Crippling the Military 101

Military analyst Frank Gaffney, head of The Center for Security Policy, contends the U.S. military should not hesitate to destroy religious sites when they're used as terrorist sanctuaries.

Last month American and Iraqi forces discovered every mosque in Fallujah was either a weapons storage facility, a bunker from which to launch attacks, or both. Coalition troops systematically neutralized the mosques, in spite of potential international and media criticism over attacking what many claim are holy sites.

The fact that this is even a topic of discussion highlights the inexplicable inroads of political correctness into the military's operational equation. It's like Don King and Mike Tyson having a serious discussion with Maureen Dowd and Nancy Polosi about which corners they can fight in and how many blows will be acceptable in an upcoming championship fight.

This story points to the cracked tip of an iceberg but fails to reveal the massive political correctness damage done to the military below the surface. Asking our protectors, whom we've placed in harm's way, to think about what they are doing while they're doing it results in several dangerous situations.

First, many of our people will be dead before they finish the thought ... any good soldier knows they're not trained to think, they are trained to react ... instantly! The thinking was all done back stateside in training exercises. Military discipline trains soldiers to recognize data, process it instantly, and decide without thought ... if they decide right, then they and their buddies will live to fight another day; if they decide wrong, then it no longer matters.

Second, allowing a social (now behavioral) science to intrude into military science establishes three things: a.) it says social science trumps military science on the field of battle; b.) it says military science can't adequately train our protectors without the assistance of a social engineer; and c.) it says that we're wasting our money on military training because a diversity or sensitivity consultant can win the war without firing a shot and without losing a life.

Excuse me for my stupidity, but are we saying that those in a theoretical and soft science that is less than a century old are more qualified to set the rules of engagement for the battlefield than those with 6,000 years of experience in a practical and hard science?

Third, recruiting becomes problematic if military leadership is endlessly questioned, constantly criticized, put on the defensive, and denigrated publicly. Who would want to turn the details of their daily life over to others and spend weeks being humiliated, beefed up, and dumbed down? Who would want to receive less than minimum hourly wage, leave loved ones for long periods of time, live in horrible and hostile conditions? And who would want to put their life on the line for those doing the questioning, criticizing, and denigrating and who consider you and your buddies less than duck feces on the bottom of a reflecting pond in Hutchinson, Kansas?

Let me warn you all, if the military won't or can't put an end to all of this leftist badgering the people had better ... or they will be duck feces on the bottom of a reflecting pond somewhere!