But before we get to these questions, each of those senior officers has had to go through a confirmation process similar to judges and cabinet members—committee hearings and votes, and approval by the full Senate. An important part of this process is a series of standard questions to each nominee at the beginning of the initial Committee hearing, the most significant of which is, “Do you agree to give your personal views when asked before this committee to do so, even if those views differ from the administration in power?” The answer is always “yes.”
Until now.
Over the last six months, I have noticed a subtle shift in the answers that SASC gets on subjects where there may be a split between our witnesses’ personal and professional opinions and those of the Trump Administration. It’s not so much a specific answer here or there but more of a noticeable reluctance to tread into certain areas and give forthright answers that might contradict the Administration line. Recently, I get the feeling that our military witnesses are almost literally looking over their shoulders before giving their carefully parsed answers.
But beyond this, I believe what we’re seeing points to a deeper, and much more dangerous, development—the deliberate attempt to convert our professional and stoutly apolitical military into an armed force with greater loyalty to the President than to the Constitution.
Since the Vietnam War, we have had a standing (all volunteer) army, but its inherent dangers have been minimized by a strong tradition of a non-political military led by officers who understand that their oath is to the Constitution—not to a party, not to a President, and not to a particular Secretary of Defense (there is no such thing as a Secretary of War).
Throughout our history, America has been protected from the grave danger of the militarization of our politics by the Constitution itself, by laws prohibiting the military’s involvement in domestic affairs (even one specifically outlawing the military at polling places), and by the apolitical tradition of the officer corps.
It’s now time for those of us with the responsibility “to raise and support armies” (I’m looking at you, U.S. Senate colleagues) to acknowledge what is happening and, along with our officers who are loyal to the Constitution, take steps to stop it.
Hence then, the article about the danger of a political pentagon was published today ( ) and is available on Time ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( The Danger of a Political Pentagon )
Also on site :