From: RichSlick@aol.com
Subject: SNET: [slickplus] A discusssion of the issues, finally
Date: 3 Jan 2000 00:48:13 -0500
To: SlickPlus@egroups.com


->  SNETNEWS  Mailing List


 
 http://www.eagleforum.org/column/1999/dec99/99-12-29.html
 Eagle Forum  
 How Do The Candidates Stand On Military Policy?  
 by Phyllis Schlafly
 
 December 29, 1999 
 
  One would think that the next President's plans to address the dramatic
 falloff in military recruitment, and the decline in military morale and
 readiness due to controversial personnel policies, would be important
 topics for the televised presidential debates to cover. But somehow, these
 matters haven't made it onto the media's agenda. 
 
  To fill this gap in public knowledge, the Center for Military Readiness
 (CMR), an independent public policy organization specializing in military
 personnel issues, sent questions on eight issues to the presidential
 candidates. All responded except Republican frontrunner George W. Bush,
 Orrin Hatch, and Democrats Al Gore and Bill Bradley. 
 
  It's easy to see why Gore and Bradley ducked the survey because all the
 questions strike directly at Administration policies. They could have taken
 this opportunity to distance themselves from the Clinton policies by coming
 out for rebuilding the military that Clinton said he "loathed," but they
 didn't. 
 
  CMR president Elaine Donnelly said she was encouraged that all the
 responding candidates said they oppose Clinton-era social engineering that
 has hurt military readiness, recruiting and morale. That was a no-brainer;
 it's the specific questions that get to the nub of the controversies. 
 
  "If you are opposed to coed basic training, will you act to terminate it
 in the Army, Navy and Air Force, with or without a mandate from Congress?"
 Steve Forbes, Gary Bauer, Alan Keyes, Pat Buchanan and Howard Phillips all
 said yes; John McCain said no, but he would ask Congress to reevaluate this
 issue. 
 
  "If you are opposed [to permitting open homosexuality in the military],
 will you exercise the option to restore the question regarding
 homosexuality that used to be on recruiting forms, an option that is fully
 authorized under the 1993 statute that continues to ban homosexuals from
 the military?" Forbes, Bauer, Keyes and Phillips said yes, McCain said no,
 and Buchanan didn't answer. 
 
  The responses were the same to the follow-up question: "If opposed, will
 you replace Clinton's Don't Ask, Don't Tell regulation with Defense
 Department instructions that faithfully reflect the exclusion law passed by
 Congress in 1993?" Contrary to popular belief, the 1993 exclusion law,
 which was passed by bipartisan majorities, remains the law of the land and
 Clinton's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy was never enacted by Congress. 
 
  "Will you order the assignment of women to currently-closed positions that
 operate in close coordination with land combat units and involve direct
 engagement with the enemy with a high risk of capture; i.e., multiple
 launch rocket (field artillery) systems (MLRS) and special operations
 helicopters?" All responding candidates said no. 
 
  Part B of this question refined the issue: "In view of negative
 consequences already observed from the recent assignment of women in or
 near previously closed combat units on land, sea and in the air, will you
 act to restore women's combat exemptions to improve military efficiency and
 readiness?" Forbes, Bauer, Keyes, Buchanan and Phillips said yes; McCain
 said no. 
 
  "Do you support the New Strategic Concept as adopted and affirmed by the
 previously-defensive NATO alliance, which was cited as authorization to
 bomb Serbia without congressional approval and to conduct the air war under
 the direction of a NATO committee of 19 nations?" Forbes, Bauer, Keyes,
 Buchanan and Phillips said no; McCain ducked a direct answer. 
 
  McCain said he supports "a vital role" for NATO in maintaining European
 peace and stability. He favors shifting more of the burdens for European
 security to our allies. 
 
  "Do you agree with recent statements made by UN Secretary-General Kofi
 Annan to the effect that sovereign borders should not be a barrier to the
 deployment of peacemaking troops between warring factions and that a
 standing UN force should be established for this purpose?" All respondents
 said no. 
 
  "Will you disband the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services
 (DACOWITS) and similar tax-funded advisory committees that continue to
 promote a feminist agenda for the military such as affirmative action
 quotas, gender norming and careerism for women as a higher priority than
 military efficiency and readiness?" Forbes, Bauer, Keyes, Buchanan and
 Phillips said yes. 
 
  McCain said no, defending DACOWITS as having made "significant
 contributions" and as having had "a positive impact on military policy."
 Veterans and members of the armed services should be shocked by McCain's
 willingness to continue tax subsidies for this little-known but powerful
 special-interest group that aggressively supports the radical feminist
 agenda for the military. 
 
  All the responding candidates answered no to the question "Will you order
 the assignment of female sailors to submarines?" All answered no to the
 question "Will you support or order the registration of women for Selective
 Service military obligations on an equal basis with men?" 
 
  All the responding candidates opposed relaxing enforcement procedures and
 penalties for adultery and sexual misconduct in the military. 
 
  The voters are not going to be satisfied with George W. Bush declining to
 say what he would do about Clinton's social engineering in the military.   
 
 Phyllis Schlafly column 12-29-99
 -----------
 http://www.newsmax.com/commentmax/articles/Col._David_Hackworth.shtml
 NewsMax.com  
 An Open Letter to President Clinton 
 Col. David Hackworth
 December 30, 1999
 
 Dear Mr. President,
 
 Seven years ago you took command of a lean fighting outfit that had just
 busted Saddam Hussein's chops in a war that was over faster than you could
 say, "Oh, Monica." 
 
 Back in 1992, our warriors were combat-ready, battle-tested and bristling
 with magic spirit -- that fire in the belly which is the most crucial of
 all the elements of war.
 
 As this century closes, our military is 50 percent smaller than the armed
 forces George Bush placed in your trust, and their once- deadly edge has
 been dulled on the futile rocks of Iraq, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia and Kosovo. 
 
 The bumbled war with Serbia has only confirmed that today we simply don't
 have what it takes to replicate another Desert Storm. Mr. Clinton, you've
 tasked our forces to do too much with too little for too long. Their combat
 ability is frayed, and they and their loved ones are weary and dispirited. 
 
 Daily, fine men and women from buck sergeant to bull colonel tell me, " I'm
 hanging it up. I can't take it anymore!" In more than a half-century of
 being a soldier or a writer about soldiers, I've seldom seen lower morale. 
 
 Nor have I seen more self-serving senior leaders, from Secretary of Defense
 Bill Cohen in the bloated Pentagon to the generals and admirals who make up
 the most brass-heavy military bureaucracy in our country's history. 
 
 Perhaps you can take credit for our booming economy -- of those sort of
 matters I'm ignorant. But you must also take responsibility for the
 weakening of our military -- you are the person under whose command our
 forces went from STRAC to SLACK. As Harry Truman once said, the buck stops
 at your desk. And I hold you accountable.
 
 Your feckless leadership and fickle policies began with your order that
 gays serve openly, followed by your policies earmarking the profession of
 arms as a place to provide females and minorities with equal opportunity.
 You and your advisors never got it straight that the U.S. military is not
 an equal job employer, but a finely honed sword forged only for the
 battlefield --- where survival and winning are dependent on skill,
 sacrifice, spirit, unit cohesion and discipline. 
 
 These factors, mixed with total trust and caring leadership, allow a force
 to win. Battles are not won by how skin color or gender fits into a
 Pentagon personnel quota matrix, but by teams who've been sweated to
 perfection. 
 
 Every serving senior brass hat has been personally approved by you. The
 majority fit into the same go-along-to-get-along and
 don't-rock-the-boat-mold. None have challenged your reckless misuse of our
 military or your wrongheaded personnel policies. 
 
 Why should they? They weren't picked for stand-up leadership, but because
 they'd roll over. There's not a Patton, Nimitz or Puller in the lot of
 them, and few are trusted by the folks they lead.
 
 But you can still redeem yourself. Although don't think it can be done by
 throwing more money at the Pentagon, the leading candidates hustling for
 your job say that's the fix. 
 
 The real answer is leadership. You need to begin by sacking Cohen and
 replacing him with a person of the stature of George C. Marshall. A leader
 with the integrity, know-how and guts to turn the U.S. military around.
 Cohen's -- pick one -- (1) allowing the forces to be weakened, (2)
 mishandling of the war with Serbia or (3) his Anthrax disaster are more
 than sufficient justification.
 
 At the beginning of World War II, our military's senior leadership was also
 sick. Marshall, then Army Chief of Staff, sacked the General Blimps and
 fast-promoted the Gavins, Ridgways and Pattons. Leaders who weren't afraid
 to make the sweeping, visionary changes that reshaped our military and took
 it from trench to mobile warfare. These savvy leaders performed a miracle
 and won a war even though the early odds were on the enemy's side. 
 
 Besides sending Cohen packing, read *Sun Tzu. There you'll learn how vital
 the military is 
 to the state and how a bad commander-in-chief can hobble an army.
 
 You still have the time to turn things around. Marshall did the job in less
 than a year, and he was fighting a two-front war.
 
 --------------
 *Sun Tzu  http://www.alcyone.com/max/lit/war/index.html 
 
                [ A must read for all REAL military leaders ]
 --------------
 Col. David Hackworth is co-author of the 1989 international best seller,
 About Face, and the subsequent Brave Men. He also co-authored the Vietnam
 Primer, the fighting man's bible for guerrilla warfare in Vietnam. His
 personal mission is to "ensure that American troops are never put in harm's
 way without the right training, the right equipment, the right leadership,
 and the right mission." You can visit his website at Hackworth.com 
 -------------
 
 <@{{><   <@{{><   <@{{><   <@{{><   <@{{><   <@{{><   <@{{><
 ---------------------------------------
 "But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to
 warn the people and the sword comes and takes the life of one of them, that
 man will be taken away because of his sin, but I will hold the watchman
 accountable for his blood."
 Ezekiel 33:6 (NIV)
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
 ***NOT FOR PROFIT***  Posted for Research and Discussion Purposes Only.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to the Slick e-zine, send e-mail to RichSlick@aol.com for details.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to send money instantly to anyone, anywhere, anytime?
You can today at X.com - and we'll give you $20 to try it!  Sign 
up today at X.com.  It's quick, free, & there's no obligation!
http://click.egroups.com/1/332/4/_/4501/_/946877829

-- Create a poll/survey for your group!
-- http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=slickplus&m=1



-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
->  Posted by: RichSlick@aol.com