For many decades the United States’ military doctrine has been to fight a “two-front war,” with the capability to sustain both war fronts.
But, as reported by OneNewsNow, Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis (USA-Ret.), a senior fellow for national security at the Family Research Council, warned that the military is so degraded under Obama that America no longer is able to fight even one war. Maginnis said, “Thirty years ago, we had 350,000. Now we’re down to 60 to 65,000 and most of those are not fighters.”
The shrinkage stems from the Obama administration’s policy in 2012 to scrap the two-front doctrine.
On January 5, 2012, joined by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen Martin Dempsey, Obama outlined a new Pentagon strategic review proposing the military should give up the capability to fight two major ground wars simultaneously, such as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan.That, in turn, entailed the removal of up to 4,000 troops from Europe, as well as the downsizing of the overall ground forces even further than the cuts of 27,000 soldiers and 20,000 Marines in the next four years already in the 2012 budget request.
The goal is to reduce U.S. armed forces to pre-World War II numerical levels, ostensibly because of Pentagon budget cuts. (See “Independent panel calls Obama’s downsizing of military ‘dangerous’“)
But cuts have not been and are not being made to other spending, such as welfare and entitlements. At the same time, new spending items have been added, including spending on accommodating and welcoming illegal immigrants and refugees from the Middle East. Nor does the reduction of troop levels account for why most of the remaining troops “are not fighters”.
The latter may be because of Obama’s social re-engineering of the U.S. armed forces. See:
- Most U.S. troops, vets would steer kids away from service
- Obama admin to end ban on transgenders in military
- University Army ROTC made to wear red high heels to “raise awareness” about rape
- US Air Force base in Arizona flies American flag with LGBT rainbow stripes
- 85% of U.S. military’s special ops oppose women in combat
The Military Times points out that the U.S. military reduction comes at a time when military spending in China and Russia, and even India and Australia, are increasing.
In the summer of 2015, the Pentagon repeatedly lost in war games against Russia, including an actual field exercise with NATO partners. From that comes the conclusion that the U.S. is not prepared for a sustained military campaign against Russia if a conflict erupts in Eastern Europe. (See “U.S. repeatedly loses in Pentagon war games against Russia”)
Should war break out in Eastern Europe, Lt. Col. Maginnis Maginnis predicts Obama will be a feckless commander-in-chief: “There’s nothing that President Obama’s going to really do, other than a rather tepid response by a series of exercises that comes with some equipment, not real heavy lethal equipment.”
Maginnis is not alone in his assessment of Obama, given the signs of disaffection in the U.S. military. See “U.S. military does not support Commander-In-Chief Barack Obama“, “US Marine Corps commandant openly blasts CIC Obama”, and “Obama ignored advice of military & CIA against Bergdahl prisoner swap”.
See also:
displacedjim
George Griffin
wm2ggo
Consortium of Defense Analysts 
Don’t worry, blue helmets are coming to the rescue from whatever the rulers of the NWO want us rescued. Additionally, we have the Bush Department of Homeland Security to protect us from terrors our government created.
Of course, our own law enforcement officers are well able to perform those functions well, but global rule by a few is to take the place of town meetings, selectmen, town and city managers, mayors, sheriffs, governors, and presidents.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on necltr and commented:
Will of the people? Who cares about the people (we have depopulation to do), let alone their will?
LikeLike
2016-03-21
The conflicting policies between Mr. Rasmussen’s NATO organization and the Republic of Russia is the principal cause for the uncomfortable relationship between the Republic of Russia and the western world. Although NATO is supposed to be “defending” the North Atlantic Organizations under the Treaty, Mr. Rasmussen’s command of NATO is and has been “offending” the Republic of Russia with too many threats. Among proposed invasions of the Republic of Russia, Mr. Rasmussen has threatened to move U.S./NATO forces eastward through U.S./NATO destroyed eastern Ukraine up to the border between Ukraine and the Republic of Russia and beyond. Previously, plans have been laid out for oil pipelines southward through Russia to ocean ports. Unfortunately, these plans were a fiasco. Part of the problem was the use of solid DU in housings ranging from bullets to nuclear warheads. Powdered Uranium 238 oxides form from explosives within projectiles. HIV-1 absent AIDS Complex forms from the injested and inhaled Uranium 238 oxides (ie DU oxides) seen in the “Gulf War Syndrome.” If President Obama would order, with the advice and consent of the U.S. Congress, a U.S./NATO advance into the Republic of Russia towards Moscow, Mr. Obama knows the invasion would fail. A military advancing into and onto Russian radioactive territory would melt down and never reach Moscow. Since DU projectiles are everywhere now, the demise of a U.S./NATO military would be inevitable. . . .
So don’t blame President Obama for failures of proprosed military fronts. The minds of the U.S. military, not Mr. Obama, developed solid DU housings. Territories where DU is spread on the ground become dangerous to walk on. The ADVANCED use of Uranium 238 oxides will only “liquify” any NATO invasion: The winner: The Republic of Russia.
LikeLike