Very sad and true, and very glad to see you saying this. Not many Reformed pastors or elders, and almost no Reformed seminary professors, have the experience wearing the uniform and the rank and retired status that you have. You speak with credibility here in both military and ecclesiastical circles that almost nobody in Reformed circles has.
We can have a debate on the role of women in modern combat operations where there is no longer really a "front line" -- but sending women into D-Day? Really? On what possible planet does that make sense?
Yes, there were cases in World War II of female partisans and female Soviet snipers, but almost no military force in 1944 was putting women into combat roles. How was what the United States did an "injustice" when it was the near-universal practice on all sides of the war?
While I agree this is likely something drafted by President Biden's speechwriters, I do think he deserves more blame than would have been due to several of our recent presidents and most of our current national level political leadership if they had said this. Unlike President Clinton, President Obama, or President Trump, President Biden **DID** have sons who wore the uniform, one of whom served honorably though the other did not. Furthermore, during his time in the Senate, Biden had a legitimately earned reputation for being a supporter of law enforcement and the military back when police unions were still a significant part of the Democratic constituency in major East Coast urban areas.
That means President Biden knew better, and if he didn't, he should have. That comment in his speech -- even if drafted by a female veteran, which is quite possible -- didn't belong in a D-Day speech. There is a place and a time to have a debate about what we can learn from the recent experience of women fighting in Israel and Ukraine, but a D-Day speech was the wrong time, wrong event, and wrong place.
(My own views are that Israel's situation is near-unique among modern nations with a demonstrated and obvious need for virtually all civilians to have military training to defend themselves and their families, and the Israeli situation is more analogous to women being trained to defend themselves if attacked in their homes or public places by terrorists or invaders, and less like a typical Western military force.)
Darryl, Thanks for writing. I appreciate it. I agree with you about the obscured “front line” in modern tech warfare. And, yes, women served with distinction in several important roles (and I have served with some outstanding ladies who wire the uniform with great honor). My words were really a visceral response to the inappropriate comment. You are right. His career record of service included support for both law enforcement/first responders and the military. I honor his late son, Bo, who certainly served with valor. The Lord bless our friends in Missouri!
Amen, Dr. Milton! I wrote something longer but hit the wrong button right before posting and it's all gone. (Basically about women in the South Korean military, where my brother-in-law served in the White Tigers, the ROK Special Forces.) It may be providential that it's gone. Bottom line is I think we agree.
A small number of women are able to do these sorts of things. They exist but are rare. Nations like Israel and South Korea which face a very real threat to their existence understand the difference between being "woke" and letting a very small number of exceptional women do things most women are not capable of doing (and frankly, most men, definitely including me).
It seems obvious we're going down a dangerous road that may only end when we face a major battlefield defeat and have to face reality on why it happened. I have confidence in the ability of Israel and South Korea to defeat its adversaries in a closely matched combat situation. The United States relies on overwhelming force and massive amounts of money.
That may not work when the adversary is China and we're trying to figure out how to defend Taiwan, or the Philippines, or some other country that China decides to intimidate.
The Pacific Rim and Indian Ocean are now the centers of attention. Naval power projection is key. Our weakness necessitated the new UK-US-Australia force (AUKUS) in 2021 which can better meet the challenge. Yet, the Chinese land grabs in Africa and surprising diplomatic moves with India (while we have neglected Ind in a) is compounding the problem. AUKUS remains our best play in the region. https://www.defense.gov/Spotlights/AUKUS/
Concurred. You and I both grew up during the era of "Great Power" competition and a Cold War that could have gone hot. By contrast, the large majority of people now wearing the uniform were commissioned or enlisted after the Cold War was over. Modern Russia is not the old Soviet Union, and China, while a growing competitor, is still mostly a regional problem, not yet an international threat. President Xi knows he needs to avoid the Japanese error of awakening a sleeping giant, but the Chinese are used to thinking in terms of generations and centuries, not a four-year presidential election cycle, and that is an inherent advantage of their political system and the culture underlying and predating it.
I don't blame young officers or relatively young colonels. It's not their fault. Put candidly, for the last three decades we've been used to fighting in failed states like Somalia and insurgents in places like Afghanistan and post-Saddam Iraq, not peer-level or near-peer competitors. Even Vietnam, as bad as it was, still functioned more like a proxy war than what we faced in Korea, let alone on D-Day.
Are we ready for something like D-Day, or even MacArthur's landing in Incheon?
Having relatives in the South Korean Army is a good way to throw cold water on the idea that America (and its allies) have nothing to fear from our adversaries. Much like the Israeli military, South Korea trains to fight on its own soil -- and the stories I hear on how my brother-in-law was trained to operate behind the North Korean lines within South Korean territory in the event of a serious invasion are things that sound more like "Mad Max" than like reality, except they could become very real very quickly if North Korea senses weakness and Beijing decides it's time to take advantage of American indecisiveness.
It seems patently obvious that the Hamas rulers of Gaza mistook PM Netanyahu's political problems in Israel for Israeli weakness. It wouldn't take much to imagine what China might be doing with Taiwan in some future period of American political conflict if the Russians had not bogged down in Ukraine. Hopefully President Xi and his North Korean vassal state have figured out that neither Taiwan nor South Korea will be easy targets.
Anyway, you're the retired colonel and I'm not. You're professionally trained in these matters; I'm the civilian watching from the outside and worrying about readiness.
I hope we in America learn a lesson from what happened in Israel, and learn the right lesson, so we can prepare well enough to cause our enemies to decide not to try that with us.
Very sad and true, and very glad to see you saying this. Not many Reformed pastors or elders, and almost no Reformed seminary professors, have the experience wearing the uniform and the rank and retired status that you have. You speak with credibility here in both military and ecclesiastical circles that almost nobody in Reformed circles has.
We can have a debate on the role of women in modern combat operations where there is no longer really a "front line" -- but sending women into D-Day? Really? On what possible planet does that make sense?
Yes, there were cases in World War II of female partisans and female Soviet snipers, but almost no military force in 1944 was putting women into combat roles. How was what the United States did an "injustice" when it was the near-universal practice on all sides of the war?
While I agree this is likely something drafted by President Biden's speechwriters, I do think he deserves more blame than would have been due to several of our recent presidents and most of our current national level political leadership if they had said this. Unlike President Clinton, President Obama, or President Trump, President Biden **DID** have sons who wore the uniform, one of whom served honorably though the other did not. Furthermore, during his time in the Senate, Biden had a legitimately earned reputation for being a supporter of law enforcement and the military back when police unions were still a significant part of the Democratic constituency in major East Coast urban areas.
That means President Biden knew better, and if he didn't, he should have. That comment in his speech -- even if drafted by a female veteran, which is quite possible -- didn't belong in a D-Day speech. There is a place and a time to have a debate about what we can learn from the recent experience of women fighting in Israel and Ukraine, but a D-Day speech was the wrong time, wrong event, and wrong place.
(My own views are that Israel's situation is near-unique among modern nations with a demonstrated and obvious need for virtually all civilians to have military training to defend themselves and their families, and the Israeli situation is more analogous to women being trained to defend themselves if attacked in their homes or public places by terrorists or invaders, and less like a typical Western military force.)
Darryl, Thanks for writing. I appreciate it. I agree with you about the obscured “front line” in modern tech warfare. And, yes, women served with distinction in several important roles (and I have served with some outstanding ladies who wire the uniform with great honor). My words were really a visceral response to the inappropriate comment. You are right. His career record of service included support for both law enforcement/first responders and the military. I honor his late son, Bo, who certainly served with valor. The Lord bless our friends in Missouri!
Amen, Dr. Milton! I wrote something longer but hit the wrong button right before posting and it's all gone. (Basically about women in the South Korean military, where my brother-in-law served in the White Tigers, the ROK Special Forces.) It may be providential that it's gone. Bottom line is I think we agree.
A small number of women are able to do these sorts of things. They exist but are rare. Nations like Israel and South Korea which face a very real threat to their existence understand the difference between being "woke" and letting a very small number of exceptional women do things most women are not capable of doing (and frankly, most men, definitely including me).
It seems obvious we're going down a dangerous road that may only end when we face a major battlefield defeat and have to face reality on why it happened. I have confidence in the ability of Israel and South Korea to defeat its adversaries in a closely matched combat situation. The United States relies on overwhelming force and massive amounts of money.
That may not work when the adversary is China and we're trying to figure out how to defend Taiwan, or the Philippines, or some other country that China decides to intimidate.
The Pacific Rim and Indian Ocean are now the centers of attention. Naval power projection is key. Our weakness necessitated the new UK-US-Australia force (AUKUS) in 2021 which can better meet the challenge. Yet, the Chinese land grabs in Africa and surprising diplomatic moves with India (while we have neglected Ind in a) is compounding the problem. AUKUS remains our best play in the region. https://www.defense.gov/Spotlights/AUKUS/
Concurred. You and I both grew up during the era of "Great Power" competition and a Cold War that could have gone hot. By contrast, the large majority of people now wearing the uniform were commissioned or enlisted after the Cold War was over. Modern Russia is not the old Soviet Union, and China, while a growing competitor, is still mostly a regional problem, not yet an international threat. President Xi knows he needs to avoid the Japanese error of awakening a sleeping giant, but the Chinese are used to thinking in terms of generations and centuries, not a four-year presidential election cycle, and that is an inherent advantage of their political system and the culture underlying and predating it.
I don't blame young officers or relatively young colonels. It's not their fault. Put candidly, for the last three decades we've been used to fighting in failed states like Somalia and insurgents in places like Afghanistan and post-Saddam Iraq, not peer-level or near-peer competitors. Even Vietnam, as bad as it was, still functioned more like a proxy war than what we faced in Korea, let alone on D-Day.
Are we ready for something like D-Day, or even MacArthur's landing in Incheon?
Having relatives in the South Korean Army is a good way to throw cold water on the idea that America (and its allies) have nothing to fear from our adversaries. Much like the Israeli military, South Korea trains to fight on its own soil -- and the stories I hear on how my brother-in-law was trained to operate behind the North Korean lines within South Korean territory in the event of a serious invasion are things that sound more like "Mad Max" than like reality, except they could become very real very quickly if North Korea senses weakness and Beijing decides it's time to take advantage of American indecisiveness.
It seems patently obvious that the Hamas rulers of Gaza mistook PM Netanyahu's political problems in Israel for Israeli weakness. It wouldn't take much to imagine what China might be doing with Taiwan in some future period of American political conflict if the Russians had not bogged down in Ukraine. Hopefully President Xi and his North Korean vassal state have figured out that neither Taiwan nor South Korea will be easy targets.
Anyway, you're the retired colonel and I'm not. You're professionally trained in these matters; I'm the civilian watching from the outside and worrying about readiness.
I hope we in America learn a lesson from what happened in Israel, and learn the right lesson, so we can prepare well enough to cause our enemies to decide not to try that with us.