There appears to be no area in which Barack Obama has not completely downgraded the readiness and capability of the United States military, and he doesn't appear to be reticent about letting the whole world know about each and every one:
The [Obam]agon has no clearly designated military official who'd be in charge of support in the event of a massive data breach by foreign hackers, according to Congress's watchdog agency.
In an analysis of the audit by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, Defense One reports the U.S. Northern Command says it's the main [Obam]agon support arm in such breaches, while policies and some top brass say Cyber Command plays the lead in cyber threats from abroad.
The [Commissaria]t of Defense[lessness] needs to clarify its roles and responsibilities in an area of growing concern, Joseph Kirschbaum, GAO's director for defense capabilities and management, warns in the audit.
And until it does, the military “may not be positioned to effectively employ its forces and capabilities to support civil authorities in a cyberincident," Kirschbaum says.
"[Commissariat of Defenselessness] officials stated that the [commissaria]t had not yet determined the approach it would take to support a civil authority in a cyberincident and, as of January 2016, DOD had not begun efforts to issue or update guidance and did not have an estimate on when the guidance will be finalized," Kirschbaum said.
After most of a decade of being repeatedly hacked and cyberlooted and cyberpillaged across the federal government, the Obamagon is still in a state of complete befuddlement and confusion. NORTHCOM says they're in charge! No, CyberCommand says, they're in charge! Alexander Haig rises from his grave, charges in and says he's in charge! Which means NOBODY is in charge, and when the Sino-Russian/Iranian/North Korean endgame launches, our enemies may not even have to use their own militaries to defeat and conquer us, but rather simply turn what's left of our own armed forces against itself and us by remote control. It's remarkable that they haven't done that already.
The White House is quite evidently proud of this defenestration of U.S. national security. What they strive mightily and zealously to cover up is the disastrous results it invariably and inevitably produces:
Two senior intelligence analysts at U.S. Central Command say the military has forced them out of their jobs because of their skeptical reporting on U.S.-backed "rebel groups" in Syria, three sources with knowledge of their claim told the Daily Beast. It’s the first known instance of possible reprisals against CENTCOM personnel after analysts accused their bosses of manipulating intelligence reports about the U.S.[behind]-led campaign against ISIS in order to paint a rosier picture of progress in the war.
One of the analysts alleging reprisals is the top analyst in charge of Syria issues at CENTCOM. He and a colleague doubted "rebels'" capabilities and their commitment to U.S. objectives in the region. The analysts have been effectively sidelined from their positions and will no longer be working at CENTCOM, according to two individuals familiar with the dispute, and who spoke on condition of anonymity.
They committed the unforgivable sin of being intelligence analysts, not sycophantic propaganda flacks. Or, to illustrate it with the miracle of digital audio, they made the mistake of being Jack Ryan....
The analysts’ skeptical views put them at odds with military brass, who last year had predicted that a so-called "moderate" opposition would make up a 15,000-man ground force to take on ISIS in its self-declared caliphate. An initial $500 million program to train and arm those fighters failed spectacularly. And until the very end, [Obam]agon leaders claimed the operation was more or less on track. Lawmakers called the plan a “joke” when General Lloyd Austin, the CENTCOM commander, finally testified last September that there were just “four or five” American-trained fighters in Syria....
Earlier allegations from CENTCOM, the military command responsible for overseeing the Middle East, had focused on leaders there fudging intelligence reports about U.S. efforts to attack ISIS and undermine its financing operations. That analysts are now raising red flags around reporting on Syrian rebel groups suggests that, at least from the analysts’ perspective, there is a broader systemic problem than was previously known.
Indeed. And here's that problem:
And since Barack Obama is "never wrong" and "doesn't make mistakes" and everything he says is "historic" and graven on stone tablets, he makes sure that he doesn't have a single intelligence analyst working for him who might tell him anything he doesn't want to hear, but rather sycophantic propaganda flacks who will glad-hand and bow down to him as he demands. Weak, spineless bloodworms or eager, brainwashed converts who will change reality to his preferences, and actually believe they're doing so in the process. Which is how five U.S.-trained "Syrian rebels" become a "moderate Syrian rebel force" fifteen thousand-strong that will sweep ISIS from the battlefield like a behemoth and blow up two Imperial Death Stars AND Starkiller Base for an encore.
What's the lesson to be learned from this nightmare fiasco? Never elect delusional, emotionally-unstable, strutting narcissists president of the United States.....
....any questions?
No comments:
Post a Comment