The U.S. Military Defends The Nation Against…TUCKER CARLSON???

Carlson Military

Last week, Fox News rock star Tucker Carlson launched into criticism of the U.S. military for, in his terms, prioritizing “diversity” over its mission. He said in part,

“So we’ve got new hairstyles and new maternity flight suits, pregnant women are going to fight our wars.It’s a mockery of the U.S. military. While China’s military becomes more masculine as it assembles the world’s largest Navy, our military needs to become more feminine, whatever feminine means anymore because men and women no longer exist. The bottom line is it’s out of control. And the Pentagon’s going along with this. This is a mockery of the U.S. Military and its core mission which is winning wars.”

The ethical issue here does not require debating Carlson’s point, but for the record, the mission is what matters, not who performs it or what group they “identify” with. If the nation would be best defended by an all-female armed forces, then all-female armed forces is what we should have. If all-trans would do the trick, great; I’m on board. If clinical schizophrenics were found to be the best soldiers, draft them all, I say, and make sanity a disqualifying feature for volunteers. Prioritizing demographics over efficiency and effectiveness is incompetent and irresponsible, and while the U.S. can survive incompetence in all other aspects of our government, and does, we cannot tolerate it in the military.

But I digress. The ethical issue here is that someone at the Pentagon (or <cough> elsewhere) told the military to attack Carlson, a civilian commentator giving his opinion, for his criticism.

US Space Command’s Senior Enlisted Leader, Marine Corps Mastery Gunnery Sgt. Scott Stalker responded in an angry video condemning Tucker Carlson for his remarks. A press release headline from the Pentagon read, “Press Secretary Smites Fox Host That Dissed Diversity in U.S. Military.” US Marines II MEF Information Group also condemned Carlson with a photograph of a female soldier lifting another trooper on her back. “What it looks like in today’s armed forces @TuckerCarlson,” stated the official government account. “Get it right before you get left, boomer”

Wait, what? The military isn’t supposed to be attacking civilians who criticize it. Conservative pundit Jim Teacher wrote, amusingly,

And doesn’t the military have regulations about uniformed personnel making political statements? Isn’t that one of the things you give up when you join? Isn’t that the whole point of having civilian oversight of the military? Aren’t taxpayers allowed to speak up about where their money is going?I’ve never seen anything like this. It’s nuts. Can you imagine if somebody did this while Trump was president? Just picture a uniformed military officer calling out Anderson Cooper or Rachel Maddow. Every newspaper in the country would be $#!++ing bricks directly onto the front page. Brian Stelter’s head would explode like somebody forgot to poke holes in it before putting it in the microwave. Human sacrifice. Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria. If Tucker wanted to prove that today’s armed forces need a priority check, he couldn’t have written a better script than this

Sen. Ted Cruz, properly alarmed, wrote to the Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin noting that the military’s use of official Armed Forces’ communication channels for this purpose was not permitted. He pointed out that military members are prohibited from using their official capacities to engage in partisan politics, yet they used public attacks on Carlson “for the sake of left wing ideology and political expediency.” Military officials saying, as in one of the broadsides at Carlson, civilians are not allowed to criticize the Armed Forces unless they themselves have served, Cruz said, “weaponizes” the military and breaks generations of tradition:

“This spectacle risks politicizing the military after several centuries of efforts to keep military officials out of domestic affairs, undermining civil-military relations by having the military take a side in a contentious cultural dispute, and the perception that military leaders are happily weaponizing the institution against political critics of the sitting administration.”

The Pentagon has backed down, apologized, and promised to “do better.” In a series of tweets, II MEF Information Group said,

We are human and we messed up. We intended to speak up for female Marines and it was an effort to support them. They are a crucial part to our corps and we need them to know that. We will adjust fire and ensure the utmost professionalism in our tweets….We’ve strayed away from our brand and realize that. Our standard practices will be in effect and you can count on us to correct our mistake going forward….We are here to train, fight and win. That tweet was intended to defend our women in uniform. We understand it was aggressive and we will reflect and do better.

Too late. This is one more institution that can no longer be trusted. As Mollie Hemingway, Federalist editor, tweeted,

“Military was last institution with credibility. Even after decades of mismanaged wars. 50 days of Biden, they’re completely destroying their credibility, going to war against and lying about a journalist who said Biden was too focused on identity politics instead of China. Scary.”

Indeed.

________________________

Sources: Legal Insurrection 1, 2; Stephen Kruiser, PM

8 thoughts on “The U.S. Military Defends The Nation Against…TUCKER CARLSON???

  1. If you think Word Press blocks are a problem wait to you have to write your posts in Chinese and have them approved by the new government of the Chinese Republic of America.

    I may never have served in the military but I have also not spent countless billions of dollars fighting against ill equipped militias and never really winning either. Exactly, what war did Lloyd Austin distinguish himself as a competent tactician or strategist. He does not seem to be able to keep his subordinates from doing stupid stuff.

  2. Two questions:

    Where does that apology fit on the scale?

    When you say, “and make sanity a disqualifying feature for volunteers,” you almost hit the backward Catch-22. Wouldn’t any volunteer be insane?

    -Jut

  3. AN ACT TO PRESERVE THE FEW SHREDS OF DIGNITY THE UNITED STATES STILL RETAINS

    WHEREAS: Twitter is a medium that constrains, by space, a user’s ability to present cogent, nuanced thought, and

    WHEREAS: Twitter has repeatedly proven that snark and aggression are keys to “re-tweets,” and thus greater exposure, and

    WHEREAS: Twitter has clearly demonstrated an uncanny ability to make otherwise intelligent people say really, really stupid things

    NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ENACTED AS FOLLOWS:

    SECTION 1) All electronic devices, including but not limited to cellular telephones, desktop computers, laptop computers, and any other device (even household appliances that are Web-Enabled), if issued by the Federal Government to any employee in any Department, Agency or Consitutional Branch, shall include blocking software that prohibits the download and use of Twitter.

    SECTION 2) Any employee of the Federal Government, regardless of role and responsibility, who attempts to circumvent or delete such software shall be terminated for cause and subject to a fine of not less than $100,000.00 and up to five years imprisonment.

    SECTION 3) Any employee of the Federal Government who uses personally-owned electronic equipment as described in Section 1 (above) in a manner that identifies with and aligns to their professional status via tweet shall be pelted with dung.

  4. There havebeen controversial military policies, with the ban on honosexuals in the military an example that happened in our lifetimes.

    That ban was criticized by various pundits.

    But responses to those criticisms were always done by civilians, whether by the civilian Service Secretaries or their staffs, or by the White House staff.

    It was never done by uniformed servicemen.

  5. I’m going to promote a friend’s book that has a sub-plot point the craziness of the military prioritizing diversity over actual effectiveness. At least those are the bad guys.

  6. I’d be hard pressed to believe “the military” is no longer credible. Most high ranking personnel in the military (the very types who took to twitter to attack Carlson) are politically connected individuals, who, make no mistake, have still served honorably and with distinction. Nevertheless, they often serve in high ranking capacity due to a generally similar alignment of values with an administration.

    That being said, the left has long sought “flipping” the military. The military has been a bedrock of hyper-pro-American values…and rightly so…that should go without question. Due to this, there has always been a very disproportionate representation of soldiers with conservative values compared to the general population.

    I’d be hard to convince that the enlisted side of the house isn’t still staunchly conservative.

    The officer side of the house is easier to flip, but even then I would find it hard to believe it isn’t still generally conservative in outlook.

    But as in all things societal, when progressive utopians get in charge and make changes, such as followed the Obama-era scouring of General-grade officers, there never seem to be changes back after conservative administrations conduct their own scourings.

  7. The truth of the matter is that the military has been going down this road since the late ’70s. That is when the military prioritized social welfare. As a retired officer, it was evident to me. The Woman’s Army Corps was dissolved. They made barracks co-ed. First, they had separate floors for men and women, then the floors were mixed. Shocking news the pregnancy, rate among unmarried women skyrocketed. At one point, the unit I commanded had 30 woman soldiers, 21 were pregnant rendering undeployable. When there became so many married military couples ( both spouses on active duty) everyone had to have on file their plan for the care of the children in case of deployment.
    The military, in general, has taken its eye off the mission, that is to prepare and fight a war, not be a social outreach program.

Leave a Reply to Chris Marschner Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.