Alexander Vindman Represents Everything That’s Wrong With Our Officer Class

Pavel Durov, the CEO of Telegram, was recently detained in France because of his alleged failure to adequately control criminal action on Telegram. What” criminal action” equates to in Western conditions is anyone’s guess. In Britain, liking cartoons or posting diaspora views on social media are the focus of criminal activity. The New York Times reported that the Telegram application had been on law enforcement radar partly due to its use by “far-right radical groups” for engaging, recruiting, and organizing. That’s Clue Number One, the sole idea people may want to know. Durov’s simply legal behavior was stifling free exchange of ideas.

Durov’s arrest was instantly condemned by American officials and business leaders. ” Hazardous days”, prophesied Elon Musk. ” The need to guard free talk has never been more urgent”, urged RFK Jr. France has” crossed a dark line”, wrote Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski. Political commentator Ian Miles Cheong said,” This is about silencing opposition and controlling knowledge.”

Truly. However, there was debate over what Durov’s incarceration meant for free speech, despite the fact that it was still controversial. Alexander Vindman—yes, that one—voiced his&nbsp, aid for France’s assault on opposition by blogging,” There’s a growing hatred for platforming disinfo &amp, malign influence &amp, a growing appetite for accountability. Is should be stressed”. He continues to condemn “free talk weirdos” as well.

Free talk absolutists nutcases. like Martin Luther King and Jefferson and Washington? like John Stuart Mill and Voltaire? like Horace Greeley, George Orwell, and Salman Rushdie? &nbsp,

No matter how sloppy it gets, liberals like Tulsi Gabbard, Bill Maher, Russell Brand, and the above Kennedy fully understand the absolute requirement of the free speech element in an empty politics. A former British military officer’s vehement opposition to free speech and his pride, as if that is what may be their default position, if unconvince Americans of all stripes.

However, when it comes to our government’s official course, I fear Vindman is basically an ugly sign of a deeper basic rot. His joyous involvement in the Trump prosecution fake gave us a noble soldier who was brave enough to play the journalist rather than a selfish middle-level politician who viewed foreign policy as a diktator, rather than the commander-in-chief to whom he swore an oath.

When I first joined the military, the president at the time was Bill Clinton, and think me, almost all of us passionately opposed his international guidelines. But we all understood, when we signed our names and took our oaths, that we’d most likely be called upon to support missions we did n’t agree with. We took our oaths seriously and did n’t work to sabotage our president. As teenagers of entry-level rank, we understood what Lieutenant Colonel Vindman did n’t. &nbsp,

Vindman: Is he the different or the principle? Also, who else do we possess as a basis for comparison? Former Joint Chiefs General Chairman Mark Milley, who gave assurances to Communist China that he would send them a heads-up if they believed President Trump would launch a warfare against them? Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has spent nearly his entire career looking for indistinguishable bright power among the rates rather than making sure our army is battle-ready.

Former Air Force General Michael Hayden, who was one of the 51 signatories&nbsp, alleging that the Hunter computer emails were Russian propaganda, with the expected result of tipping the vote to Biden, all the while knowing full well that the emails were real?

Former Army General Susan Escallier, who approved the plea deal with al-Qaeda terrorist and 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Robert Mueller III, a former marine captain, effectively crippled the first two years of his administration as the leader of the Russian collusion witch hunt against President Trump?

Then-Lieutenant Colonel Ben Phillips who, despite repeated reports and warnings about the extremist and anti-American behavior of Major Nidal Hasan, nonetheless&nbsp, reviewed his performance as “outstanding” and “best qualified” a mere three days before the latter murdered thirteen soldiers at Fort Hood? Then-Chief of Staff General George Casey, who&nbsp, said the “real tragedy” of the Fort Hood terrorists shootings would be “if our diversity became a casualty as well”?

Yes, but what about all the unnamed, unnoticed officers who are genuinely patriots but lack the standing to bring about any real change?

I’ve only heard about one of them. There was one officer who publicly spoke out against what he rightly saw as an absolute betrayal by our Pentagon leadership of everything and everyone they swore to protect after our humiliating, unconditional surrender to a rabble of illiterate goatherds in Kabul 2021. Marine Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Scheller posted a video online and civilly, respectfully, but forcefully demanded some accountability.

For his courage and integrity, he was burned at the stake.

And no military officer ever defended him.

So that basically explains everything I need to know about the level of officers currently serving our troops. Without a doubt, thousands of them have shown their bravery against foreign foes in remote lands, just like the aforementioned Mueller ( who bravely served in Vietnam and was wounded in battle ). However, we also need them to exhibit that same brave against domestic adversaries. And I do n’t mean against some chimerical” white supremacy”. I’m speaking out against our dysfunctional, dishonest administration that literally kills our troops for political gain.

” Change” does n’t mean you need to stage a military coup. It can be a peaceful show of dissent, as Lt. Col. Scheller did. He was tarnished into obscurity after giving up his career to save his soul. Vindman, on the other hand, sold his soul to bolster an MSNBC career, where he champions the demise of free speech.

The careerist cowards slithering in the Pentagon hallways are degrading our military more effectively than any terrorist organization could ever hope. And while it’s true that recruitment is down because nobody wants to serve under an Obama, Biden, or Harris administration, it’s especially true that nobody wants to serve under an officer class whose self-serving, ladder-climbing perfidy goes against every value that recruits are taught in basic training.

Do n’t take my word for it. Look at the recruitment numbers, which, unlike Vindman, do n’t lie. Male army recruitment has decreased by 35 % over the past ten years. Recent years have &nbsp, seen the Navy and Air Force miss goals by the thousands. The Marine Corps is one of the smallest branches of the military, which is a major factor in the Marine Corps ‘ adherence to its quotas.

Military pay has always sucked, so it’s illogical to pin that on failing recruitment. COVID affected all industries, many of which have since recovered, so that ca n’t be isolated as the culprit. But no one wants to work for an organization that routinely practices the betrayal of its employees.

Many of my Marine Corps friends are still close to me today. They are spread out throughout the nation and have all had very different paths in life. Every one of them loves this country, loves the Marine Corps, and is proud of their former service. And every one of them—every single one of them—tells young relatives, neighbors, and prospective enlistees the same exact thing: Do n’t join today’s military. It’s gone full woke. Your leaders wo n’t have your back.

Take it for what it is worth and engage in something worthwhile with it for any active duty officers field grade or higher reading this. If we were to serve under the brave and moral character of a Lt. Col. Scheller, we would all gladly enlist all over again. But odds are we’d get suffocated beneath the slithering putridity of a Lt. Col. Vindman. &nbsp,

Source credit