1. THE MILITARY:

Under Leftist regimes, such as today’s under Mr Obama (and please notice, significantly, since 2008, I have never successively linked in my blog the words “Obama” and “President”), the military is nothing but a useful mule or tool for various forms of societal change.

The Left, frankly, despises and disdains the military — all its members, its leaders, its troops — unless and until it can be corrupted for use regarding a societal, global — and not a national DEFENSE — issue.

There is a reason that a greater number of military officers have voluntarily left or been forced to leave under this administration than most any other.

There is a reason that military chaplains — save those of Islam — have been under attack under this administration than any other.

As Jeff Fuller writes at TheWashingtonTimes.com:

Why troops avoid a fight

Soldiers won’t follow clueless leaders into battles they can’t win

by Jeff Fuller

What does this experience (as delineated in the article if you click it above) offer to those clever, young staffers crafting military tactics and rules of engagement in the White House National Security Council (NSC) for our military units in Iraq and Syria?

Do not expect any military unit, especially a bunch of Iraqi Sunni soldiers led by corrupt Shiite officers, to risk their lives in a fight against ISIS fighters. They will not. And neither would many American troops without effective leaders, adequate weapons, communications, Medevac and close air support, and a fighting chance to win.

A more important paragraph:

But at some point up the chain of command, they have general officers who risked their lives in combat in the past but will not speak truth to the young NSC staffers who set the currently amateurish rules of engagement, define the limits of military power and craft empty speeches in which President Obama declares with a straight face that our goal is to degrade and defeat ISIS.

In other words: our troops are beginning to discriminate and separate the lies from the truths, the wheat from the chaff.  Because their most intimate posteriors are now “on the line.”  A further lesson from history:

As someone who cares deeply for our country and still carries grenade fragments from battle, I can only hope that at some point, our troops will be able to say that their senior military leaders choose the truth over political and career expediency. In Vietnam, much of the foolishness was generated by military officers who either never understood battle or had forgotten its lessons. Now this Peter Principle tendency has been exacerbated by the youngsters who rule the NSC.

To the military: for whom will you die and when, if ever, will you draw the line?

Having written that, there is a serious lesson to be learned — also — by the LE Sheepdogs of this nation:

2. CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT:

I learned quite a number of things in my 41 years of service to civilian law enforcement.  As a Sergeant for a major LE agency on the Left Coast, and having served as my department’s Rangemaster and EVOC Supervisor (and a number of other specialized positions, with another separate three state and federal agencies), I learned that there is a vast chasm between what one says and what one does.  I learned to respect a few ranks but not to respect the persons wearing those ranks because altogether too many of them were corrupt and violated their own oaths — yet were promoted still because of nepotism or melanin or their ability to don the requisite knee pads required for a sundry of appointments and coronations.  They too often spoke one line and physically violated another.  And trust me: cops can sense the stinking bullshit of hypocrites from miles away.  Verbal detritus does not a leader make.

I learned from my SBSLI class that dissent is a good thing.  Dissent was certainly required in this circumstance.

And dissent will become a major, a huge issue in the future of the military and civilian law enforcement.  That is to say: the Sheepdogs.

Just what is a Sheepdog?  I am a long-time Sheepdog, far beyond the years where most average Sheepdogs quit.  I am also a Silverback, far beyond the years where most others with less stamina (or more sense) quit.

That said, what might be a common denominator between military and civilian LE “leaders”?

I say this: there are way too many “test takers” and “test passers.”  There are “managers” who can sort out widgets and beans and push paper, but there is a dearth of true “leaders of men.”  Managers are good with paper and bits and bytes.  Leaders are good with people.  Actual humans.

I am convinced of the incontrovertible: leaders are born.  They cannot be “made.”  Persons either possess “leadership skills” or they do not.  You can see and acknowledge a true “leader” from elementary school right up through college and beyond.  One cannot “teach” what is truly the unteachable: leadership.  True leadership.

And true leadership is this: if I asked my troops to do “X,” would they do it for me?  If another Sergeant asked, would they do it for them?  A true leader gets things done not when he or she demands, but when he or she “suggests” or asks.  Or even by a mere presence, subsumed.  But in the crucible of extremis, would my troops do what I asked?  Frankly, I’d like to think they would if, for no other reason, than how I treated them under “normal.”  They would know that I readily recognize the difference between “standard” and “critical.”

3. THE LOGICAL EXTENSION:

My point being:

In the not too terribly distant future, military troops and civilian LE troops are going to have to make a terrible and critical decision.

Will they follow their so-called “leaders”?

At this point, I would suggest: you should weigh that decision very carefully because many of your “superiors” and “leaders” are neither superior nor leaders.

I suspect and submit that you already know who it is that you would follow, and who it is that you would not.  Those who are — in the colloquial — “full of shit” and those who are not.  Those who treated you with inherent respect, did not take advantage of you, did not make you the butt of jokes, did not rule their rank over you, those who were firm, fair and consistent.  You knew you would encounter the same person over any number of days, and not Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde.

The person who said, if they were “disappointed” in you, you would have a serious internal speech with yourself to the point of questioning your entire ethos.

I was once told, by an ancient and doddering Sergeant in my department many years ago, that one must only do three things to have a successful career: 1) Do you job, 2) Tell the truth, and 3) Don’t be malicious.

It would seem that too many of our so-called “leaders” violate one or more of those aspects on a continuing basis.  Some seem to get promoted for it.

If you think — after all of this — that I’m leading up to something, you would be correct.

A country that allows political hacks to set military operations policy has lost its way. And we are lost, for sure.”  — Lt. Col. Jeff Fuller