Discovery Channel’s ‘Militia Rising’ Profiles America’s Top Militia Forces
Where’s the barrel?
First, let me explain myself, I am gun carrying female as it is my right to arm and protect myself. I have been hunting since a small child and passionate for the outdoors. But… this person made some bad decisions and poor choices. Simply stated, he could and should have waited. I live in the upper midwest, near Canadian Border – MN / WI area, and come across these animals, bears and timberwolves. I have never had to shoot one in self defense. And even the more inexpensive snow machines have reverse – but why not wait and watch from a distance. No lets gets closer and make noise, because I am in a rush!!! way to enjoy the outdoors ding dong!! These people gives us law abiding, gun carrying, citizens a bad name. I hope they charge him. Bad image for hunters and gun owners.
Dr. Stanton I’d like to respond to some of your points, unofficially, as a military officer and combat veteran.
First your points are well received, even if I don’t agree. On principle, I’m outraged that the DoD budget is considered discretionary while the numerous entitlement programs, that far exceed federal authorities granted by the constitution, are not. So when the military budget is targeted I always ask what entitlement programs are being cut. Our Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors and Marines provide a critical service to the nation. Most of those on government subsidies provide no value added to the nation or their communities, except that they tend to vote to protect their entitlements, and by default the political elite, which is their real value to those in power.
As for the size of the service, I’d readily admit that the DoD has in many respects become a bloated bureaucracy. Unfortunately that bureaucracy is dominated by civilians (government) who are not subject to the same level of potential reductions. They are being downsized, or so I’m told, but not as aggressively as the uniformed force. In order to cut the DoD personnel cost, I’d offer that we start with the civilians where the herd can most afford to be culled.
Back to the size/structure of the military. A smaller force would be fine, if we had a national foreign policy that was founded on something more than the threat of force. Our political leaders are absolutely incapable of leveraging other sources of political power and default to steel and fire or fold all together. In the 90′s, when we were cut from 24, to 18, to 12 and ultimately to 10 divisions, our operational tempo increased exponentially with deployments to the Balkans, then subsequently to the middle-east where I’ve spent the bulk of my career. So cut the military, but have a plan to leverage some other source of national power because we’re tapped.
As for the A-10, it’s proven technology. Having leveraged close air support in combat, I can tell you from personal experience that the A-10 is the most effective CAS platform available to the Soldier on the ground. Now admittedly it’s a toss up between the AH-64 Apache, and the A-10. The AC-130 is another great platform. The F-16 on the other hand, and by extrapolation the F35 or JSF, fly too fast, too high, and are too expensive to get into the ground fight.
So while your analysis has merit, it has to be placed in context with the realities in which we live. The world doesn’t change just because we think happy thoughts. Our nation is losing influence on the international stage, do we really think that’s going to reduce the demand for its military services?
If we have only HALF the courage those patriots did at Lexington and Concord we all would be in the catbird seat.
trying to get something down he in ks. won’t to come up for the meeting march 14.