What our soldiers are saying about Syria

Retired Major General Robert H. Scales, former commandant of the U. S. Army War College, gives the word on the streets from those who would actually have to do the fighting:

By no means do I profess to speak on behalf of all of our men and women in uniform. But I can justifiably share the sentiments of those inside the Pentagon and elsewhere who write the plans and develop strategies for fighting our wars. After personal exchanges with dozens of active and retired soldiers in recent days, I feel confident that what follows represents the overwhelming opinion of serving professionals who have been intimate witnesses to the unfolding events that will lead the United States into its next war. [Read more...]

Military’s qualms about war with Syria

Our military leaders have some major qualms about attacking Syria.  From Ernest Londono, U.S. military officers have deep doubts about impact, wisdom of a U.S. strike on Syria – The Washington Post:

The Obama administration’s plan to launch a military strike against Syria is being received with serious reservations by many in the U.S. military, which is coping with the scars of two lengthy wars and a rapidly contracting budget, according to current and former officers. [Read more...]

Military will allow evangelism but not proselytizing

Responding to the uproar about the prospect for court martials for evangelism that we blogged about, the military is clarifying that evangelism will, in fact, be allowed.  Just not proselytizing.

So what’s the difference?  The military’s definition is after the jump.  Is this a valid distinction?  What will determine one from the other?  How might this apply outside the military, to the ways Christians share their faith in the public square?  Is there some “witnessing” that should be out of bounds?  [Read more...]

Court martial for evangelism?

How persecution begins:

The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: “Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense…Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis…”. [Read more...]

The militia part of the Second Amendment

The Washington Post has a front page story saying that the Second Amendment had always been construed to refer to a “collective” right to own firearms on the part of state militias until 2008 when the Supreme Court ruled that it refers to an “individual” right.  This change in interpretation, the article contends, was because the NRA nefariously funded legal research that supported its novel position.

I think that argument is absurd.  Read the gist of it after the jump. But then I’d like to discuss the “militia” part of the 2nd Amendment.  Since the Constitution says that “a well regulated Militia [is] necessary to the security of a free State,” shouldn’t we have a well regulated militia, as opposed to a standing army? [Read more...]

Medal for drone warriors

The military has instituted a new medal, the Distinguished Warfare Medal, to honor great deeds performed by those who operate drones and other high-tech military systems operated from afar (such as, presumably, cyberwarfare).  The problem is that in the hierarchy of medals, the Distinguished Warfare Medal outranks the Bronze Star (which is given for valor in combat) and the Purple Heart (which is given for getting wounded).  The new medal has sparked outrage and ridicule from troops on the ground who have to face getting shot at, as well as veterans who had to put their lives on the line, unlike drone warriors.  As a result of the uproar,  military brass are reviewing the ranking. [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X