One way to create a border wall with low cost to the tax payer is to use the existing stock pill of automotive tires that we have a mountain of already .
they can be placed at the border in a strategic configuration and filled with dirt .
It will be very difficult to cross an open tire bearer that is miles wide with high and low sections that require climbing over . The sun will heat the tires to a unpassable tempter . This is a strategic use of a already existing supply of tire which we pay to ship to some far of land to only be burned . If we face a invading force this strategic barrier can be lit on fire to stop any army from advancing . It can also be mined and set with traps to stop heavy equipment . The used tire sores is available now to put in place immediately at very low cost to install.
Getting away from the WAR STATE, is a great Idea. I agree in part. I see that we REALLY need to stop funding countries such as Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabian, Palestine and ALL others who have ever called for the death and destruction of the United States.
I agree that guiding principles are important!
Having been in my youth a USMC machinegunner. My problem with war is that the politics always get involved. I can remember the beginning of the Iraq war when we were fired upon by soldiers waving the white flag. I remember an R.O.E card that I had to keep with me at all times. It felt as though our hands were tied behind our back. This only became worse as the years progressed and cost us many young men and women. If we should deem to engage in conflict then we must accept the brutality that goes along with it. When the bullets were flying towards with the address of we’ve been trying to reach you about ending your young life ….the farthest thing from my mind was the R.O.E and the Geneva convention! Now I in no way shape or form suggest we commit war crimes. My thought is we need to LET OUR PEOPLE WIN! There’s always someone up top who’s trying to make a name for themselves and pushing their personal agenda and interests onto the battlefield. Take the 2nd battle of Fallujah…WE WERE PULLED BACK! I now know the reason why…but at the time my thought was “why fight for the same goddamn ground we just took!” In closing war is ugly,brutal and the last base instinct of humanity is encouraged “kill or be killed!” We either embrace that or stay the hell out of war!
We need to end the U.S. colonialist hegemonic policies. Stop interfering in Foreign Governments. Close all U.S. Military Bases outside of the North American Continent. Stop stealing resources from foreign countries and stop protecting corporations who steal foreign resources.
Absolutely!
Words are important however. “Vital strategic interests” are open to definition.
I would prefer to see a clear statement that proscribes military engagement except to counter direct military threat to the US homeland.
Kudos to Smedley Butler. No more US military acting and dying as muscle for wall street.
I agree with your points. Additionally, it may be prudent to end the privatization of tasks that our military is already capable of doing for itself, i.e., outsourcing food preparation and other such tasks. No need to pay for the feeding of our troops twice (so to speak). Great contribution.
I agree 100% with COL MacGregor’s comments.
Happy Veterans day to all of you who have served. 
I agree, but believe a Veteran’s Basic Income should be issued alongside this reformation.
Check out vote for my Veteran’s Basic Income policy on page
I am in absolute agreement that “U.S. National Defense and Foreign Policy must rank diplomacy and peaceful cooperation first”. However, although it is true America’s potential opponents may not pose a direct kinetic, force-on-force threat to the American homeland, it is not true that they do not pose a significant threat. No one will argue that the cyber domain of warfare is not both real and deadly. The next major conflict will be fought significantly on the cyber front to devastating effects. There is no need to send massive flotillas filled with thousands of soldiers and weapons systems or even employ massive air forces, all at great expense, when cyber attacks from the safety of one’s own nation can cripple if not destroy communications grids, banking systems, electrical grids, water utilities, etc. These attacks are called EBOs or “effects bases operations.” They are designed to create minimal widespread damage while forcing one nation to capitulate to the demands of another. As is the nature of warfare, the next great war the world sees will not be fought as the last world war. Preparation cannot be simply focused on more tanks, planes and ships and the men and women to crew them. Cyber is the ultimate asymmetric strategy of warfare and we must be prepared to blunt its effects on the homeland.
The judicious use of military power can be extraordinarily effective. One of the best examples of this is President Reagan’s attack on Lydia in the 1986. This attack was swift, deadly and effective. Following the attack Muammar Qaddafi capitulated to US demands and little was heard from him until wrongheaded US foreign policy removed him from power under Obama. The Reagan employment of military might was correct and effective. It did not seek to occupy and rebuild the aggressor with the naive approach that the US could create a loyal vassal state. This should be the model of US military might employment. Only when necessary and with no intent to occupy.
Maintaining US military facilities abroad is unnecessary. The cost is both diplomatically and economically extreme. With modern intel capabilities and investment in even more capable systems, the US is and would continue to be able to monitor the movements and preparations of other nations with great fidelity as to actions and intent. Through building a resilient and capable industrial base, we can be prepared to mobilize to meet a significant kinetic threat long before it arrives on our shores should it be detected. In addition, an immediate and complete redesign of US global-range strike weapons systems and force deployment systems would allow the US to hold the globe at risk to US striking power and follow-on forces. We have the technologies to make these systems reality now and with them, there is no need for forward deployed bases.
Well said. Considering your position (and countless others) it is absolutely imperative that the new administration deeply consider something along the lines of this proposal
Your military experience is a good guide post on how to reform the systems in the Department of Defense.
As a strategic compliment to your proposal to align the Department to be more focused on the common defense, and address fiscal inefficiency, one’s proposal for an ancillary arm - a Department of Peace, would be an important avenue to temper the misuse of our military service members to engage in unethical, unchecked profiteering at the expense of both human rights and American civil liberties under both domestic and international laws.
Here’s the first draft of my proposal… Establishment of a United States Department of Peace
I welcome those with both legal and military experience to build upon the ideas, framework, strategies, and implementation to secure a lasting peace, improving our economy, bolstering American resilience, thereby restoring our great nation’s standing as a beacon of liberty and freedom, where we can lead by example as a population capable of making the necessary sociological adjustments to remedy systemic failures due to interests that do not serve the common interest of our Constitutional republic and make us less secure as a nation.
I agree mostly. Our military is more than capable of getting anywhere we NEED to be. We do not need bases in any other country, no not even “allies”. We need our military home securing and defending our border states and open water states. Our military can assist with national weather disasters instead of being in “strategic” areas that we have no business being in. Make it, Build it, Defend in American homeland. Our “allies” need to figure out how to defend themselves and raise their own militaries. Also, the bloated military budget of “use it or lose it” needs to be abolished. Cut wasteful spending and stay under budget.
Exploring Military Command Structures: A Look Back
Ever wondered why military organizations have so many layers of command? 
Historically, these structures were built to ensure effective leadership before the age of instantaneous communication.
Key Points:
-
Historical Context: Before modern technology, commanders needed to establish multiple tiers of leadership to maintain order and control over vast distances.
-
Redundant Structures: Hierarchies like numbered air forces, major commands, and geographical commands were developed to provide clear lines of authority and decision-making, even without instant communication.
-
Adaptation to Change: While today’s technology allows for near-instantaneous communication, many of these structures remain in place, reflecting a legacy that prioritizes thorough oversight and strategic management.
-
Current Relevance: Understanding these layers helps us appreciate the complexities of military operations and the evolution of leadership in a rapidly changing world.
-
Way Ahead: America must reduce the cost of the federal government while maintaining military dominance. One way to accomplish this is the elimination of out of date and unnecessary command layers. Let’s eliminate and streamline command structures keeping only what is required and honoring that which history required but no longer serves the nation at increasing lethality and military dominance. The decisions on which to eliminate needs to be done at the DoD level with advice from the individual branch’s. The DoD should look at best practices such as the army having all their facility and base managed by a single command and look at if it might make sence to either restructure the individual branches to mirror that or consolidate every installation, base and facility under one DOD level entity and staff it with civilians. That would free up significant numbers of military billets for missions.
As we move forward, it’s crucial to rethink how these structures can adapt to modern demands while maintaining effective command.
#MilitaryHistory #CommandStructure #Leadership #MilitaryStrategy #TechInMilitary #HistoryMatters
Root out the CIA infiltration throughout the whole government that has been going on since the 1947 Security Act, if that’s possible. As JFK said before he got Arkancided: “Secrecy is repugnant to a government of and by the people.” It allowed the CIA to become a rogue agency much bigger and with more influence than anyone but they realize since they use the old "I can’t tell you that because it’s a matter of national security / it’s an ongoing investigation racket. Finish the job JFK wanted to start and break the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the wind.
We must not allow Central and South America to continue to be influenced by our enemies (Communists). Something should have been done about Cuba long ago. Venezuela will become a festering cancer that will allow our enemies strategic territory in our own back yard. We should not be sending American taxpayer money in any form to any foreign location for any reason.
While I understand the sentiment behind the statement American taxpayer money should not be sent abroad, I believe it is essential to recognize the importance of supporting our allies. A complete withdrawal from international commitments could undermine global stability and our strategic interests.
Instead of an all-or-nothing approach, I propose a multithreaded strategy leveraging formal treaties to outline specific categories of support. This framework would include:
-
Defined Categories of Support: Establish clear parameters for what types of assistance are provided, whether military, humanitarian, or economic, ensuring that all aid aligns with national interests.
-
Involved End Strength: Specify the level of commitment (personnel, resources, etc.) required for each category of support, allowing for better planning and resource allocation.
-
Blockchain Financial Auditable Trails: Implement blockchain technology to create transparent, auditable trails for all financial transactions related to foreign aid. This would enhance accountability and trust, ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used effectively and efficiently.
-
Regular Reviews and Accountability Measures: Include provisions for regular assessments of the support provided, ensuring that it meets agreed-upon objectives and remains aligned with U.S. strategic interests.
In addition our heavy involvement in WWII and the atrocities and genocide operations we fought against as well as our heavy support in the UN for the establishment of Israel isn’t something we should abandon. Israel has developed technology that could be used to better the entire planet. They have taken dessert land and saltwater and created farming green belts like no one else has ever succeeded at, they also have huge technological improvements they often implement to equipment we sell them that could greatly decrease our upgrade and maintenance costs. This ally and any others we support should be recognized in formal treaties and remove the heavy handed and often diametrically opposed political agendas influencing the informal and ongoing assistance.
By adopting this compromise approach, we can maintain our commitments to allies while ensuring fiscal responsibility and transparency. This way, we reinforce our global partnerships without compromising the integrity of our financial systems or the interests of American taxpayers.