U.S. Military: Obama, Our Troops and Word Games

bowers 2

I was looking at the cartoon (below) which I mentioned recently and how I had not sent it around because it might have been perceived as inaccurate in its presentation of the sad, sad second Fort Hood shooting. One of my friends responded to the essay and (other) accompanying cartoon (about cutting military costs even further by disarming EVERYONE all the time in our Service Branches) by explaining how “profiling” should be practiced and actively utilized in various defense and security activities. I agree.

There is no guarantee against “profiling” under the 4th, 5th or 13th Amendments. The stricture against “profiling” was spawned by the Administration’s intense desire to appear to be protecting “minorities” from the ideals of bad old white guys (like the Kochs), the Tea Party, or people sympathetic to Tea Party aims or any other group of wild-eyed “Bitter-Clingers” the Administration (or NSA or IRS or any other socialist, Nazi, commie bureaucratic thuggish bunch that comes to mind) care to defame. As usual, their misguided policies are worse than simply useless. They are downright harmful. (For example, see Eric Holder’s moronic gun running activities.) 

A pal of mine traveled to Israel once and when he was in the airport getting aboard an El Al plane he was pulled aside by Israeli security experts and grilled for an hour about his reason(s) for traveling to Israel. They really “profiled” him hard. There were several things about him which may have aroused suspicion. This happened a couple decades ago. He was an American. He was a former Marine. He was a college graduate (which, admittedly, is pretty dubious). The physical search of his person yielded nothing. He had legitimate scholarly and cultural reasons for going to Israel. He was affable (like always), beardless, red haired and extremely white  (sorry, Jimbo). And, of course, he’s Jewish. So they grilled him for an hour. They “profiled” him when there was no evident “profile.”

Have you ever heard of an El Al flight blown up or disappearing? Maybe, but I don’t recall one.

I heard some silly pundit remark about how “inconvenient” it would be to have all military folks armed at all times on military bases. Maybe. But how inconvenient would it really be? When I was a carpenter (those were beautiful times) I hardly noticed the “inconvenience” of wearing a nail apron and hammer. It was just part of the job. A side arm weighs less than what I had to carry around building houses. And not everyone of our wonderful service members would have to be armed. But one in a hundred would be better than none when the shooting starts. 

There was a JAG Lt. Col. whom I worked with at my first attorney job. He once went to some big conference of JAG officers and told me stories about the people in attendance when he returned to work the following week. The conference was held in some civilian venue. One thing he thought was funny about the conference (he was Air Force) was two Marine JAGs who were present. While everyone else was wearing uniforms as designated by their Branch, the Marines, who were also following Marine protocol, were wearing battle dress fatigues and (horror of horrors) carrying M-16s. Not side arms, but assault rifles. I don’t recall if my friend said the rifles were loaded, but since every Marine is first a rifleman, I would expect the Marines to have, at least, been packing ammo, if not carrying loaded weapons. Pencil-necked pansies may think such action was extreme, but it’s the Marine Way. I’m fine with that.

And what would have happened if some kook had started shooting up the JAG folks? A silly idea you may say, but what better target than a big group of officers who are known to be disarmed. Killing a bunch of officers would serve our enemies goals very well. Very disruptive. (Naturally, since they were lawyers, maybe a hypothetical enemy …even a suicidal one …might have thought it better to leave the lawyers to their work. This remark is intended as humor. Obviously, humor is not my line.) But my point is to consider just how valuable a couple trained marksmen armed with hot M-16s, in close proximity with a shooter, would have been during any of the shootings on our military bases…or schools for that matter. 

The conditions in which our Service People on our military bases have to serve (not even considering for the moment the current stupid Rules Of Engagement in combat theaters) are unsafe, dumb and insulting to those who serve under personal peril to keep us free. 

Obama may not have issued the order to disarm our troops on our own turf (I think it was Clinton setting another disreputable career watermark), but Obama certainly can end the idiocy. He has witnessed three such events during the last year. He has again demonstrated his utter inability to learn even the most painful and simple lessons. I know he is busy with fund raisers, very costly vacations and lessons for dummies about how to build websites, but this is easy. Just sign the Order. 

About the author: Steve Bowers

Steve Bowers grew up on a farm in Indiana, attended Indiana University and went into the construction business. While working on a construction project at a law school he was appalled at how lawyers could screw stuff up on a simple building project. Thinking he could do better, Steve went to law school. He’s pretty naive.

View all articles by Steve Bowers

Like Clash? Like Clash.

Leave a comment

Please disable your Ad Blocker to leave a comment.

Trending Now on Clash Daily