Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns


Generals and Politics

You can tell that civil-military relations are getting complicated when a general, appointed by this President to carry out his new strategy, is being criticized for speaking in favor of the strategy. In the meantime, McChrystal's superior, General Petraeus--one who had an especially close relation to Bush--is said to be (maybe) interested in running for president. I am betting that this isn't coming from his supporters. Expect a major shakeup, justified by a brand new strategy for Afghanistan/Pakistan/al Qaeda.
Categories > Military

Discussions - 7 Comments

Yea, major shakeup. What I notice is that Obama has time to celebrate his anniversary and chat up the Olympic Committee, all the while our troops are dying in Afghanistan. A simple decision (to stay or go), he can't make that.

We need to get rid of this empty suit ASAP.

Here's a little food for thought. The Marine Corps currently has over 204,000 Active Duty troops, with another 35,000 in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Just over 11,000 Marines are deployed to Afghanistan, and 12,000 to Iraq.

These numbers are current as of September 25.

Over 204,000 Marines, with only approximately 23,000 deployed to a combat zone.

The rest of us can't train indefinitely.

I think it needs to be pointed out that General MacChristal (and don't say you didn't notice!), is white, and his criticisms of our Commander-in-Chief must be seen through that prism. Perhaps the good general feels he is too good to serve someone who looks like Obama. I'm not saying that's definite, but we do need to take this into consideration


Are you black? Because I'm wondering if my comments should be seen through the prism of a white guy too.

Or, maybe I'm just not catching on to your sarcasm, because this can't be serious, right?

Michelle is probably some kind of troll. Regardless, there are far too many folks (black or white) who want to use race as a fig leaf to cover fundamental flaws in judgment and character.

On the other hand, why not let them overplay the race card? Every time they do it, I'm sure they alienate otherwise sympathetic voters. After 50 years, the act is growing really tiresome, and I'm not alone in thinking that.

"The rest of us can't train indefinitely."- That is what your dress blues are for...drill and ceremony.

Former White House speechwriter John L. Perry has courted controversy by suggesting that the U.S. Military, upholding their oath to defend the Constitution against domestic enemies, could stage a bloodless coup to oust President Obama.

In an article originally posted on the Newsmax website, Perry wrote, “There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.”

Despite the fact that Perry was not explicitly advocating such a coup, Newsmax later removed the article to ensure it “was not misinterpreted”.

The article outlines how military officers, outraged at Obama’s “trampling” on the Constitution, nationalization of American institutions, rising deficits, unemployment and taxes, could peaceably seize power from the “radical-left commissars” of the Obama administration.

“Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible,” writes Perry.

It is important to stress that Perry is not a Neo-Con, he worked under the Democratic administrations of Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter.

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Perry warns that America could be unrecognizable by 2012, prompting a coup to “restore and defend the Constitution,” a prospect that is “weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership,” he writes.

Perry says that such a move could be accelerated if Israel were to bomb Iran, causing the Middle East to explode and a massive destabilization of the free world.

Of course, the unlikely staging of a military coup could be just another ruse to implement martial law in the aftermath of what would undoubtedly ensue – mass civil unrest and a potential breakdown of society.

More and more credible analysts are predicting that the United States could collapse in a Soviet-style breakdown within the next few years. In such a scenario, the vacuum of power created would leave the door open for the imposition of an even greater tyranny than we are witnessing today with Obama’s big government Socialist agenda.

It is far more likely that a military coup, even if it began as a genuine effort to “restore the Constitution,” or “solve the Obama problem,” would be hijacked and transformed into an effort to subjugate the entire country under a militarized police state to an even greater extent than it is now.

The more probable scenario is the one that was outlined by Tommy Franks in a 2003 interview with the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado, where a military form of government would be implemented in the aftermath of a huge terror attack that kills millions.

Franks predicted that another mass casualty terror attack would occur that would cause the “population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution.”

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL:

Warning: include(/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/2009/10/generals-and-politics.php on line 610

Warning: include(): Failed opening '/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.2/lib/php') in /srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/2009/10/generals-and-politics.php on line 610