Taking a break from what is normally called “technology” to post a little thankfulness for a “technology” the military uses quite effectively as the real, tangible force multiplier: The Recruiter.

It was easy enough, when taking management time on someone to check the enlistment contract of the sailor in question and make disparaging remarks about the lineage of the poor soul who was detailed to recruit and found themselves a little short of quota near the end of the month, and working under the emotional stress of the “system,” as defined by the analysts defined it….

In retrospect, I have, through introspection and reading the many weblogs over the last few years, have come to appreciate the role these people play in the maintenance of a solid, strong and continually improving best military in the world, and, in history.

While out making rounds today, I pulled into a local Marine Recruiter’s office. I did have an ulterior motive, but it was driven by the need to just step in and shake a few hands and say thanks for the hard work that makes the rest of it all possible. It also told me the quantity of pizza I will have delivered one day soon for lunch.

A Staff Sargent and two brand, spanking new Privates were present. The young man and young woman privates looked all the part of the very young who are carrying the load of the nation. No ribbons but the NDSM graced their khaki shirts, but they got the same hand shake and thanks, for they are the ones, with a global war staring them in the face.

So: My suggestion – stop by those strip mall storefronts and take a moment to tell them you appreciate their work, walking the halls of the high schools and making community meetings, much of it at the expense of their personal time at home, when the entire military is making deployments to the combat zone when they are not on “cake” jobs like “shore duty” stateside.

This work is vital, but not nearly as well recognized as an integral part of the system. I think this is especially important in areas far from military bases, as many of these little outposts of the Armed Services are like little islands unto themselves.

They are our edge to make the non-living technology work to defeat our enemies and help those others around the world less fortunate.

He was a man who saw his service to others more important than his own life in dire circumstances: Pvt George Watson, US Army.

In recognition of his last effort, his Medal of Honor citation reads:

Citation: For extraordinary heroism in action on 8 March 1943. Private Watson was on board a ship which was attacked and hit by enemy bombers. When the ship was abandoned, Private Watson, instead of seeking to save himself, remained in the water assisting several soldiers who could not swim to reach the safety of the raft. This heroic action, which subsequently cost him his life, resulted in the saving of several of his comrades. Weakened by his exertions, he was dragged down by the suction of the sinking ship and was drowned. Private Watson’s extraordinarily valorous actions, daring leadership, and self-sacrificing devotion to his fellow-man exemplify the finest traditions of military service.

In more detail, here are the circumstances of the story in Wikipedia:

A resident of Birmingham, Alabama, He had entered the Army September 1, 1942, and was a member of the 2nd Battalion, 29th Quartermaster Regiment. He was a passenger aboard the Dutch steamer USAT Jacob on March 8, 1943, which was near Porloch Harbor, New Guinea, when the ship was hit by Japanese bombers.

When the ship was abandoned, Watson remained in the water and, instead of trying to save himself, assisted soldiers who could not swim into life rafts.

Weakened by his exertions, he was dragged down by the suction of the sinking ship and drowned. His body was never recovered.

Pvt Watson is one of seven African-Americans to have been awarded the Medal of Honor in WWII. However, his award did not happen until 1990, when, of ten names of African-American heroes were submitted for upgrading/award for the MOH, did he become one of those seven, and all of them honored decades after their courageous acts. In 1997, President Clinton made the presentations. The other six awardees all served with line combat units. Pvt Watson, alone, of the Quartermaster Corps, received this high honor, from a non-combat unit.

To remember this hero, who had no known family, a field at Ft Benning, and the courthouse for Jefferson County, GA have been named for him.

A Military Sealift Command ship, the USNS WATSON (T-AKR-310) carries the name of Pvt Watson. A LMSR with “roll-on, roll-off” capability, it was built at NASSCO:

USNS Watson will be assigned to MSC’s Afloat Prepositioning Program which prepositions on ships equipment and supplies for the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force and the Defense Logistics Agency worldwide. Prepositioning improves U.S. capabilities to deploy forces rapidly in any area of conflict.

Watson is scheduled to be loaded with U.S. Army cargo in September (1998). USNS Watson will be crewed by 29 merchant mariners from Maersk Lines Limited under contract to MSC. In addition, up to 50 military personnel can embark to “monitor and maintain the military equipment on board, ensuring its readiness.

By the year 2001, MSC will have taken delivery of 19 LMSRs as part of the U.S. Navy Strategic Sealift Acquisition Program. The program is in response to the need for expanded sealift capability identified in a congressionally mandated study done in the early 1990s. The 19 LMSRs will provide five million square feet of sealift capacity early in the next century.

Large, Medium-speed, roll-on/roll-off ships – T-AKR Description: Military Sealift Command’s newest class of ships – Large, Medium- speed, Roll-on/Roll-off Ships, or LMSR – will significantly expand the nation’s sealift capability in the 1990s and beyond. Nineteen LMSRs will have been converted or built at U.S. shipyards by the year 2001.

Features: Large, Medium-speed, Roll-on/Roll-off Ships, or LMSRs, can carry an entire U.S. Army Task Force, including 58 tanks, 48 other track vehicles, plus more than 900 trucks and other wheeled vehicles. The ship carries vehicles and equipment to support humanitarian missions, as well as combat missions. The new construction vessels have a cargo carrying capacity of more than 380,000 square feet, equivalent to almost eight football fields. In addition, LMSRs have a slewing stern ramp and a removable ramp which services two side ports making it easy to drive vehicles on and off the ship. Interior ramps between decks ease traffic flow once cargo is loaded aboard ship. Two 110-ton single pedestal twin cranes make it possible to load and unload cargo where shoreside infrastructure is limited or nonexistent. A commercial helicopter deck was added for emergency, daytime landing.

Not only is this ship named for him, as the first of the several units in the class, they will all honor Pvt Watson as the WATSON Class T-AKR-310 ships.

Pvt George Watson’s Medal of Honor is maintained at the US Army Quartermaster Museum at Ft. Lee, VA.

His legacy is to continue to provide help to others on the field of combat.

Bonus reading: Eagle1 talks about a response by government and industry to seaborne threats.

From the TWS Administrators:

Air Force is now in beta testing stage, Invites are
being sent out to those that have pre-registered,
During beta testing access is by invitation only.
Should be fully online Jan 01, 2008

Loyde Mcillwain
Senior Administrator
TWS Inc

If I were and AF type, I’d get over there and pre-register right away and get onboard.

The Navy – TWS has been a great tools to get in contact with old shipmates…

Update from Loyde in the comments:  you have to be invited to get in now.  Keep checking the site for use in Jan’08!

Welcome, any Lizards who stop by to critique my work!

I had a brief moment of clarity (at least I’ll call it that) yesterday, while listening to the talk shows once more going over the General Kerr issue at the Republican debate this week.

Here it is: The Clintons (past administration, and the one to maybe come) realize something about the military experience, and are intent on using it for that very purpose. I submit this is wrong. Yes, it’s a social experiment they are after. Why? Because that has been the very power of the organization in history.

I have blogged a lot about the society changing work of Eleanor Roosevelt, not directly, but through the stories I have put here about Ben Garrison, and other African-American units that served our nation well in WWII, and then allowed the true integration of the Armed Services, ahead of the general population.

The Tuskegee Airmen are well known. Add to that the USS MASON (DE-529), Subchaser PC-1264, the 761st (“Black Panther”) Armored Battalion and the 555th (“Triple Nickel”) Parachute Battalion. These units, set up by President Roosevelt, showed these men could fight for the country just as well as another other able bodied man in the US.

One thing about race: Throughout history, there has never been any doubt about whether you are born that way, or it is something you chose. This is the big disconnect we are facing. The jury is still out on which it is for homosexuality. Political pressures and the MSM would have you believe there is no choice about it. The “scientific evidence” is sketchy and from small sample sizes, so, at best inconclusive. There are those who, having lived the “life style” will adamantly tell you it’s a “nurture” thing, and you don’t have to be that way, others will say those people, like Andy Cominsky, have been “brainwashed.” I’ll say, that the discussion on the reasons for being homosexual being debated now, have only become a topic of public debate and concern in the last few decades. That, in my book, smacks of someone trying to make something factual that is not.

Here’s one of my observations of the scientific community in recent times: On one hand, they will regale you with tales of the long suffering individual, driven by a revelation, suffering public and peer disdain for years, and then, the “discovery” comes that completely vindicates them, and they are elevated from the ranks of the dregs of the community, and placed on high pedestals! They become revered and followed. Later, some small voice comes forward and says “I don’t think that’s it.” The scientists attack that impetuous one, who would challenge…but, the cycle repeats. At some point, the theory of the youngster is found to be more correct (those two words chosen specifically), the elder is de-throned, at the worst, or provided a place of honor for having provided some insight, at best, and the history of science continues.

On the other hand….the “scientists,” almost without taking a breath, will launch into a discussion of how. let’s say Darwin, is 100% correct and there is no need to revisit the “theory” of evolution any more, IT IS SETTLED!

I see the current discussion on the condition of being gay as the second case, even while there is much to be looked at with true scientific discipline, untainted by any groups desire to elevate themselves to a special status, above the “all men are created equal” measurement.

Toss the entire “Global Warming Climate Change” issue in with Darwin’s Theory of Evolution model of “it’s that way because a POLITICIAN told me” category. Side note: Yeah, I waited all those months just so I could evacuate before the many Cat 5 hurricanes headed to the “plywood state” and they never came….

Now, back to the topic: Bill Clinton went for it first with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as a political payback for a voting block that went his way in 1992. It was a realistic compromise to get elected, with nothing to do with National Defense. Since end of the draft in 1971, the military had been an all volunteer force. There were adequate numbers of people enlisting. The DADT had nothing to do with abandoning a previous organizational ban, so we could put more manpower into the fight. We weren’t in a fight, and the Clinton Administration was drawing down the military as fast as it could.

Using the totalitarian management structure of the military, Bill Clinton, as the Commander-in-Chief, had pretty much Carte Blanche to make it happen, including the power to place his leadership at the top of the military to make sure they went along. That is the prerogative of any president, and I’m not faulting him for using the system in place, but I would argue about his motivation to repay a political debt, not to strengthen the military.

Thus began the change, were, as an analog to the service of the minority units in WWII, and the later full integration into service life by President Truman, it became a lever to show the general populace a better way to handle our social interactions. In that case, once more, I’ll point out it was over a matter of a fact of true, scientifically understood heredity.

Now, along comes Hillary. If she is to attain the office of President, she will most likely declare openly gay people will be allowed to enter the service. Why? Once more, to illegitimately use the power of the Commander-in-Chief’s authority to return a political favor for getting the gay vote.

What does that say about her (and Bill’s) view of the Armed Services? Those organizations, setup in The Constitution, to “provide for the common defense” are nothing more that dating services. Join the service and get to shower with people, without having to ask their permission. In any other part of society, doing so would have one arrested for a sex crime. It’s all about consent.

The only reason it is important is to get to power by promising access to the homosexual community.

What about the years of training the military has gone through, trying to prevent “fraternization.” That became an issue with the massive infusion of women in the service, and the incredibly deep rooted human desire for sexual contact. Why didn’t the military want this, even among heterosexuals? It makes for difficult, and many times impossible, decision making moments, where the leadership needs to be scrupulously fair. Sometimes that “fairness” needs to be played out in terms of making sure who you send to a dangerous situation is being done for the right reasons, and not because you are in a relationship with someone in your unit.

Adding openly homosexual people to the already PCed military environment is just one more obstacle to good order and discipline, which is detracted from by raging hormones left unchecked.

Once more, the “here’s your orders, now get on with it” methodology has the near term possibility to just making it more palatable for the military to take on more of the social interaction phenomena, rather than being focused on combat readiness. Maybe they see it as an offshoot for the “busy gay ‘professional,’ who doesn’t have time to set up a full time relationship.” Yeah, that’s the ticket – Join the military and let everyone around you in the barracks know you’re “like that” and let the shy ones come to you.

One thing this plan doesn’t include, is respect for the people, who joined the military to serve the nation, and not as a dating service, who do not want those who are sexually attracted to them staring at them in the head facilities.

At least DADT offers the gay person the opportunity to serve and all they have to do is take their “relationships” off base. The same is actually expected off all the other service members already. The reason a DADT policy for heterosexuality isn’t necessary is because the vast majority of all humans aren’t homosexual and therefore it would be pretty ridiculous to tell them not to say what their sexual preferences are. They don’t do it now. It wasn’t part of their enlistment contract and it serves no organizational purpose.

The only purpose of the Armed services are to serve the people by defending them. If that’s what someone wants to do, then keep it zipped. It’s expected of everyone. The UCMJ has all the “rules” and it applies to all in uniform.

And, don’t forget that the Democrats all want to scream and yell about the “waste, fraud and abuse” of the DoD. How about we begin to add up all the costs for the course development, the manpower and facilities, the contractor fees, and the hows spent byt real troops sitting in classrooms getting lectured on being sensitive and not using certain words. Can someone explain how that helps the US military defend the nation better? I’d like to hold that “metric” up for the “you’re wasting our money crowd and see what they have to say.

Here it is: The Clintons (past administration, and the one to maybe come) realize something about the military experience, and are intent on using it for that very purpose. I submit this is wrong. Yes, it’s a social experiment they are after. Why? Because that has been the very power of the organization in history.

I have blogged a lot about the society changing work of Elanor Roosevelt, not directly, but through the stories I have put here about Ben Garrison, and other African-American units that served our nation well in WWII, and then allowed the true integration of the Armed Services, ahead of the general population.

The Tuskegee Airmen are well known. Add to that the USS MASON (DE-529), Subchaser PC-1264, the 761st (“Black Panther”) Armored Battalion and the 555th (“Triple Nickel”) Parachute Battalion. These units, set up by President Roosevelt, showed these men could fight for the country just as well as another other able bodied man in the US.

One thing about race: Throughout history, there has never been any doubt about whether you are born that way, or it is something you chose. This is the big disconnect we are facing. The jury is still out on which it is for homosexuality. Political pressures and the MSM would have you believe there is no choice about it. The “scientific evidence” is sketchy and from small sample sizes, so, at best inconclusive. There are those who, having lived the “life style” will adamantly tell you it’s a “nurture” thing, and you don’t have to be that way, others will say those people, like Andy Cominsky, have been “brainwashed.” I’ll say, that the discussion on the reasons for being homosexual being debated now, have only become a topic of public debate and concern in the last few decades. That, in my book, smacks of someone trying to make something factual that is not.

Here’s one of my observations of the scientific community in recent times: On one hand, they will regale you with tales of the long suffering individual, driven by a revelation, suffering public and peer disdain for years, and then, the “discovery” comes that completely vindicates them, and they are elevated from the ranks of the dregs of the community, and placed on high pedestals! They become revered and followed. Later, some small voice comes forward and says “I don’t think that’s it.” The scientists attack that impetuous one, who would challenged…but, the cycle repeats. At some point, the theory of the youngster is found to be more correct (those two words chosen superficially), the elder is de-throned, at the worst, or provided a place of honor for having provided some insight, at best, and the history of science continues.

On the other hand….the “scientists,” almost without taking a breath, will launch into a discussion of how. let’s say Darwin, is 100% correct and there is no need to revisit the “theory” of evolution any more, IT IS SETTLED!

I see the current discussion on the condition of being gay as the second case, even while there is much to be looked at with true scientific discipline, untainted by any groups desire to elevate themselves to a special status, above the “all men are created equal” measurement.

Toss the entire “Global Warming Climate Change” issue in with Darwin’s Theory of Evolution model of “it’s that way because a POLITICIAN told me” category. Side note: Yeah, I waited all those months just so I could evacuate before the many Cat 5 hurricanes headed to the “plywood state” and they never came….

Now, back to the topic: Bill Clinton went for it first with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as a political payback for a voting block that went his way in 1992. It was a realistic compromise to get elected, with nothing to do with National Defense. Since end of the draft in 1971, the military had been an all volunteer force. There were adequate numbers of people enlisting. The DADT had nothing to do with abandoning a previous organizational ban, so we could put more manpower into the fight. We weren’t in a fight, and the Clinton Administration was drawing down the military as fast as it could.

Using the totalitarian management structure of the military, Bill Clinton, as the Commander-in-Chief, had pretty much Carte Blanche to make it happen, including the power to place his leadership at the top of the military to make sure they went along. That is the prerogative of any president, and I’m not faulting him for using the system in place, but I would argue about his motivation to repay a political debt, not to strengthen the military.

Thus began the change, were, as an analog to the service of the minority units in WWII, and the later full integration into service life by President Truman, it became a lever to show the general populace a better way to handle our social interactions. In that case, once more, I’ll point out it was over a matter of a fact of true, scientifically understood heredity.

Now, along comes Hillary. If she is to attain the office of President, she will most likely declare openly gay people will be allowed to enter the service. Why? Once more, to illegitimately use the power of the Commander-in-Chief’s authority to return a political favor for getting the gay vote.

What does that say about her (and Bill’s) view of the Armed Services? Those organizations, setup in The Constitution, to “provide for the common defense” are nothing more that dating services. Join the service and get to shower with people, without having to ask their permission. In any other part of society, doing so would have one arrested for a sex crime. It’s all about consent.

The only reason it is important is to get to power by promising access to the homosexual community.

What about the years of training the military has gone through, trying to prevent “fraternization.” That became an issue with the massive infusion of women in the service, and the incredibly deep rooted human desire for sexual contact. Why didn’t the military want this, even among heterosexuals? It makes for difficult, and many times impossible, decision making moments, where the leadership needs to be scrupulously fair. Sometimes that “fairness” needs to be played out in terms of making sure who you send to a dangerous situation is being done for the right reasons, and not because you are in a relationship with someone in your unit.

Adding openly homosexual people to the already PCed military environment is just one more obstacle to good order and discipline, which is detracted from by raging hormones left unchecked.

Once more, the “here’s your orders, now get on with it” methodology has the near term possibility to just making it more palatable for the military to take on more of the social interaction phenomena, rather than being focused on combat readiness. Maybe they see it as an offshoot for the “busy gay ‘professional,’ who doesn’t have time to set up a full time relationship.” Yeah, that’s the ticket – Join the military and let everyone around you in the barracks know you’re “like that” and let the shy ones come to you.

One thing this plan doesn’t include, is respect for the people, who joined the military to serve the nation, and not as a dating service, who do not want those who are sexually attracted to them staring at them in the head facilities.

At least DADT offers the gay person the opportunity to serve and all they have to do is take their “relationships” off base. The same is actually expected off all the other service members already. The reason a DADT policy for heterosexuality isn’t necessary is because the vast majority of all humans aren’t homosexual and therefore it would be pretty ridiculous to tell them not to say what their sexual preferences are. They don’t do it now. It wasn’t part of their enlistment contract and it serves no organizational purpose.

The only purpose of the Armed services are to serve the people by defending them. If that’s what someone wants to do, then keep it zipped. It’s expected of everyone. The UCMJ has all the “rules” and it applies to all in uniform.

And, don’t forget that the Democrats all want to scream and yell about the “waste, fraud and abuse” of the DoD. How about we begin to add up all the costs for the course development, the manpower and facilities, the contractor fees, and the hows spent byt real troops sitting in classrooms getting lectured on being sensitive and not using certain words. Can someone explain how that helps the US military defend the nation better? I’d like to hold that “metric” up for the “you’re wasting our money crowd and see what they have to say.

Anyhow, a vote for Hillary is a vote to actually turn the US Armed Forces into a sexual experimentation labs of epic proportions and combat efficiency be damned. Not because a law says so, but because her character will allow her to do it, and the vote gives her the power. What sexual preference/proclivity/perversion will next gain the favor of Hillary and therefore be made “legal” in the military to gain some more votes?

I’d prefer the method they used when they started to vilify smokers in the late 80s: If any one person in a space objects to smoking, then no one can. How about we apply the same principle here for people who think they joined the military to fight for the country, and not to be ogled by gay people?