Grunt’s Eye View of Elections and What is Important
Keith Nightingale
A problem with elections is that the candidates strive more not to irritate than to educate. The PC wolves lurk at every sentence and graphic insuring a definitive statement becomes amorphous mush. Handlers race to insure the candidate does not get painted into a future corner.
For the vast number of “not in the know” voters regarding the real position of the candidates, I offer some basic choices/issues for the candidates to chew on and hopefully make a part of the public record. To agree to actually attempt to address them would be akin to manna from heaven.
Here are some points to consider as compiled from numerous grunt-level communications ranging from junior enlisted to senior flags. Unfortunately, for today’s candidates, the people that wear the uniform and feel the effect of directed policy, actually think, read and communicate. Here are some existing issues the uniforms would proffer to have specifically addressed:
After taking office, could you find out how we defeat ISIS and tell us?
Can we eliminate the defense sequester and submit a new budget to rebuild our military?
Can we build an active Army of around 540,000, as the Army Chief of Staff has said we need?
Can we build a Marine Corps based on 36 battalions, which the Corps notes is the minimum needed to deal with major contingencies?
Can we build a Navy approaching 350 surface ships and submarines, as recommended by the bipartisan National Defense Panel?
Can we build an Air Force of at least 1,200 fighter aircraft, which USAF believes is the minimum needed to execute current missions?
Can we develop a state of the art missile defense system?
Can we get some cogent plan for resolving Iran, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan that the common citizen can understand and support?
Can we just quit screwing around and wasting lives?