The Pandemic Threat

The Challenge in 2020 - Pandemic in America

The Corona Virus (Covid 19) has changed the lives of all Americans; the initial estimates of massive deaths has introduced fear  among the American people.   The medical comunity is divided on the size of the threat and the best way to defeat it.  Our country and the states have taken an aggressive approach to the virus, closed schools, businesses, and ordered people to stay  home.   This has, at least in the short term, destroyed our economy and made the economic threat equal to the medical threat for most people.
Most experts agree that the Covid 19 virus is more deadly than the normal Flu due to it being very contagious.   However the death rate is similaar to the Flu in the high years, aad it is important to remember that there is no vaccine.  The other factor is the threat to the  young does not seem to be servere from the data available; so there is a case for not shutting down schools and daycares.   There are other examples of the extreme actions having negative impact on the populaton.  I believe.the threat was over sold and has dragged our political leaders into taking extreme action, and now they are finding it hard to examine the information that is available to all of us and reconsider their actions.  If you take the positive test results (percentage of total tests) and apply it to the total population of a particular area, the percentage of infection is quite low.   Coming up with a therapy to treat the virus will be a positive step, and then ultimately a vaccine.   However, for now I believe the data supports the importance of opening up the country as quickly as possible with reasonable safeguards.

Put America First

America is a divided country, we have reached an extreme in anger, hate, and a total lack of civility.  Our leaders in Washington are part of the problem, they are not  putting the country first,  their hate of our president guides their words and deeds.   It is hard for us to see through the fog of biased media to make a good decision in the upcoming election.  I believe we must strive to be objective and grade the president on accomplishments not whether we like his style.   God has used imperfect people to accomplish great things throughout history.   If we put America first and look at current conditions we will re elect our president in 2020.

The Critics are Wrong

My View as a Veteran

Lately there have been discussions by critics of American involvement in Afghanistan, and connecting it to poor strategy in Vietnam and Iraq.    As a retired Air Force pilot (23 years) and Vietnam Veteran, I cannot stand by and listen to the political and academics condemn our efforts in those conflicts, and I would add Korea to the list.    Were the outcomes open to criticism, sure; these wars were not “won” in the true military and national sense.

Vietnam – in 1965 as a young fighter pilot, we were briefed on plans to attack North Vietnam from the air long before they had installed their Russian air defense system which cost us aircraft and lives later in the war.   Needless to say we did not have the political will to bring about a quick victory.   In my view, the reason was a fear of China involvement and a lack of understanding of the enemy.  In my second tour of duty in Vietnam I saw rules of engagement which prevented us attacking certain targets; and a munitions shortage (denied by the political leaders) but was fact.    So we fought a war without achieving total victory, we never lost a battle, but we allowed the enemy to have sanctuaries, and “safe” targets we could not attack.  We did eventually step up our pressure which led to peace talks.  However, they were not adhered to by the North Vietnamese who were able to take over South Vietnam in a matter of days with all American forces having been withdrawn.  I believe our lack of political will was based on Watergate and prevented an American response to the breaking of the peace agreement; our leaders were consumed with domestic politics and we let the enemy have their way.   A complete victory was never the plan due to political constraints and concern over China and Russian involvement.

There are examples of wars, although small, that were won quickly with overwhelming force and a clear objective of victory.   (Granada under President Reagan, and Panama under President Bush).  Although they were smaller conflicts and did not involve a Russian or Chinese threat, the military was given a clear mission to win the conflict and secure the goal.

Iraq – President Bush authorized our military to invade Iraq and defeat them with overwhelming force; it was achieved in a few days.   Unfortunately, I believe, the president was given some bad intelligence that the Iraq leadership would be removed/defeated from within so our final movement to Bagdad was halted and an agreement short of surrender was secured.   The 24^th Infantry Division was on its way to Bagdad and probably would have secured complete victory and a change in leadership, but was stopped.     Later, as we all know, Iraq invaded Kuwait, and we returned to fight another war in Iraq, again our objective this time was to achieve a surrender of the Iraq Army and remove their leadership which was achieved.    However, we failed to manage our victory in many ways that are well known, but the tragedy was pulling our forces out of Iraq and allowing the enemy to grow and threaten again.  So for a third time we entered Iraq to defeat ISIS and fight over some of the same ground.   Poor political decisions were responsible for what happened in Iraq; and today there remains a threat in that country. 

Afghanistan – A justified war began after 911, with strong public support.  However, the objectives were limited and our military was not given a clear mission for total defeat of the Taliban.  Why?  I believe political concerns gave the enemy a sanctuary in Pakistan and that remains today.                                                                                                                                             The Korean    War is another example of providing the enemy a “safe space” that we were prevented from attacking.  The concern over China didn’t deter a Chinese intervention against us, but we took no action against China.

The criticism that has recently been aimed at our military leaders, some of it deserved, but I believe the premise is based on a limited and faulty understanding of the wars mentioned.   We have had great leaders in our military operating under political leadership, but in some cases should push back when poor political decisions result in limitations on the military’s ability to carry out the mission.   If the goal is not victory and the rules of engagement limit our forces, then the generals need to “fall on their sword” and resist sending forces into a “no win” situation.    No win wars are a product of, lack of will,   a faulty strategy, limited objectives, and restrictive rules of engagement based on political decisions

If military generals are operating more in the realm of politics than military strategy and not speaking up then criticism is valid and the result can be another no win war.    During my career my observations led me to believe that there are two types of leaders/generals, I call them “political generals” and “warrior generals”.    The history of military conflicts from wars to individual campaigns and battles makes a strong case that our forces prevail when commanded and led by leaders who are warriors.

Steve Altick, Lt Col  USAF (Ret)

Where are the Patriots in the Democratic Party

It is sad to see that our nation is so partisan and divided that the democratic party is only focused on resisting our president and have no interest in doing the right thing for America.  Some examples would be border security; totally resisting building a wall even though they supported the initial wall in the past; resisting the president's appointments, stalling on bills and legislation that is needed.   The democrats will pay a price for their resistance against the president and focusing on investigating instead of legislating.  They are void of "America First" patriots

America Needs Patriots

The President's State of the Nation gave us a graphic picture of what is wrong in America,; politicians putting America 's interests second to their own resistance to our president.   It is easy to see why people elected the president to be a disruptor of the status quo in  Washington.  Here are some sad facts: the house has passed appropriation bills that fund the needed growth in military and all the departments of government, on other words, a real budget which the government has not had for years.  These bills are sitting in the Senate with no action taken because of the lack of true patriots who will focus on the country first.  The only way to fix this is to get rid of a good portion of the Senate and get  younger patriotic people elected (more vets) who put America first.   The opposition is wrapped up in their dislike of our president and will resist anything that is put forth for the good of the country,   It can only be changed by us in 2018.

Winning in Afganistan

Very frustrating to listen to the "experts" talking about there not being a road to victory in Afghanistan; not true!   They talk about the inability of our forces to win over the Taliban and Isis, but they fail to realize that the main reasons are the rules of engagement and providing safe sanctuary in Pakistan for the enemy.   So simple, if we want to win, we simply go where they are and kill them.  We should have learned that lesson from history, but our country is so concerned about the cost that we fight ten year wars without winning.  I was in Vietnam in 1964, and we could have won that war quickly, but our leaders did not  have the courage politically to take out North Vietnam, and then they were able, with Russian help, to get an air defense system that cost us many lives;  that would  not have happened in 1964.  I only hope that our new administration has the guts to do what it takes to win.

Our country remains divided over the results of the 2016 election; the losing side continues to be focused on opposing  our elected President.   We have heard Hillary Clinton refer to being part of the "resistance", and now our former President has created a new non profit organization to bring about change in America and fight the new administration on all fronts.   This has never happened in our history where we have a losing side in an election decide to resist the lawful government.   We have already seen the attacks on our new President as he works to carry out the agenda that elected him.  The opposition party has put resistance ahead of country and refuses to work to make America better.   It is a sad state of affairs, but more than that organized resistance can border on treason and should be carefully watched.  The citizens of our country must not allow any further erosion of patriotism and loss of civility in America.