Willful Blindness

Is the Army ready for another Jihadi attack? I doubt it. When you consider how politically correct things were during the Bush administration, it must be much worse now, in an administration that doesn’t even want to name the enemy. With regard to Times Square, it seems we’ve reverted back to the war on “terror.” Except I don’t think that they believe we’re at war, even though the people who planted that bomb are trying to kill us.

12 thoughts on “Willful Blindness”

  1. When the Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, says: “As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well,” then all hope is lost….

  2. One of my friends was a master trainer for so long he wasn’t up to snuff in his old MOS, so he was used to do a lot of security testing of bases while attending remedial schools.

    He would say that, NO, we ARE NOT! and he retired AFTER 9/11 when he told me some of his stories. There isn’t just complacency with security standards (basic ones, like gate control and stuff) to the point that it’s actually apologetic that our defense assets are in fact LESS protected than normal citizens going to work.

  3. With regard to Times Square, it seems we’ve reverted back to the war on “terror.” Except I don’t think that they believe we’re at war, even though the people who planted that bomb are trying to kill us.

    Considering that both Officer Napolitano (“Nothing to see here! Move along!”) and Mayor Bloomberg initially tried to avoid calling it “terrorism” and we were told the feds were looking for a “middle-aged white man”, I’d say their gut-reaction continues to be one of conspicuous denial. So why, even in the face of apparent threat, would the military be allowed to halt the march towards “diversity”?

    There was a recent puff piece by talking hair-do Anne Curry about how wonderful it is that women will be deployed on nuke subs. There were the requisite lines about how great it will be for women, views of what separate sleeping quarters and potty facilities will be. It was all very nice, but I didn’t hear any mention of the current baby boom or sexual harassment problems which have grown within the surface fleet since women have deployed there.

  4. It’s simple: Terrorism DOES NOT HAPPEN during the Obama administration, unless it is committed by Americans who didn’t vote for him.

  5. “There was a recent puff piece by talking hair-do Anne Curry about how wonderful it is that women will be deployed on nuke subs.”

    If I were a woman, I don’t think it would be very enjoyable spending six months “below” surrounded by seamen. Seamen and sperm whales…

  6. MfK and Starless – Women have been on surface warships in the US Navy since the early 1990s. I think they’ll be able to deal with the bubbleheads below.

    US base security has been a subject of concern since the mid-1980s, when I was in the service. The problem isn’t so much political correctness as budget priorities. Allocating troops to or paying for base security always takes a back seat to more “critical” missions. I’m not saying it’s correct, merely explaining why it is.

    Going back to the linked article on Major Nidal, the military faces two problems. First, we’ve got over a million people in uniform. Finding one nut out of a million is never going to be easy. Second, I have personally seen people desperate to get out do and say all sorts of weird things, even during peacetime. Distinguishing between “I want out” and “I’m actually dangerous” can be difficult.

  7. MfK and Starless – Women have been on surface warships in the US Navy since the early 1990s. I think they’ll be able to deal with the bubbleheads below.

    Yes they have and I’m sure they can. I’m not impugning women or their service. The point is that in the drive to increase the military’s role as a vehicle for social change and diversity all kinds of unintended, but wholly predictable, consequences have come up. Unlike some of the objections in the early ’90s, it’s not women having their periods and being all emotional that affects unit cohesion, but the interpersonal interplay that always comes up when you throw a bunch of hormonally charged barely-adults together. Coeds college dorms v. coed aircraft carriers — not much difference.

  8. we’ve got over a million people in uniform. Finding one nut out of a million is never going to be easy.

    Especially when the Military ignores the obvious signs that the “one nut” exhibits showing him/her to be a nut. With that being the case it doesn’t matter if the subject group is one million or one hundred.

  9. First, we’ve got over a million people in uniform. Finding one nut out of a million is never going to be easy.

    Wow. Going with the logic, how will ever get Bin Laden? How did we ever find Saddam?

  10. Finding one nut out of a million…

    I could see that if the million were also nuts, but they are not. The fort hood guy was obvious, but political correctness allowed him to kill good people. Getting rid of the politically correct crowd is the solution. This was and still is an avoidable problem.

Comments are closed.