DOWNSIDE LEGACY AT TWO DEGREES OF PRESIDENT CLINTON
SECTION: STATUS OF US MILITARY
SUBSECTION: OVERVIEW
Revised 7/21/99

 

OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT MILITARY STATUS

WorldNetDaily 10/12/98 "Col. David Hackworth, the most decorated U.S. soldier of the Vietnam War, has written a blistering open letter to President Clinton decrying the nation's military priorities. "In 52 years of hanging around soldiers, I have seldom seen the cutting edge of our fighting forces so dull, nor morale lower," Hackworth wrote. "The last time it fell so badly was during the Vietnam War. This gutting of American arms has happened on your watch and it's not because there's not enough money. Since Desert Storm, combat effectiveness has gone down hill like an out of control freight train even though we now spend 18 cents of every taxpayer dollar on defense... I suggest you assemble Shelton and your service chiefs and ask them the following questions:

Capitol Hill Blue 3/25/99 Doug Thompson "... Career military strategists at the Pentagon warned President Clinton that joining the NATO bombing campaign against Kosovo "created more problems than it solves" and urged him to seek other solutions, military sources say. "This is a time when the military actually urged restraint," one Pentagon source told Capitol Hill Blue Wednesday night. According to multiple sources within the Pentagon, Clinton was determined to send in the bombers and didn't care if his military planners agreed or disagreed with him. "This campaign is a White House operation, not a military action," said one senior officer. "We are following the orders of our Commander-in-Chief. That doesn't mean we agree with them." Professional military strategists say the campaign, as planned, is poorly executed, ignores established procedures for bombing in difficult terrain and puts U.S. resources at unnecessary risk...."

SpinTech 4/12/99 Ron Paul "...A weakened nation left with a dwindling supply of weapons while facing an increasingly tense situation with troops held hostage and military morale at an all-time low, as war-mongering civilian leaders are eager to spill more blood. Not a description of Iraq or Serbia, but of the US as we enter the second quarter of 1999. While downplayed by the media and the Clinton Administration, anonymous sources have revealed in news leaks that the United States is dangerously low on satellite-guided cruise and the Tomahawk missiles - two indispensable mainstays of our air power. Yet these weapons are being expended like candy - with apparently the same effect - in Serbia. At the same time, this week, we learned that Russia is moving ships into Balkan Sea. While publicly remaining neutral on the US/NATO attacks on the sovereign nation of Serbia, the Russians have been traditional allies of the Serbs. Massive anti-American demonstrations in Moscow cannot long go unnoticed by the Russian politicians, whose government is, at best, tenuously held together. Finally, Americans awoke to the troubling news that three American soldiers were captured by Serbian forces and paraded on state television. Their capture reflects the basic problem with our foreign policy. These men were in Macedonia as NATO troops with a UN "peace-keeping" mission that ended in February. The reason they were still in the region - and specifically near the Serbian border - is unclear... Of course, what is also not lost on our military is that this Administration does not really worry about things like military morale. After all, the Air Force is trying to wage this mission with a record low number of pilots, diminishing weapons and resorting to cannibalizing pilot-less aircraft for spare parts. The other branches are likewise seeing fewer recruits. And it is no wonder! Why would any young person choose military service - or to stay in the military - when it may require being captured by hostile forces, in the most untenable of situations, while performing missions that have no relation to our national security under the command of foreign leaders? .....To say the situation facing America is bleak would be optimistic. Dangerous would more correctly reflect reality....."

Date: 4/9/99 Author: Paul Sperry Investor's Business Daily "...The administration waited until last month to fire the alleged spy - only after the press broke the story. It hasn't yet charged him with any wrongdoing. More, the White House didn't order the labs to beef up security until last year. Why didn't officials give the case top priority? Some suspect it conflicted with a higher priority: Selling the global test ban to China and other nuclear states. ''They wanted to get them on board by exchanging this new (virtual-testing) technology in the spirit of scientific fraternity and openness,'' said former Reagan Defense official Frank Gaffney. In the process, he says, the labs have left themselves open to espionage by countries like China that remain hell- bent on making their nuclear missile arsenals more, not less, lethal. ''In creating much more of an academic environment, the labs probably went too far - at least more than makes old weapons guys comfortable,'' said Troy Wade, a former Reagan Energy official in charge of nuclear weapons. An ex-O'Leary aide said her open-door policy angered some Pentagon officials who ''feared security breaches.'' Looking back, he says, they were right. Clinton, who stands by his denuclearization policy, argues that the Los Alamos leak predated his watch. He said ''security procedures were too weak for years and years and years.'' .....But former officials note the problems accelerated under Clinton. Recent GAO and internal Energy reports concur. ''What's happened over the past six years makes the sort of generic problems we've always had with the labs pale by comparison,'' said Gaffney, who specialized in arms control policy at the Pentagon and now heads the Center for Security Policy in Washington.

C-Span/Floor of the House of Representatives 6/9/99 Rep. Dan Rohrbacher (R-California) freeper truthkeeper reports "...The House has been debating the Cox-Dicks amendments (in relations to security policies) to the Defense Appropriations bill. So far everything has sailed through, except for the Ryan amendment (R-Kansas). He wanted a two-year moratorium on foreigners in our lab, Cox-Dicks wanted 30 days. Cox-Dicks won. But, after a little break, I just tuned back in to watch a real dogfight going on over the DeLay amendment on U.S./China Military Training.... DeLay properly is trying to prevent the continuation of the idiocy that would allow the Chinese a ringside seat in our military training programs under the cockamamie guise of "exchange of operations." Dana Rohrbacher just finished REAMING this policy, saying China is NOT an ally, they're an enemy...and called this all what it is...INSANITY. He just raked Clinton over the coals, and told the American people to "pay strong attention to this vote!" Well, as if this weren't good enough, the "good" democrat, Gene Taylor (can't remember which Southern state is his), just finished rising in support of the DeLay amendment. But then he went a step further...he scolded DeLay himself for previously voting for MFN status for China. He pointedly told DeLay he should have been aware, or should certainly be aware NOW, that MFN stands for "MONEY FOR NUKES." He then said "They cleverly changed this title to NTR, but that only stands for "Nukes to Rockets." He concluded his remarks by saying, "Mr. DeLay, I'm with you on this one if you'll be with me next month when we have to vote on MFN. Vote AGAINST it." Duke Cunningham of California is now up speaking about not letting loose a cobra when you have children in a room, "you don't let it near the baby's crib," and you don't "teach the cobra how to bite you." Cunningham said Clinton let Russia and China in to observe our military tactics previously, and this exactly like teaching them how to bite "our kids" (in the military)...."

Federal Computer Week 6/21/99 Bob Brewin Daniel Verton "...As part of a strategy to defend its unclassified networks against relentless cyberattacks, the Pentagon may establish a new network to handle electronic commerce and other interactions with the public while cutting off all other existing connections to the Internet. The proposal follows an increase in the rate of cyberattacks -- many stemming from the Kosovo conflict -- on the Non-Classified Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNET), through which the department transmits unclassified information, including some tactical data, via the Internet. Marv Langston, deputy assistant secretary of Defense for command, control, communications and intelligence (C3I), said top DOD officials have begun debating whether to disconnect NIPRNET from the Internet and create another network, a so-called third layer, which would provide Internet links between DOD and e-commerce partners and provide the public with access to military Web pages. The proposed strategy, under debate by DOD officials, would leave the department with three layers of networks: the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network, for classified information; NIPRNET, which would become a virtual private network for internal DOD communications; and the new network, through which the department would communicate with its business partners and the public....."