands, or buts.  Equally, our military leadership needs to have the intestinal fortitude to look the commander-in-chief in the eye ans say "sir, we must fight the enemy and our current orders do not do that. If these our to be our orders I cannot in good conscience continue to serve my country and must resign."

The firing of Gen Stan McChrystal cause a stir.  Can you imagine the stir that would be caused if the CJCS or any of the JCS had the strength of character to resign in such a manner?  I guarantee that would cause some serious debate about what in the world we are doing. 

The bottom line for me is we should not be the world's policeman and we should not force our way of life on others just as we do not want them to force their way of life on us.  We expect to live and according to the dictates of our conscience and we must permit other countries the same.  We the people need to reacquaint ourselves with the constitution and the founding of our country.  The founding fathers did not intend for us to be in everyone's business.  Remember, "no entangling alliances?"  It's debatable how good they were at following their own wisdom, but never-the-less I feel it is counsel worth heading.

More thoughts to come in the next few days.

Labels: Common Sense, GWOT, Leadership, Main Stream Idiots