Retired flag officers break their silence

George Rebane

Having served in America’s military constrains neither an individual’s 1A rights nor his duty as a concerned and patriotic citizen in calling attention to a grossly misguided government.  To remain silent in such a case is, at a minimum, the height of cowardice and dereliction of duty.  Seeing the destruction of our republic that the Biden administration is engineering with their even more radical colleagues in Congress, over 120 retired flag officers (generals and admirals) came together to sign an open letter to the nation (here).  In this letter they express their deep concerns about what is going on currently in our country, and what this means to the future of America and Americans.

In response to the publication of this open letter, the always anti-Trump and sometimes right-of-center Foreign Policy was given to vapors as it digested “this piece of appalling partisan invective” (here)  It came out with a strong editorial that took the former flags to task, even accusing them of being unpatriotic, and declared that the “open letter by former officers calling the president a ‘Marxist’ dictator is a greater threat to US democracy than the ouster of Liz Cheney.”

The FP mavens even went so far as to accuse these civilians of having “violated the norms of their profession and contributed to the erosion of healthy civil-military relations in the Untied States.”  Apparently they missed that part of their political science studies that taught them when and where members of the American military are to remain non-partisan.  The strictures when on active duty fall away once their military careers are over and they re-enter civilian life.  Our country’s history is full of episodes of former military officers becoming quite partisan after their service terminated – at least five of them even became presidents, hundreds have served in partisan elected offices, and thousands more let their subsequent partisan voices be heard in the public square.

To FP and like-thinkers, these former officers “are now doing their level best to undermine (the Constitution) and, in particular, the crucial principle of civilian control.”  As you read the flags’ open letter, you will see that they do none of what their leftwing opponents accuse them.

Comments

[Scott O]

Apropos of the topic as well as the recent comparisons of our govt's ARMY recruiting vid vs other recruiting vids (China's here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOWRembdPS8
caution - toxic masculinity!)
Who knew the rot started in 1971?
https://www.takimag.com/article/at-first-quietly-then-much-less-quietly/
Our own current Secty Of Defense admitted we can not prevail in any current theater of combat - only the ones "we choose".
How charming.
What about the ones China or Russia 'choose'?
We can't even protect our own cyber space.
They don't have to invade us - just wait until the only thing you get on the internet is Emperor Xi's smiling face explaining the US dollar is no longer acceptable for world trade or payment for America's debt.

[Paul Emery]

George

Just taking one item at a time from the "open letter" you refer to we have the issue of
Executive Orders and here's a quote "the Current Administration has launched a full-blown assault on our Constitutional rights in a dictatorial manner, bypassing the Congress, with more than 50 Executive Orders quickly signed, many reversing the previous Administration’s effective policies and regulations."

What they don't acknowledge is that Trump signed more executive orders than Obama, Bush and Clinton when he notched 220 in only four years compared to Obama's 276, Bush's 291 and Clintons 364 all in eight year terms.

The facts show it's clear that that Biden has a ways to go to catch up with Trump. If executive orders are a problem to the signers of the Open Letter their real outrage should be leveled at Trump who is the champ in issuing Executive Orders inn the last four administrations.

link
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+many+executive+orders+Trump

[scenes]

Poll Emery: "The facts show it's clear that that Biden has a ways to go to catch up with Trump."

Do you ever look up anything?

https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/executive-orders/donald-trump/2017

EO: 13765 - 13800 (May 16, 2017)

https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/executive-orders/joe-biden/2021

EO 13985 - 14028 (May 17, 2021)

[scenes]

Poll's Partisan Puling(tm) aside, it's interesting to look at the history of Executive Orders.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-orders

The reason I list this is because the real ramp up didn't happen during the FDR Presidency For Life (as I'd expect) but during Roosevelt I. A person would have to dig through the Orders and see how substantial they were to really understand it I think. It's interesting to see Jimmy Carter's modern primacy here.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 1035pm - Your 1035pm is more than a bit embarrassing in how it declares your apparently limited understanding of executive orders, their purpose, history, and impact on life in America. To you and yours, focusing on their number appears to be the depth of such understanding. Mr scenes tries to expand that in his 807am and 821am - please avail yourself.

[Paul Emery]

George

I was responding directly to the numbers provided by the "open letter". Why was my response incorrect and theirs accurate? They made it a point to emphasize the number of Bidens Executive Actions and all I did was compare them to Trumps to illustrate a factual comparison.

What criteria do you use to challenge my numbers and how does that not apply to
Trumps numbers, which are the greatest for the last four Presidents.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 1128am - OK, one example would be that Trump's executive orders promote expanding our economy and securing our borders, while expanding our liberties. Biden's do exactly the opposite.

[Paul Emery]

So George it's not the use of executive orders that you're opposed to as long as it supports your political inclinations. In other words Trump can do it because you agree with his decisions.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 228pm - Exactly. Executive orders have a purpose in the exercise of executive powers. And, of course, people approve of their use as long as it promotes the kind of government and its policies that they favor. That's why you like what Biden is doing with his, and I vehemently disapprove of them. I thought that was obvious to all serious students of government.

[Paul Emery]

However George the concerns of the signers of the "open letter" was the sheer number of Bidens executive orders not the use of them. This is what they wrote: "The Current Administration has launched a full-blown assault on our Constitutional rights in a dictatorial manner, bypassing the Congress," In other words they are questioning the constitutionality of the process. Now you say you support the process and that "bypassing the Congress" is ok as long as you support the results. Am I correct in that assumption?

[George Rebane]

PaulE 312pm - Their questioning the constitutionality of the executive order process is not my questioning that process. Biden did nothing unconstitutional in issuing his instant blizzard of EOs. In my mind his EOs were both ill-considered and wrong for the country; but that is a political evaluation.