Previous Story Next Story View Comments Post a Comment Send This Page Date Archives Category Archives

Diversity in the Army

More news stories on Racial Conflict

Duncan Hengest, American Renaissance, January 2008

In the first months of 1991, the United States military annihilated the Iraqi army. After several weeks of air raids and only three days of ground combat, American forces had little more to do but pack up and prepare for a victory parade. More than any other branch of the service, the Army had made the hard climb from its Vietnam abyss to the triumphant force of Desert Storm.

In the Vietnam era, the Army suffered from three major flaws: poorly trained non-commissioned officers, drugs, and racial tension. The victory in the Gulf suggested to the American public that these flaws were fixed and, indeed, two were. The post-Vietnam army started an intense training program for sergeants, and the schooling gets tougher as they move up the ladder. The military also invested heavily in drug screening, and entire units, including senior officers, were put through random drug tests. Specialists were hired to deal with addiction. The last problem, racial tension, however, has been only partly solved.

As 1960s-style integration is increasingly shown to be a myth, the military remains the last bastion of racial mixing, but a thin veneer masks serious trouble. Politicians and pundits brave the wrath of the thought police to keep women out of combat and young troopers away from practicing homosexuals, but no one talks about the problems of race. Despite Hollywood clichés like Glory, blacks have often been at best a mixed benefit and at worst a burden to the service. Racial conflict is out of the limelight, and the US Army is an effective fighting force, but trouble can erupt any time.

Non-whites in the armed forces cause three problems. The first is unit and soldier indiscipline. In the past, entire black regiments have behaved badly, and individual blacks often follow the same pattern. Second, blacks and whites sometimes think and behave differently. Bridging the gap is costly and never entirely successful, and racial divisions sap unit morale. Third, there is the added trouble of other non-white troops. An increasing number of racial and religious minorities can give rise to unique kinds of trouble.

The military was officially desegregated by President Truman in 1948, but segregated regiments weren’t broken up in earnest until the first year of the Korean War. The catalyst for this was the poor combat record of black units. Most of the men with World War II experience had left, and the army conscripts were often from the bottom of society. Discipline was poor. Task Force Smith, the first ground combat units to face the North Koreans, was wiped out as an effective fighting force. The white regiments were bad but the black ones were worse. One cannot read about the Korean War without running into tales of black units that were unable to hold together under fire.

The all-black 24th Infantry was notorious for hasty retreats. This unit performed so badly that according to Max Hastings in The Korean War, General Walton H. Walker, commander of ground forces in Korea, “recognized that it was possible to use the 24th only as an outpost force, a trip wire in the face of Communist assaults. It proved necessary to maintain another regiment in reserve behind the front, to conduct serious resistance when the 24th broke.” (p. 81.) Another all-black unit, the 3rd Battalion of the 9th Infantry, performed disgracefully at the battle of Bloody Ridge in August 1951. In fact, “the 3/9 had done nothing. It had failed miserably in the only real attack it had attempted, and its C.O. … had been on the bottle.” (T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War, p. 359.)

After the disaster of Bloody Ridge, the Army desegregated its units so that blacks would make up roughly 10 percent of each company, and black soldiers were spread out one or two per squad. This meant no single regiment could be expected to do poorly in combat, but “the social problems, of course, were not solved.” (T. R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War, p. 359.)

The Vietnam War was the low point for military race relations, and by 1971 there was conflict wherever soldiers were stationed. Robert Heinl, Jr. described the crisis in an article called “Collapse of the Armed Forces” in the June 7, 1971 issue of Armed Forces Journal:

“Racial conflicts (most but not all sparked by young black enlisted men) are erupting murderously in all services. At a recent high commanders’ conference, General Westmoreland and other senior generals heard the report from Germany that in many units white soldiers are now afraid to enter barracks alone at night for fear of ‘head-hunting’ ambushes by blacks. In the quoted words of one soldier on duty in West Germany, ‘I’m much more afraid of getting mugged on the post than I am of getting attacked by the Russians.’

“Other reports tell of jail-delivery attacks on Army stockades and military police to release black prisoners, and of officers being struck in public by black soldiers. Augsburg, Krailsheim, and Hohenfels are said to be rife with racial trouble. Hohenfels was the scene of a racial fragging last year—one of the few so far recorded outside Vietnam. In Ulm, last fall, a white noncommissioned officer killed a black soldier who was holding a loaded .45 on two unarmed white officers.

“Elsewhere, according to Fortune magazine, junior officers are now being attacked at night when inspecting barracks containing numbers of black soldiers. Kelley Hill, a Ft. Benning, Ga., barracks area, has been the scene of repeated nighttime assaults on white soldiers. One such soldier bitterly remarked, ‘Kelley Hill may belong to the commander in the daytime but it belongs to the blacks after dark.’

“Even the cloistered quarters of WACs have been hit by racial hair-pulling. In one West Coast WAC detachment this year, black women on duty as charge-o-quarters took advantage of their trust to vandalize unlocked rooms occupied by white WACS. On this rampage, they destroyed clothing, emptied drawers, and overturned furniture of their white sisters …

“As early as July 1969 the Marines (who had previously enjoyed a highly praised record on race) made headlines at Camp Lejeune, N.C., when a mass affray launched by 30-50 black Marines ended fatally with a white corporal’s skull smashed in and 145 other white Marines in the sick bay. That same year, at Newport, R.I., naval station, blacks killed a white petty officer, while in March 1971 the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., outside Washington, was beset by racial fighting so severe that the base enlisted men’s club had to be closed.”

Today, tensions are not nearly so bad. An all-volunteer army with standards that weed out the worst offenders is no longer the battleground it once was, but by the late 1990s black and Hispanic gangs were a serious problem. In Killeen, Texas, (outside Fort Hood) military gang members were a danger to civilians. The Army made a thorough effort to stamp out gangs, but the Department of Justice’s National Gang Intelligence Center released a 2007 report covering nearly all the notorious non-white street gangs:

“[They] have been documented on military installations both domestically and internationally. These members are present in most branches and across all ranks of the military, but are most common among the junior enlisted ranks. The US Army, Army Reserves, and National Guard are likely to have the most enlisted gang members because they are either the largest branches of the military, the service is part-time, or they tend not to be as selective as the other branches of the armed services.”

The report noted that white extremists in the military did kill a black couple in 1996, but after an extensive investigation, the authorities concluded that “there was no widespread or organized extremist activity in the Army,” and that “gang-related activities appear to be more pervasive than extremist activity on and near Army installations and are becoming a significant security concern for many soldiers.”

Probably the greatest problem with blacks in the Army today is lack of ability, despite armed services qualification tests that wash out a considerably greater proportion of black applicants than white. Before my combat tour I found that blacks only slowly grasped the complex skills necessary for modern warfare. Once, as a passenger on a military bus, I overheard a group of blacks talking about something they all had in common: re-training. If a recruit fails a task, such as assembling a machine gun or operating a radio, he is culled from his squad for re-training. I never heard a knot of white soldiers discussing their common experience of re-training.

Blacks also fail the Army’s quite challenging field artillery training course at an appalling rate. Statistics aren’t public, but when I was learning the dark voodoo of artillery gunnery at Fort Sill’s Officer Basic Course I was surprised that all of the blacks in my platoon who started with me flunked out or “recycled.” Likewise, all who graduated with me were “recycles” from earlier courses. These men were not raw 18-year-olds; to get in you had to be a college graduate and get through pre-commissioning training.

This lack of ability makes for problems. One black lieutenant who worked for me in the US needed special training to keep a monthly budget. Although he was a college graduate, he could not figure out how to pay his bills. He made enough money, but he couldn’t manage his finances. Soon, creditors were calling the unit, and the situation was an embarrassment for the chain of command.

When I was stationed in Korea, a black major I worked for lead his troops from his barracks room. He would give a few directions by cell phone, and spend the rest of his time watching movies. This lack of face-to-face leadership led to disaster. In the office his outfit used, the ceiling tiles were rotting or missing, with exposed wires hanging down; the desks were covered with dust and garbage. This shabby ethos spread out to the men. The captains were demoralized, new lieutenants untrained. The sergeants worked uphill to maintain standards. Because there was no plan for combat training, the troops were available to be sucked into meaningless work details, such as grass trimming at the base post office.

When I first arrived in Iraq, my night-shift counterpart was a black man with more than 20 years of experience. He had been diagnosed with serious sleep apnea and needed a special breathing machine to help him sleep. A man with this condition should not be in a war zone, but large black men are physically imposing, and often get their way. At his pre-deployment medical screening, he was naturally marked as not-deployable. He took exception to this and nearly came to blows with the doctor. The doctor cleared him.

During the night shift, he collected routine reports and did typical staff work. In the morning I based my work on what he had done, but I wasn’t getting the information or cooperation I needed. I began getting criticism for my section’s work, and soon every shift-change briefing became a heated argument.

One day this man took offense when I pointed out that every time an artillery shell is fired, it uses up a corresponding powder charge, and that we needed to order both replacement items together. His reply to this centuries-old observation was to insult me and remind me that I wasn’t as “experienced” as he. Matters just got worse. Finally I cornered him on an easy thing he missed, and furiously asked him if he actually understood what he was doing. Unable to look me in the eye, he stormed out of the tent.

He got a medical evacuation from Iraq that very day because his breathing machine for sleep apnea suddenly “broke.” An enlisted man later told me he had innocently lent the officer a screwdriver that day. In any case, my section was never accused of sloppy work again.

That experience with the black officer was my racial awakening. He was the first of a host of blacks I saw in Iraq who suddenly discovered they had angina, breathing problems, or other hard-to-see “ailments.” I’m not a doctor, so I don’t know if their complaints were valid, but I always had a gut feeling they were a trick to go home early. Once they are in a war, few people want to stick around, and even fewer want to come back, but in general, the whites I knew left the service only after they had honorably finished their combat tours.

In Iraq, I was repeatedly stunned by the inability of many senior black officers to think through problems. In one case, I asked for increased close air support for an area commonly used by insurgents to fire mortars at American bases. A black officer refused air support, suggesting that we “put snipers in trees” to deal with the mortars. Iraq is a barren desert. The trees are mostly irrigated date palms and cannot support a sniper. That black officer worked hard and was certainly brave, but I am still amazed he came up with that foolishness about snipers. Bad staff work is a tremendous opportunity cost. It took me hours to get fighter-bomber coverage. This was valuable time wasted, and lives were needlessly endangered.

Likewise in Iraq, I had to cool tensions between a white Air National Guard lieutenant colonel and a black warrant officer. The white colonel was a Vietnam vet who had bitter memories of black behavior when he as a young draftee. The warrant officer was essentially worthless. I finally solved the problem simply by keeping the two men apart. I gave the black man no work, and he spent his waking hours playing video games.

Once I saw a black major so befuddled by the unit’s vehicle bumper number standard that a five minute maintenance meeting turned into an afternoon marathon. What was the problem? Every combat vehicle in a unit gets a number. It is painted on the front and rear bumpers, and conforms to a standard that places the vehicle in its exact squad. For example, 1-300 IN K-6 would be the Kilo Company, First Battalion, 300th Infantry Commander’s Vehicle. Different units have slightly different numbering standards, but they are not hard to figure out—except for this black major, who was stumped.

He was the operations officer, and his failure to grasp the obvious spread out to more important areas. Soon, battalion-level staff functions slowed to a crawl or just stopped. Routine procedures such as coordinating with Range Control when firing artillery became difficult operations. Eventually nothing worked right. When the head of a 500-man outfit does not have the brains to make common tasks routine or enough respect to make orders stick, things go wrong. The men become grouchy and troublesome. During several training exercises, 155mm artillery shells hit dangerously close to forward observers. Junior officers nicknamed the major “Abortion.” He was quietly replaced, but in a way that let him keep moving up.

Not all blacks and other non-whites were disruptive. Many were fantastic soldiers. But I did discover that nearly every major problem, accident, or scandal I saw in the service had a black or Hispanic at the bottom of it.

Black officers are often unsatisfactory but at least they do not usually commit the kinds of crimes common among young black enlisted men. As a peacetime platoon leader, I was always being roped into rape investigations. Invariably the suspects were black. Whites would get drunk and rowdy, but I never knew one to be a rapist. Thanks to these investigations, I learned a new expression: “running a train.” This means gang rape, and comes from men standing in line waiting their turn. It is strictly black slang.

One black soldier in my platoon was a good soldier and a hard worker, but he had heavy baggage. He was picked up by the military police for drunk driving, and once he had to have all his combat gear reissued. He said it was stolen, but I suspect he pawned it. Still, he did his job well, and I worked hard to help him when he was indicted for rape in a civilian court. We even sent him home from a deployment a week ahead of his comrades so he could attend court hearings.

On the day of his trial, his platoon sergeant and section chief arrived in court, resplendent in their uniforms, to show support for their man. The judge informed the chain of command that the suspect had not met any of his preliminary court dates, and that he was going to be locked up. We never learned where he had gone when we sent him home, but he didn’t go to court. His commander had to start writing up the paperwork to kick him out of the Army.

Sometimes black officers and leaders do fall into the error of their younger brothers. The Army covered up a serious gang rape scandal when a group of black officers in the 10th Mountain Division videotaped themselves ravishing some female soldiers. The officers were alumni of a black fraternity, and they brought their victims along as part of the entertainment for the fraternity’s reunion party. This was on the heels of the Navy’s Tail Hook scandal in 1991, so the bad press and the racial angle made for a quick high-brass silencing. The black officers were relieved of duty, but the cover up was so effective that I cannot find any trace of this incident on the Internet. I learned the facts from two different veterans of the unit who did not know each other, and who were an ocean apart when they told me their tales.

The 1997 sex/rape scandal at Aberdeen Proving Grounds was widely reported, however, and involved black drill sergeants shaking down female recruits for sex. The same year, the Sergeant Major of the Army, the highest-ranking enlisted man, was court marshaled when six women accused him of pressuring them for sex. Gene McKinney, the first black to serve in that position, was acquitted of sexual harassment but convicted of obstruction of justice.

The military has the same racial crime-rate discrepancies as civilian life. However, the Army has a job to do, and dealing with crime chews up resources. An enormous amount of effort went into the McKinney trial. Is there an important innovation that was not thought up as a result?

In a free society one would expect “whistleblowers,” but they are rare because of the equal opportunity bureaucracy. The consequences of failing an EO rating are worse than failing the annual marksmanship test. Every evaluation for leaders has a section on support for equal opportunity. A “No” ends a career.

Blacks know this, and some are tempted to make false charges of “racism.” One quartermaster captain told me he narrowly avoided a serious drubbing after a black first sergeant accused him of calling her and her troops “monkeys.” Her outfit ran a warehouse in Iraq, which he was responsible for inspecting. He said the warehouse was a “disaster,” and he thinks the “monkeys” accusation was meant to be a cover up. The accusation didn’t go very far, but only because there was a black soldier with the captain who saw it all, and testified that the accusation was false. After that, the captain dealt with the warehouse supervisors through a black subordinate. As he explained to me, he “didn’t need any more headaches.”

Race causes other wastes. Colin Powell writes in his memoirs about a division commander who ordered every dogface to watch the movie Brian’s Song. It is about an intense friendship between two football players—one white, the other black—and the commander thought the movie would ease racial tension. The division even sent MPs to round up idle men and bring them to theaters. What counter-insurgency book wasn’t written because of Brian’s Song duty?

There is a different problem with our increasingly “diverse” army. Many non-whites simply don’t put forth much effort, and in extreme cases they can be more hostile to whites than to the enemy. A Korean West Point graduate pulled strings to leave his Iraq-bound unit for garrison duty near Seoul, where he became a multicultural “director of community outreach.” We were in a war, but he used up taxpayer dollars to take an unnecessary diversity job in Korea.

There are far worse problems than sloughing off. A serious fragging nearly decapitated a brigade of the 101st Airborne at the start of the Iraq War. An American-born black convert to Islam, Hasan Karim Akbar, killed two officers and wounded the brigade commander. In another fragging incident, Staff Sergeant Alberto B. Martinez, posted to Tikrit, Iraq, allegedly rolled a hand grenade into a room and killed two officers. His trial is hung up in legal motions.

Non-whites have caused other trouble. There have been serious fears of spying among the Muslim troops at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. All charges were later dropped against West Point graduate and Muslim chaplain, Captain James Yee, but he raised enough suspicion to be arrested. Several Arabs were arrested along with Captain Yee. They weren’t convicted of spying but received convictions for lesser, but serious infractions.

Espionage cases are hard to prove. Accomplices can vanish back to their native lands, witnesses can be assassinated, and fingerprints, DNA, and other physical evidence can be more easily explained. Sometimes counterintelligence discovers evidence inadmissible in court. Often spies can be convicted only if they are caught in a sting where the evidence is overwhelming and can be used in court.

America now fights its wars in the Third World, and our policy of putting Third World people in the military is dangerous. It is only a matter of time before a Somali, Kurdish, Laotian, or Hmong “refugee” has the authority to call in air-strikes or command riflemen. Like the Romans who were destroyed by their Germanic mercenaries, Americans could find that their army is a foreign viper.

Diversity has been turned against us in the past. During the Philippine Insurrection early in the 20th century, the troublesome, all-black 24th Infantry produced a renegade named David Fagen. He deserted from the American side and accepted a Philippine Army commission as a captain. The Filipino insurgents had offered such a deal to any black deserter. Captain Fagen was not the only black turncoat, but their numbers were small, since Filipinos and blacks are a world apart. If the fighting had been in Africa things might have been different. Still, the Fagen incident caused a decline in trust between the races, and even a certain hysteria. After American setbacks, one journalist concluded that Filipino successes were the result of, “the scheming of American deserters, who were so familiar with army routines.”

Successful military operations must be glued together with trust, and diversity destroys trust. In diverse groups, the tendency is to hunker down, avoid making friends, and just try to survive. Instead of quickly starting from a common point, American soldiers must spend time developing trust. Some black senior officers cannot quite believe that white subordinates aren’t ready to blast them; the ghosts of Reconstruction and Jim Crow rise easily at a forward operating base filled with muscular, blue-eyed white men with assault rifles.

Likewise, white soldiers may not trust black officers, since they are often baffled by simple problems and quick to be swept up in vice. Too often, black leaders and enlisted men can appear to be nothing more than the gangster types who were despised back in a white’s home town.

Instead of working through problems, developing innovative tactics, or focusing on training, soldiers must spend time smoothing wrinkles and dealing with tensions that otherwise would not exist. The alienation, post-traumatic stress disorder, drug-taking, and other pathologies commonly found in veterans since Vietnam are probably related, at least in part, to this lack of trust.

The unwillingness to recognize desegregation’s failures may even influence strategy at the highest level. In its August 8, 2003 issue, the British newspaper, the Telegraph, quoted from a speech by Condoleezza Rice:

“‘Like many of you, I grew up around the home-grown terrorism of the 1960s. I remember the bombing of the church in Birmingham in 1963, because one of the little girls that died was a friend of mine,’ she said.

“Black Americans should stand by others seeking freedom today, she went on, and shun the ‘condescending’ argument that some races or nations were not interested in or ready for Western freedoms.

“‘We’ve heard that argument before. And we, more than any, as a people, should be ready to reject it,’ she said. ‘That view was wrong in 1963 in Birmingham and it is wrong in 2003 in Baghdad and in the rest of the Middle East.’”

In fact, Iraq has no history of democracy nor any real prospects for it, and more than 50 years after Birmingham, American jails are filled with blacks. Delusions always come back to haunt the deluded.

America’s position at the top is lonely and precarious. Any military slipup can embolden our enemies. Pol Pot was certainly aided by America’s withdrawal from Vietnam, and Osama bin Laden was inspired to strike after our failure in Somalia. Any lack of trust within our fighting formations, any lost opportunity, any crime, any bad judgment makes the worst more likely.

But the most important danger is domestic. It is simply a matter of time before whites vote clearly for their own interests. At that point, an alien army could spark a serious domestic and Constitutional crisis. To avoid such a calamity, Uncle Sam needs an army loyal to Americans and sympathetic to their institutions.

Duncan Hengest served as a company-grade field artillery officer in the United States, Korea, and Iraq. He was on active duty for seven years.

Original article

(Posted on August 8, 2008)

Field artillery in Iraq.

Previous story Next Story Post a Comment Send This Page Search

Comments

The left wing radicals and their media outlets such as Katie Couric would like nothing better than to entirely emasculate
the armed forces along with taking away guns from civilians.
Through “diversity” the Democrats wish to dissolve all unity to armed forces possess and replace it with a group of squabbling
minorities unable to act as a cohesive body.

Posted by Tim at 6:30 PM on August 8

In my Navy days, one of my Squadrons was a “F-14, Tom-Cat” fighter base, every Thursday we would have training on the airplane, very easy stuff, just pay attention and take a simple test about the stuff your were just told and if you failed you had to go in Saturday for a “Make-up” refresher, anyway seems the only ones that had to go back on Saturdays were the blacks, they called that “racist” and did away with the training.

Posted by Bandmo at 7:38 PM on August 8

The Military is but a microcosm of our society as a whole. What Hengest said is true. But the real question is… so? What to do? Kick every African - American out of the military? No! The answer is to hold every soldier to the same standard with no exceptions! But can that be done? We shall see.

Virtually every aspect of today’s military requires a certain level of mental ability. Soldiers are suppose to be screened.

The nature of the African - American is to get over on Whitey! Often, the African - American soldier will short circuit the system and then their reviewers who write their Officer Evaluation Reports OER’S (or NCO reports) are very reluctant to rate them accurately (since the reviewer himself or herself is also reviewed)- and to get the reputation in today’s Army or Marine Corp as being a racist is the kiss of death.

Consequently, the politically correct lie, diversity, the new progressive Army, the new Corp, has become ingrained dogma. But dogma is not reality. Even in so called elite units: Rangers, S.F., Recon, the members tend to bond — but different races do not bond as tightly.

A little known truth about Viet Nam was that there were places in Saigon where ONLY African - Americans would go. For a white person to go to a club in the black areas would invite bodily harm or death.

If one would assume that there is no difference between blacks and whites then one would expect that an all black unit would perform as well as an all white unit. Hmmm. This would be a good reason for promoting diversity in schools and neighborhoods too wouldn’t it? Since apart, both races perform equally well.

Then the question that becomes is just how many blacks would be necessary to be in a formally all white unit for the unit’s performance to begin to degrade. Of course, if the unit’s mission was to play basketball their performance would be expected to improve!

An argument can be made that one reason that elite units are elite is because they tend to be predominately white. Special Forces, particularly units “behind the fence” at Bragg require a high degree of intelligence, as well as a high level of fitness and mental toughness.

It has of course been years since I was in the military and although I did somehow make it though various elite courses culminating with the Navy’s SEAL course I don’t remember ever seeing an African - American seal. There might have been one but most blacks don’t swim very well. Of course, in the movies all of the great seals are black! I do remember seeing quite a few black RANGER’S and RECON guys however!

In short, the reason that today’s military is basically all show without punch is because the people who preach diversity dictate the military’s policy. Does anyone think that today’s Army would be of the same caliber that hit Utah, or today’s Marines are cut from the same cloth as the first wave on Ivo? Maybe. I’m sure the service guys would all indignantly say they were. Hmmm. The corollary, is of course this: would our country which is now the product of political correctness, be able to stomach any war in which sixteen thousand would be killed or wounded in a couple of days? Hardly!

The military is becoming increasingly technological! Twenty years from now one will have to be bright just to be a soldier and guess where all the technology is going….. psst can anyone spell C H I N A?

MoMo

Posted by MoMo at 7:45 PM on August 8

A guy I worked with told me this story from the 60’s. He was an MP and was called out to break up a race riot. A white guy got beat up at the NCO club and his buddies back at the barracks decided to get revenge. A bunch of them, maybe even 20 or 30, were outside the club, some carrying chains, and the whites and blacks confronted each other. The MP’s chased off the white guys arresting a few. My co-worker himself wrestled one of them down.

When I was in the Army, I had a 1st SGT mention that, “young people today have a different morality”. By that he meant a better morality. I certainly couldn’t have imagined whites ‘retaliating’ like that when I was in the service, though I did here stories of race riots in the barracks, earlier during the 1970’s, from sergeants who said, “things (race relations) must be a lot better today.”

Still, as someone who had been an enlisted man, I must say that when ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’, gays in the military, came about, I thought there was a good chance there was going to be a civil war/revolution of some kind. I’m just glad I wasn’t in the service then. The racial situation was bad enough when I was in there.

Posted by Scared at 8:30 PM on August 8

The rape rate in the military is 40%. Forty percent of women in the military get raped. This is not surprising to me. Aside from the agreesiveness of the minority members in the military and the naivity of white women who join to fulfill their macho fantasies about themselves, females and males should always have been contained in SEPERATE services. Anyone could have predicted the prostittution and rape in the forces once they became coed and I for one did.

Posted by Whiteplight at 8:33 PM on August 8

I served in two different branches of the service, Army enlisted, then Air Force officer. This article is spot-on and mirrors my experience and observations.

Posted by Cliff Yablonski at 8:34 PM on August 8

“The military was officially desegregated by President Truman in 1948, but segregated regiments weren’t broken up in earnest until the first year of the Korean War. The catalyst for this was the poor combat record of black units…One cannot read about the Korean War without running into tales of black units that were unable to hold together under fire.”

And of course,

“But the most important danger is domestic. It is simply a matter of time before whites vote clearly for their own interests. At that point, an alien army could spark a serious domestic and Constitutional crisis. To avoid such a calamity, Uncle Sam needs an army loyal to Americans and sympathetic to their institutions.”

I have long held, that should a pro-white president ever get elected again in this country, one of his very first acts in reestablishing demographic stability in the United States, would be to order that the armed services become a whites only entity. The president would be in a unique position to do this, since Truman’s treasonous desegregation of the military in 1948 would probably be a precedent upon which a determined commander-in-chief could act legally. Of course, such an act would be fought in the courts and “civil rights” laws would be cited against the action, but could these be held up seriously against a president’s Constitutional powers with regard to the military, particularly with such an obviously defining executive precedent, begun by Truman in 1948?

There is a tough call, but if a president were wise enough to put into place a Joint-Chiefs-of-Staff and JCS Chairman committed to such a “provocative” reorganization process before hand, it might have a greater chance of success. After all, could not the process become a defacto reality with bayonets firmly fixed, regardless of the courts’ demands once begun; moreover, might not the courts become a bit more reasonable in the face of such a determined defacto reality?

From there, one enters a highly speculative gray area, since the president would be taking extraordinary steps and risks, while the fools in the US Congress would be getting a bit “hot and bothered” to say the least. Their powers would begin to be in question, with a military poised to back a president with pro-white intentions; moreover again, should there be a critically important move to deprogram all incoming and existing white military military personnel from the “multicultural ideal”…?

There is something to think about, with many scenarios possible!

As always, God help us all or maybe let it be so!?!?!?!?…

Posted by John PM at 9:46 PM on August 8

I was in the Navy in the early 70’s. Racial tension often erupted into small and not-so-small scale riots. The destroyer on which I served had a fair number of blacks and chicanos. A small core group of them were sharp and hard-working guys who were genuinely friendly. The majority who worked in low level jobs (painting, mopping, etc.) were lazy and ignorant as were some whites in those divisions. But what set the minorities apart was their ability to play the race card which meant the “honkies” had to take up their slack. The sinks in the heads were always full of hair from their afros which they would “pick out” every time they used the facilities.I recall one young black sailor who urinated in his rack every night for a few weeks in order to get out on a medical discharge. It worked!!

Posted by Queequeg at 10:22 PM on August 8

“The rape rate in the military is 40%. Forty percent of women in the military get raped. This is not surprising to me. Aside from the agreesiveness of the minority members in the military and the naivity of white women who join to fulfill their macho fantasies about themselves, females and males should always have been contained in SEPERATE services”

I agree and disagree. Women don’t join the military to fulfill a macho fantasy but instead for the educational benefits(GI BIll),to learn work skills or to see the world. Many are from rural or working class families and this to them is an opportunity they may not have in their small town. However, I do agree with seperate units for men/women. This is necessary for young women’s own protection, sad to say but true.

Posted by at 10:28 PM on August 8

Just the other morning, c-span Washington Journal did an interview with a very high ranking black (mulatto) officer.

He praised how well ‘diversity’ and integration was going in the armed forces and said it was a model of success for America at large.

He described how every commanding officer was required to submit reports every six months or so (more time consuming and useless buracuracy) on how they were meeting ‘diversity’ benchmarks in their units.

I couldn’t think of a more absurd definition of successful integration model for the US; holding a gun to peoples heads and threatening their careers and livelihoods.

Posted by sbuffalonative at 10:50 PM on August 8

Informative. How can it be that there are only six Google results for “Duncan Hengest” (2 from AR, one a duplicate on Stormfront, and a couple that appear to be in a Slavic language)? Especially when he is telling an unknown but explosive story about a post-Tailhook rape (?) scandal. As talented Internet writers go, this guy is more obscure than Michael O’Meara.

Posted by Sudbury at 10:59 PM on August 8

“As 1960s-style integration is increasingly shown to be a myth, the military remains the last bastion of racial mixing, but a thin veneer masks serious trouble. Politicians and pundits brave the wrath of the thought police to keep women out of combat and young troopers away from practicing homosexuals, but no one talks about the problems of race. Despite Hollywood clichés like Glory, blacks have often been at best a mixed benefit and at worst a burden to the service. Racial conflict is out of the limelight, and the US Army is an effective fighting force, but trouble can erupt any time.”

Yes, “trouble can erupt anytime.” And the “trouble” that is always there, teetering constantly on the edge, is the result of social engineering, expanded to include the military, which involves a breakdown in trust, unity and efficiency within the ranks of every unit.

There were so many truths revealed by this writer it was hard to select one to respond to. Everything he said was right on.

The US military is the dominant military force in the world today, and has been such for quite some time now, but that’s beginning to slowly change. The world is catching up, and Russia with its growing wealth in the exportation of oil, is giving strong indications of once again challenging US military superpower status, as well.

With technical superiority and, especially air superiority in every conflict to date, the US military has been like a football team consisting of an offensive and defensive line, averaging about 800 pounds each, with an outstanding quarterback and receivers, against an opposition that can boast no more than an average two hundred pounds per lineman, without a quarterback at all.

With a team like that, the US is able to cover up much incompetence within its ranks and even the lackluster elements and lack of trust and unity aren’t really noticed, except by those who are part of the team or very aware and knowledgeable observers who know the military well.

There’s no room for incompetence or any kind of self-imposed weaknesses in a fighting force, but unfortunately, social engineers have such a tight stranglehold on every aspect of the military now change is impossible. Diversity has become our national religion, and it is fought for almost as vehemently as the most radical jihadists fight for their perverted version of Islam.

Since all warnings and advice against a diversity army are constantly ignored, it’s just a matter of time before the US experiences a military disaster that will shake the country to its very foundation. Mark….my….words.

Posted by Ranger at 11:00 PM on August 8

“Many non-whites simply don’t put forth much effort, and in extreme cases they can be more hostile to whites than to the enemy”

YUP… That’s why I got out of the service after six years. Non-whites weren’t ALL that way, but too many were. It didn’t seem to happen that much with hispanics, Filipinos, or other Asians. It was, by and large, blacks.

After awhile, along with all the other dumb things inherent in military service, I just got tired of defending America against all enemies when the only real enemies I could see were ones that were supposed to be on my side.

When Bush decided to start a frivilous war in Iraq, that was my major objection. Anything military is full of ironic stupidity and obscene wastefulness, and in war the stupidity and wastefulness increase exponentially. You just don’t DO it unless you have to, and we didn’t have to.

Posted by generalquagmyer at 11:01 PM on August 8

“The rape rate in the military is 40%. Forty percent of women in the military get raped”
Posted by Whiteplight at 8:33 PM on August 8

That would certainly explain why a former co-worker of mine, a butch lesbian and proud Navy sailor, has a mulatto son. I must admit that her son baffled me, but this is a very likely explaination.

Posted by Anglokraut at 11:48 PM on August 8

My time in the military was one of the most significant experiences in making me racially aware. It was there, that I saw diversity up close for the first time in my life. Despite conventional thinking, diversity does not create tolerance, it causes intolerance. I would never have became racially aware if not for my time in the military. Overall though, the military was a great experience.

Posted by Joe at 12:53 AM on August 9

Facinating!

And at this same time the British Army is about to expand the recruitment of “British” blacks & asians and even going to the Caribean to take on troops from Jamaica etc.

We all know where this will end - even in an ordinary office environmenmt blacks and asians are more trouble than they are worth. In combat they are dangerous.

In my time in the reserve forces I met up with a few blacks. Whilst they exhibited non of the violent behavior of american blacks they were a complete waste of space. They were lazy, stupid and always complaining about being cold.

It is quite bemusing to find that despite all the evidence our politicians still plug away at the diversity agenda - to the obvious detriment of us all.

Posted by Geoff M at 2:08 AM on August 9

I did two tours in Vietnam, one with a rifle company and the second with the 5th Special Forces, and can attest first-hand to the problems inherent with blacks in the military. While they were perhaps 10-15% of troop strength in that era (much less in SF units), they were responsible for the overwhelming majority of disciplinary problems of all types. Obviously, this should surprise no one, since blacks are similarly represented within the criminal element throughout our society and pretty much anywhere they’re found in the world.

Interestingly, in the all-volunteer military we currently have blacks have reverted to their former pre-Korea status as mainly support troops. Combat arms (infantry, armor, and artillery) are now overwhelmingly white or Hispanic and their performance has improved accordingly.

Should blacks ever again comprise a significant portion of combat arms units we can expect their performance to suffer accordingly. However, given that assignment to combat arms is voluntary it is unlikely that blacks will ever be equally represented in these units.

Posted by john at 7:56 AM on August 9

“The last problem, racial tension, however, has been only partly solved.”

This excellent essay should add to the above statement that the racial problem is one that will never be solved, because blacks regard their race above all other things and will never change, making true integration completely impossible, not only in the military but every place else as well.

Blacks, more than any other race, have tribalism stamped indelibly in their genes, just as they have lack of foresight, impulse control, propensity for crime and violence, and low intelligence, imprinted within their make-up also.

Posted by q at 8:21 AM on August 9

Fort Stewart 1980’s, my true experiences. Blacks with shaving profiles, White Sgts ordering only whites to do jobs because they didn’t want an EO complaint on their records. Black NCO’s exerting their authority on whites while letting other blacks off the hook. It was blatantly obvious. Black officers demanding respect and not earning it. Black First Sgts promoting blacks as soon as time in grade was acheived, bypassing overdue whites. One time I had a slug fest with a black soldier whose lack of comprehension casused the fight. Black 1st Sgt spent 3 hours on a race relations meeting for the whole company on a Sat! Our free time spent talking about a problem that could never be solved.
As a young adult I saw Blacks as equals, my life experiences with them has taught me otherwise. We are not all created equal, physically nor mentally. I wish it weren’t so.

Posted by Jer at 8:36 AM on August 9

This is an issue that seems to escape most white nationalists. Instead of understanding that we are at war with minorities and wars are won as a series of individual battles…..often COVERT ones, they seem to think all whites are asleep, awaiting for things to get bad enough before they rise up. One need only to look at russia to see what happens if you keep waiting for things to “get bad enough”.

We won’t have an openly pro-white President. At least not for quite some time. Instead, almost exclusively though the republican party, the stage is being set to support such a retaking of our country from the liberals.

That’s why this election is so key and why McCain MUST win over Obama. Will McCain work towards white interests? Probably not. At least not openly. But the thing to understand is how the republican agenda supports such a thing for the future. And what McCain WILL do is change the makeup of the court system to those who will obey the rule of law rather than partisan politics.

One day, there WILL be a pro-white administration. And it will be challenged in court. And when that day comes, the liberals and minorities will find that they’ve already lost because the battlefield was developed years, even decades ago. In other words, the courts will be deaf to their demands.

It’s already happening.

Posted by at 8:46 AM on August 9

Interesting article, and I agree for the most part. As far as I’m concerned, I can see no benefit to having blacks or other minorities in the armed forces. Having said that, I must also say this. For the most part, the responces on this subject I think are missing a very important point.

That point is that technology is/will remove many minorites from the service in a very short time I think. I think such things as grunts are going to be phased out in a decade or so. Yes, they’ll be special forces, but your grunt units will be very much reduced and then finally done away with.

The technology is moving too fast now. It seems like nothing can stop it. Technology seems to have a life of its own now. All you have to do is look at youtube at the drones they’ve got. That’s the future.

We’re already in Reagan’s “Star Wars” as far as technology goes. I’m very sure that nobody in the world could stay on a battlefield with us today, and that includes the Chinese. The Chinese, Russians, or anybody else would be demolished by our forces almost immediately. That’s why I laugh when these experts talk about how good the Iranians are. We’d wipe the floor with the Iranians in very short order. But we can’t say that out loud or somebody might ask, then why do we need all this military spending, and the powers that be don’t want any reduction in military spending.

But this doesn’t mean that our soldiers are better. It means that our technology is better. not only better, but on a far higher plateau than any other opponent, or combination of opponents.

I’m very sure that at some level, all this stuff with the minorities has been taken into account and the thinking is that we can win over any opponent even with such people.

Tom Iron…

Posted by Tom Iron at 8:50 AM on August 9

Right on, ‘generalquagmyer’, the racial lunacy as practiced in the US military is truely unreal. Unfortunately, because of major media dissimulation, the clueless white public knows virtually nothing about the racial military debacle. They continue to blindly worship the military, never suspecting that it is a form of inter-racial duress, similar to inter-racial incarceration, in fact.

Posted by Sid at 9:44 AM on August 9

This article gives specific reasons and examples of why diversity in the military is a weakness. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard the trumpeters of diversity in the military give any specific example of why it is, or how it could be a strength - it is always presented as some sort of vague emotional assertion.

Posted by HideouslyWhite at 11:04 AM on August 9

Interesting.

How does the most powerful nation in the world expect to remain so?
A simple analogy:
Imagine a Company
As a boss of this competitive commercial enterprise, would you want to hire blacks to promote and propel this company. We all have seen the black work ethic. Transfer this to combat. What is combat but grueling, stressful, WORK. There’s a reason blacks aren’t found generally on the job sites, they do shoddy work, and that’s when they put forth an honest eight hours. It is no different in the armed forces. I would not want to be on some battle front with a bunch of lazy, hedonistic, hungover, whiners.
World War II was America’s last stand.
America is finished, and is a straw man, and soon everyone will know this. Sad but true. Imagine this version of the American forces against the cohesive and battle-hardened Russians.
This is the beginning of the end, the hippies and socialists have perverted the nation from within.

Posted by at 11:52 AM on August 9

Stories of blacks in the military are legion. Here’s one that’s representative of what to expect. When I was a second lieutenant, I had a friend who went to the gym to shoot some hoops. A young african,thinking he had a white boy to fool with, demanded the basketball he had signed out. When he refused, this genius sucker-punched him and took the ball. He was still shooting hoops with his african friends, all of them acting like nothing had happened, when the MP’s arrived. He was court-martialed and kicked out for striking an officer. Never say no to an african without keeping your guard up, no matter how trivial the matter.

Posted by Cliff Yablonski at 1:20 PM on August 9

I was stationed with some US Army armor (tank) units in Germany in the late 1970’s, and it was apparent that blacks largely stayed away from that complex, and rather intense military career field. Blacks were the cause of most of the severe discipline problems and had problems controlling themselves on, or off-duty. Infantry units, that were over 50% black at that time, were examples of barely controlled chaos.

Posted by at 1:32 PM on August 9

I’d like to thank all my white brothers and sisters for their intelligent comments.

Empires foster diversity. It’s as Steve Sailer says: invade the world, invite the world.

Interventionist militaries love experiments in diversity.

Posted by William Davies at 2:37 PM on August 9

I was walking after midnight on the Air Station side of the base in Norfolk in the late 80s and this car stops alongside the road and this intoxicated black sailor gets out and tells me to empty my pockets. I stood my ground and when the guy saw I wasn’t afraid of him he backed off.

I was working out the Naval Air Station Dallas Active Duty Services office in the early 90s. There was this belligerent black Yeoman who worked in our building. Everything was about race with him. He used to talk about how White women would walk across the street to avoid him and how the system was keeping him down. I found out from working around him that he was doing some shady business like giving answer keys to test questions on courses to his black buddies. One of the black cooks on the base was a friend of his and he arranged to take some food from the galley and use it host a party he was giving at his apartments. He typed up fake transfer orders to get out of his lease and did it for other black buddies on his computer at work. I contacted the Waste, Fraud and Abuse hotline and reported it anonymously. Naval Investigative Service interviewed him and several of his friends and they didn’t charge him with anything!

While stationed in TN this black guy used my social security number and name to order things from the Navy Exchange. I reported it and the guy said I gave him permission to do it! Luckily, justice was served and the guy was reduced in rank and fined. Actually he should’ve been kicked out.

Posted by at 3:19 PM on August 9

If one of these incidents were to happen to a black soldier, even if only an allegation, every black in town would have heard about it by nightfall. Whites only hear about these things in the manner the media decides to report on them. Blacks aren’t afraid to claim they are victims, especially when it’s not true. That could be the very reason they aren’t afraid. Because it’s not true.

Posted by at 5:51 PM on August 9

“I agree and disagree. Women don’t join the military to fulfill a macho fantasy but instead for the educational benefits(GI BIll),to learn work skills or to see the world. Many are from rural or working class families and this to them is an opportunity they may not have in their small town. However, I do agree with seperate units for men/women. This is necessary for young women’s own protection, sad to say but true.”

Posted by at 10:28 PM on August 8

> Well, a macho fanatasy is a motivation that even I doubt, although the lesbian officers are certainly about that.

> That comment on my comment brings up another issue concerning the military that was on my mind at the time; the military has been a big welfare state within the U.S. for a long time. A a very big and incredibly inefficient one at that. Whole families have been raised on Uncle Sam’s dime for a long time, but it really began to get out of control once the volunteer service era began. The incentives and the free welfare like ride attracted many people who just couldn’t make it on the outside. Look how surprised many of them were when they found that they were required to serve in a war. Not so many signing up for all the benefits now, eh? I don’t want to put our fighting men down as they are under the impression that they are fighting for something. I am not sure what it is they are fighting for anymore, but that is the main thrust of most Amren issues. Talk about communism folks, the military is a communist parasite state within! Think about it. The heaviest PC requirements live in the government and even moreso in the military and it is pounded in. Of course, it is mixed with a heavy Christian undercurrent but it is there, proving that you can have communism with God!

This country used to wait for wars until it raised armies, but since WW2, the military has become a state within America that uses most of the money the civilian, free-enterprise private citizens generate. What a mess, the military is a behemoth that can’t be stopped until it either becomes the nation or the nation collapses. President Eisenhower warned us about this….

Posted by Whiteplight at 6:48 PM on August 9

This article was eye-opening but not really surprising. I’ve spoken with many ex-military people (mostly enlisted men) who became racially conscious from their experience with non-whites in the military. Most of their ire was directed towards blacks.

Violent black and Mexican street gangs are encouraging their members to join the military to acquire weapons training. In the mid 1990’s a black soldier with gang and NOI affiliations broke into a national guard base and stole automatic weapons, ammunition and grenades. Even TIME magazine speculated that illegally obtaining and stockpiling weapons could be in preparation for a race war. Of course most of white America was sleeping or too busy to take notice.

Whites will rue the day when non-whites gain a majority in the civilian population and the military. If nothing is done to reverse current trends this will happen and it will be very bad for whites.

Posted by Super Dave at 7:00 PM on August 9

“Of course, it is mixed with a heavy Christian undercurrent but it is there, proving that you can have communism with God!”

As a result of the way communism’s founder Karl Marx condemned religion as the “The opiate of the masses”, throught the history of the former Soviet Union millions of Christians and Jews were sent to the gulags and suffered other persecutions for refusing to renounce their religious faith and become athiests.

But here is this contrast, Francis Bellamy, the man who wrote the Pledge of Alliegence we say to the flag, was a Baptist minister who advocated socialism in his sermons. Rev. Bellamy obviously believed communism to be the will of God.

It is possible use the Bible, either to justify capitalism or communism, depending on which sections you use. The early Christians, themselves, formed communist-style communities.

So here is this alternate-history question I have to everyone reading this post. Karl Marx was from a Jewish family that converted to the Lutheran branch of Christianity. Suppose Marx, like Bellamy, entered the ministry. Then suppose that as the founder of communism, Marx advocated communism to be the will of God. Then suppose Marx advocated that communism absolutley needed faith in God for it to succeed.

Would it have been, during the history of the former Soviet Union, athiests and agnostics being sent to the gulags and suffering other persecutions, for refusing to believe in God? Would church and synagogue attendance, and the possesion of Bibles, Torahs, and religious icons be mandatory for Soviet citizens, instead of being prohibited for Soviet citizens?

Believe me, I do not intend for this post to be going off the subject matter of racial trouble in our military. However, when Whiteplight made the comment of how it is possible to have communism with God, I felt I had just had to make this what if… scenario?, post!

Posted by Ross at 11:07 PM on August 9

Roughly around the time of WWI, a black Army unit went on a rampage where they attacked white civilians and killed many people. This happened in Texas. I can’t find anything about it on the internet.

Posted by Joe at 12:34 AM on August 10

With all these racial problems in the U.S. Armed Forces caused by blacks, I am glad that we have not had a military draft since 1973. As a patriotic American, I am opposed to bringing back the draft because it would violate the U.S. Constitution against involuntary servitude.

A more personal reason I am against bringing back the military draft is that I turned 18 in 1974. Had I been born a few years earlier, I might have been drafted and sent to Vietnam. Then I would have had to face the Viet Cong in combat and racial conflicts brought on by blacks back at the base.

Cliff Yablonski tells in his post about a black soldier who assualted an officer over a basketball and then was kicked out of the military.

I never even volunteered for military service, but if you are in the United States Armed Forces, do whatever you can to serve your time and avoid a dishonorable discharge!

If you have the misfortune of a dishonorable discharge you have the same misfortune and liability of being a convicted felon. This means you cannot vote, hold public office or own firearms. It will be almost impossible for you to find civilian employment You will also have the same kind of negative social stigma as that of being a convicted felon.

To everyone reading this post, did you see the excellent movie, “A Few Good Men” starring Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson, and Demme Moore? At the end of the movie, when the two Marines, who had Cruise’s character as a lawyer, each get a dishonorable discharge, it raced through my mind the consequences those two ex-Marines would have to live with for the rest of their lives.

Posted by Ross at 3:43 AM on August 10

Just the other day I celebrated the 21st anniversary of my official departure from the USAF. Every day I thank God that I left when I did, and this article is one major reason why.

I’ve read the comments here with great interest, especially those from fellow ex-military members. Unfortunately, all of them seem to take for granted the notion of a massive permanent military machine. FYI, our Founding Fathers deeply distrusted the military, because they knew all too well that a major threat to liberty is the presence of a standing army in peacetime. If we were to return to the Founders’ ideal, we would have a very small professional force, augmented when necessary by state militias. Such a small military would have no need for blacks, women or foreigners. To accomplish this, of course, we would need to mind our own business, abandon our vast network of bases in more than 100 countries and utterly annihilate a military-industrial complex that requires a perpetual war footing to justify its existence.

I hate to burst Tom Iron’s balloon, but technology is no guarantee of victory. In fact, it can actually be counterproductive. I strongly recommend everyone read William Lind’s essays on 4th-generation warfare. Even before 9/11, the high-tech Army would routinely lose war games against an “enemy” which sent messages by courier and used every other time-honored low-tech tactic in the book. The Army’s response, of course, was to change the rules of engagement so that the “good guys” would win (the US military is notorious for such shenanigans). Hence the complaint by an Army officer early in the Iraq war that “this isn’t the enemy we war-gamed against.”

Posted by Strider at 5:17 AM on August 10

My father served in Korea as a Marine Corps grunt from 1950-1953.
As a young boy my fathers experiences with black deserters serving in the Army brought about the best of my genetics.
Blacks are irreconcilably different to all races and are confined within their own tribe.
95% of blacks are meant to perform menial labor and must be conditioned with the optimism that menial labor provides a future within their racial distribution with added bonuses such as banquets, gift cards, and retirement watches.
The same principle must be renewed within the military.
Segregation is a fundemental part of military morale and vital to unit cohesion and includes women.
If steps are not adequately taken to reverse multiculturalism by the next presidential election America is likely to experience unregulated turmoil and increased nonwhite crime on a level unimagined in the new era.
Nonwhites do not belong in this country and those born here prior to the immigration reform act are the only persons permitted to stay by law.

Posted by MilitaryMuster at 7:19 AM on August 10

this genius sucker-punched him and took the ball…He was court-martialed and kicked out “for striking an officer.”
Posted by Cliff Yablonski
———————
Interesting story. In this case, justice was done. But I wonder what would have happened if your white friend had NOT been an officer?

Actually, what should being an officer have to do with it at all? Justice is justice. Or is it?

Posted by at 9:04 AM on August 10

I grew up in the 50’s on military bases overseas( Germany, Italy and North Africa, yes we used to have a base in North Africa then) as the son of a USAF officer in what was called the OSI (office of special investigation). Although Truman may have “integrated” the military towards the end of his presidency and this policy may have been reinforced subsequently by Eisenhower, in the early 50’s this was not visible on most US bases. I did not return to the US until 1961 to Travis AFB in California. That was the first time in my life that I had ever encountered a black person, something I thought very strange. I was then in the 4th grade and attended the base school.

One thing that I did notice after visiting an Army base near Washington DC a few year ago was that it was entirely different from anything I had experienced growing up as a military brat in the 50’s and early 60’s. After parking to visit the post exchange, I noticed that the people surrounding me were overwhelmingly non-white and appeared to be lower class (many were military dependents who continued to dress, speak and express the mannerism of their origin) . I felt as if I had just driven into a multicultural ghetto.

Clearly, the WWII generation military, composed overwhelmingly of whites, was long gone. I have never bothered to go back to a US military base and no longer believe that the military reflects America. It largely reflects a certain subset of America which I can easily get my full of by going to SE DC or downtown Miami any day of the week. I consider this, not only a great loss and a shame, but more importantly, a potential disaster both domestically and internationally. Domestically, because it is doubtful that such a military would support the constitution in times of domestic unrest and internationally, because such a military, no matter how sophisticated its technology, is simply not a credible threat to would-be aggressors(the fundamental function of the military aside from winning wars).

Finally, one can appreciate the extent of the lies and deceits which underlie the current destructiveness of the multicultural ideology with respect to the US military by recalling one of the most incoherent decisions of the Supreme Court in history, viz. that of ex-justice Sandra Day O’Connor who wrote that diversity was such a critical governmental and social imperative that the military could not be effective without widespread racial integration!

Then, consider the historical facts: what wars has the US won? They include the revolutionary war, the Mexican American war of the 1840’s, the federal government’s military won the war for Southern Independence, WWI and WWII and the 1st Desert Storm(which was very brief in duration, employed a great deal of high technology weaponry, against a totally inferior foe). What wars have we won since the integration of the military? The list only includes Desert Storm I (with the stated limitations on its significance) but the wars lost since Eisenhower include the only major long term engagement of the US military, viz. Vietnam (the Korean war occurred before significant racial integration; we won a truce dividing the country into two parts, which was a victory of sorts). For some reason, ex-justice O’Connor was either unaware of our history or chose to ignore it. As a country we cannot afford to bury our collective head in the sand by following the patently false, but politically correct views of the Sandra Day O’Connor’s of the left.

I would be interested in reading the comments of others who grew up in the baby boom generation and were associated with the military in the 50’s and/or 60’s.

Posted by at 12:04 PM on August 10

“Interesting story “striking an officer”. In this case, justice was done. But I wonder what would have happened if your white friend had NOT been an officer?”

Both service members would have received a talking to. Perhaps both punished, or even the white guy only, punished. I witnessed this myself while in the Army in 1985. A black SP4 hit a white SP4 and the white guy got an article 15 (punishment) for ‘fighting’. The white guy, and the white guy only, would probably be made fun of back at the barracks for being sucker punched.

The chain of command, or the media, might refer to this as a ‘fight’ or an ‘altercation’ but preferring to avoid mention of the issue. Or simply referencing this later as an example of ‘racial-tensions’. We just read a story like this last week in the Army Times and I think the Washington Post. Discussing racial discrimination, tension, and disparity, Blacks, have had to face in the service.

Posted by at 12:44 PM on August 10

strider @ 5:17AM on 08/10,

Sir, you may be right, but I think you miss the point here with our armed forces. Their mission isn’t necessarily to achieve “victory.” It’s to continue amassing newer weaponry. The thinking of our generals and admirals must be that if they win a war, maybe the politicians will finally say they don’t have to make such high military expenditures any longer, so “losing” or stalemate is their objective. Certainly, participation of blacks and hispanics in the military will help to achieve such an objective.

Look at the way we wage war anymore. The opponent has no chance of real victory. After the conflict with us is over, their country is a shambles and we walk away and forget about it. Nothing changes here in our country. Twenty years down the road, people will hardly even know where Iraq and Afghanistan are again. Somebody will vaguely remember there was a war there. That’s the way it is here. Too bad.

Believe me, I don’t like to say such things, but I believe them to be accurate.

Take care Sir and have a good evening.

Tom Iron…

Posted by Tom Iron at 7:51 PM on August 10

No, you would not have had to face the Viet-Cong, you would have been facing the North Vietnamese regulars. I spent 3 1/2 years in the Viet-nam war and fought everyone but the Viet Cong which effectively ceased to exist in early 68 due to political and military treachery (sound familiar) I personally advocate instating the draft and mandatory service (NOT the peace corps either) MILITARY service in one of the armed service branches.

Posted by Skip at 8:07 AM on August 11

I agree with Strider here, technology WILL NOT GUARANTEE winning a war. Ultimately someone has to go in on the ground to take and hold ground and in this Iraq war (which I have been in for nearly 5 years) we cannot do that because we are restrained into having to fight a PC war. The only way to win a war is if the winners to be are willing to scorch the earth of the enemy. These Muslims are more than willing to scorch our earth AND theirs to win and if we do not or cannot adopt that ruthless doctrine, WE WILL LOOSE and become Muslims.

Posted by Skip at 8:17 AM on August 11

All of you are no doubt correct. But the military, segregated or not, is the enabler of a corrupt Washington establishment. We have over 800 military bases around the world. That needs to be curtailed. We have no justifiable mission in places like Europe or northern Asia. We should get our troops home as quickly as possible before they become a tripwire for a war we don’t want or need. It’s the multicultural types who want to “fix” the world and make it safe for liberal ideals. We have no dog in this fight. Don’t serve in the military and don’t support it.

Posted by Xenophon at 9:33 AM on August 11

I would like to point out that the very Elite Units, such as SEALS, Rangers, etc are all white. This fact is mentioned prominently in the book, “Blackhawk Down!”. White men in these units have the I.Q. to study the Job (War) and are craftsmen. Through experience and observation, they do not trust blacks or Hispanics, think they are lazy and incompetent, and their worst nightmare is to be assigned to a “regular unit” where the dedication is minimal and cowardice is the norm.

Posted by Gun Runner at 2:57 PM on August 11

…”I personally advocate instating the draft and mandatory service (NOT the peace corps either) MILITARY service in one of the armed service branches.”

Posted by Skip at 8:07 AM on August 11

This is a really complicated issue, so I am adding my ideas only as food for thought.

I was one of those hapless 18 year olds in 1970 who faced the draft and only escaped by luck; my draft lottery number was 337 and they called up to 200 that year. But I have never forgotten the friends I knew who either died or came home emotionally marked, some dying of self-abuse later. What the Viet-Nam war did was to sabotage trust in our government to only send us into conflicts that really were in our national interest and a matter of survival. In the Cold War chess game, Viet Name became a hot spot with my generations MALES dying in droves for the purpose of America “saving face” and purpetuating the military industrial complex - replete with untold, fathomless pits of waste. And the tactic was to send our boys into ambuses and then call in artillery and air support to kill “more of them than us.” Every serving man I knew who returned was either bitter and angry over the way the war wasted its men or so far gone on drugs (often heroin in the Navy and Air Force) that their future lives were fairly well lost. Drug (heroin) smugling got really big via the courier service provided by the Air Force. The corruption of American involvement in Viet Nam was beyond monumental.

Now once again, the most believing, patriotic of our youth are being misused and the result is thousands of lost and maimed lives - of mostly white men and their families. We are nearing the point where the question really is whether serving in this countries’ military is helping or hurting the white community or serving a multicultural state where whites have a dwindling stake? If the nation is becoming a third wold cess-pool why are whites continuing to volunteer to fight for this system? Mostly because they are still imagining they live in America, the America of 1954. A draft would likely only enlarge the multicultural mess by increasing the problems illustrated in this article, with whites the continuing loser. The other big thing I notice is that most people have already decided that they won’t volunteer to fight for this country as they perceive it a likely fight for large, private corporate interests. So mostly rural Christian whites volunteer, fired by their particular form of religious patriotism. From that aspect, the current conflict appears to also be a war of or between relgions.

Indeed, America is nearing its existential crisis.

Posted by Whiteplight at 3:17 PM on August 11

Skip,

You are correct that Europeans have lost the will to pursue war in an effective capacity. We have the ability, but not the stomach for it. To win quickly and with low cost to our side, we need to be absolutely ruthless — scorched Earth, as you say. This method actually saves more lives and money in the long run, because it totally defeats and demoralizes the enemy. Hence, war is rapid and final, allowing everyone to get back to living.

Instead, we attempt to run “gentile and kind Politically Correct” wars, which go on and on and on, like a giant festering wound, and never defeat the enemy. In the long run, it produces more overall casulities and misery than just going in and killing everyone, until the enemy surrenders, unconditionally (and is very happy to have peace).

Posted by at 6:04 PM on August 11

If technology is the deciding factor in future wars, then we are in bigger trouble than this story reveals.

Technology may be difficult to originally develop, but once it is developed, it is insanely inexpensive to copy and mass-produce. There is no effective means of safeguarding any piece of technology so that we have exclusive use of it, so technology may well be of greater comparative advantage to our enemies than to ourselves. The mere existence of some fundamentally new technology justifies our enemies investment in duplicating it. Before we detonated the atomic bombs over Japan, other countries could not justify investing research into nuclear technology simply because there was no guarantee that any such investment might produce something of value - for there was no absolute scientific concensus that an atomic bomb was theoretically possible.

The usage of an atomic bomb gave other countries the instant guarantee that there indeed was some payoff for such an investment, and a few years later, our enemies are churning out atomic warheads.

Consider for example the arab countries. Does anybody believe that the indiginous peoples of those countries, left to their own devices, could have ever come up with, say, plastic explosives or cellular communication technologies? Unlikely. But now we are faced with arabs that detonate plastic explosives via cell-phone triggers, and rather than nomadic tribesmen trading spices via caravan, we now have serious global threats from these primitive peoples, primarily by their application of technologies that we produced.

Finally, our stateside technology industry is being entirely off-shored; the first to move abroad has been the manufacturing facilities, but now it is the R&D labs and the scientist/engineers that come up with the new devices. Not only does this make it even less feasible that we might retain exclusive use of some technology for more than a few years, it might be reasonably considered to be outfitting our enemies with the military infrastructure they might use to make war on us, while simultaneously robbing us of the civilian infrastructure to defend ourselves insofar as we are purging from our professional classes those very people we would need to rebuild technology manufacturing facilities should we suddenly find ourselves in the desperate need of doing so.

Indeed, in most instances, the fabrication of technological devices is the choke-point, not the aquisition of raw materials or even the development of more efficient designs. The major barrier to nuclear bombs is purely mechanical - the ability to purify fissionable material, a process that uses centrifuges - mechanical devices that existed centuries before the notion of atomic power was ever bandied about by physicists. The aquisition of fissionable material is not terribly difficult, it is the purification of that material that is difficult, and that is difficult because the centrifuges must operate within very demanding tolerances, which requires the development of machine tools of such demanding precision that for a long time only the German toolmakers, men who had entered into apprenticeships at boyhood and developed the skills over a lifetime of professional development like their fathers and grandfathers before them, could actually implement.

The only reason that relatively few countries have nuclear arsenals is because we have been able to limit access to the very expensive machine tools, expensive not only from a purchase standpoint, but expensive to maintain, as those tools can only be built, maintained, and repaired by master craftsmen, who themselves were created by civilizations that invested in the development of those skilled professions over the course of centuries. When you see pictures of, for example, Iran’s nuclear development programs, you likely see a whole bunch of persian scientists with their lab coats and such, and they are surely all very sharp men, but they are a dime-a-dozen, the guys that are absoutely critical to their success are the one or two european guys, guys that are employed by german toolmakers such as Siemens and are on loan to ensure the tools Siemens sold them continue to operate.

We as a nation are racing to divest ourselves of those very skilled professions, and by looking at the pace our captains of industry are outsourcing these skilled professions, you would think that the faster we rid ourselves of these valuable resources, the better.

There have been some high-profile espionage stories regarding Chinese nationals working in Silicon Valley using their employment within technology companies such as chip manufacturers and so forth as a platform on which they have access to the latest technology designs and using that access to send secrets back to their home countries. We pay the education costs of these people, we pay the development costs of the technology designs, which is far and away the greatest portion of the expense in any technology development, while our potential enemies cash in on the final product, mass-producing that product in fabrication facilities built in their countries financed by American capital.

I believe it is a mistake to believe that technology alone will work to ensure our military supremecy; it is more likely that technology might very well allow our enemies to leapfrog the barriers of entry into a war, and to challenge our military more effectively when they do.

Chris

Posted by cmmitch357 at 6:12 PM on August 11

Blacks, more than any other race, have tribalism stamped indelibly in their genes

I think this is nonsense. I think the evidence shows that blacks are naturally the least collectivist of the continental races. But, their mean IQ isn’t so low that they can’t see the quickest way onto the gravy train. Black “tribalism” is directly proportional to the distance to the nearest white sucker.

Posted by Svigor at 6:55 PM on August 11

I thought the movie Jarhead was a disgusting and shameless anti-White, anti-American, and anti-Military charade. And, like nearly everything that comes out of Hollywood when it tries to deal in Reality - A big Lie.

Posted by Dedalus at 9:48 PM on August 11

Geoff M at 2:08 AM on August 9 “And at this same time the British Army is about to expand the recruitment of “British” blacks & asians and even going to the Caribbean to take on troops from Jamaica etc…..We all know where this will end - even in an ordinary office environment blacks and asians are more trouble than they are worth.”

The main exception being the Gurkhas, who generally excel.

As for the 40% rape rate - astonishing.

Posted by Iain at 8:40 AM on August 12

“We have over 800 military bases around the world. That needs to be curtailed. We have no justifiable mission in places like Europe or northern Asia.”

Agreed, plus we are wasting our money on on defense in other parts of the world that we should be spending on our own people.

Posted by at 9:38 AM on August 12

Well how about this idea. Maybe we can learn from the Iranians here. Just issued them all plastic keys to unlock the doors to Mecca, arm them with sticks and march them into battle against the Iranians when we finally go to war with them.

Posted by Unemployed WASP at 7:15 PM on August 19

Home Top Previous story Next Story Send This Page Search


Welcome Readers guide About us Home Links Search Contact Us Send us news stories Write for us Interview Jared Taylor Activists corner Polls AR Store Books DVDs Video tapes Donations Subscribe New subs Renewals Gift subs Donations Archives AR back issues News items By date By category Older news Atom feed RSS 1.0 feed RSS 2.0 feed Interviews AR attic Videos