"New USMC enemy: Tucker Carlson from Fox" Topic

Well, yes.

The Fox team's legal briefs compared Carlson's show to radio talk-show programs hosted by ex-MSNBC and Fox Business star Don Imus, who won a case more than two decades ago because an appellate court ruled that "the complained of statements would not have been taken by reasonable listeners as factual pronouncements but simply as instances in which the defendant radio hosts had expressed their views over the air in the crude and hyperbolic manner that has, over the years, become their verbal stock in trade."

From the link I gave above.
Just to be fair to all sides, Rachel Maddow's (boo! Hiss! Spit on sidewalk!) lawyers made exactly the same argument in a similar defamation suit.
Carlson's lawyers in effect made the argument that you can't take anything this man says seriously. OK. I'll go with that.
I'll watch him for entertainment, but to learn the "truth". (?) I'll save that for … hmmm. I don't know which bloviating "opinion journalist" I would believe.

ARDO,

last time Australian Naval ship came under fire was in the Korean War

Look up HMAS Hobart 1968, mate. Yes, it was "friendly" fire, but it was still fire. Also Hobart and the other RAN ships that patrolled up there did come under land-based fire on occasion, at least in the mid-60's (it wasn't a life-prolonging act by the NVA gunners to reveal their positions, so it was rare but possible).

I'm not one to coddle the pussers, but they do a bit more than lounging around their boats, getting tans.

Legion, the role of the Australian infantry is to "Seek out and close with the enemy, to kill or capture him, to seize and hold ground and to repel attack, by day or by night, regardless of season, weather or terrain." I think we have the better role/mission statement. :-) If that wasn't engraved in our brains by the end of Week 1 of IET's then various means of encouraging memory were available, usually of the "extra PT" variety.

I think that's what ARDO is getting at- "kill or capture him"- in the combat arms you have to be ready to kill people. Even if 99% of your career is doing courses, parades, inspections and assisting at fires, floods and other natural disasters, the expectation is there from Day 1, Week 1 of your corps training.

As for women in uniform, I know/knew a few who were fitter, more disciplined, had more stamina and were even better shots than most males (though a Pay Corps lass who could consistently fire 35mm groups is just scary).

I don't and didn't know one who could do a 14 day contact patrol on the Thai border, carrying twice frontline ammo (200 rounds 7.62mm ball, one 100 ball linked and two smoke grenades- no claymores or 66mm as we were only on an EX), 14 days rat's and eight litres of water- no resups because a resup would give away your location. I know/knew a few women who would give it a good go, though, and last longer than some male soldiers (even some grunts).

As for the topic subject- some people deliberately say things to provoke outrage. Media people of all political persuasions excel at it. That's why mute buttons are put on remote controls. They have the right to say it, I have the right to ignore them.

They have the right to say it, I have the right to ignore them.

Bingo. I've been saying that for years. Freedom of Speech includes MY right to not listen to you exercising it. Some don't seem to get that.

This is not an issue of freedom of speech.

This is a breach of regulation in which military members are prohibited from entering into political conversations.

Period.

What he or she said doesn't matter as the job of the military is to uphold and protect their right to do so under the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

If you want to be a political commentator and are an active member of the US military, then get another job. But while you are in uniform you need to keep your mouth shut.

Another point, or I should say "rant" is the draft. Females are not required to register for selective service, once again we are distinguishing between the genders. If we do fight against Russia or China and its prolonged we might need a draft considering the "gentle" nature of most of are young men. If the draft is started and females are still exempt does that mean men who pretend to be females are now exempt as well?

Yes, when it was decided for PC(?) etc., etc., reasons(?) before 2016. That the JCS, IIRC, said well if females can now go into combat arms, then when they turn 18. They should have to sign up for the Draft just like males do. But I don't think many of our elected and appointed civilian officials would want their children of either sex to have the possibility of being drafted. And may have to go in to harms way. And associate with "thugs & Riff-Raff" like you & I, Irish Marine. 😮😉

AFAIK the nothing has gone on to make 18 year old females sign up for the Draft. During a recent trip to the Post Office. I only found paperwork for males to sign up. But that is not too surprising to me. As we have noticed for certain members of society "hypocrisy", etc., is the norm.

"All animals are equal … some are just more equal than others."

IIRC Orwell said that.

AFAIK, I don't want to touch the topic of men who want to be females with a light-year long pole. 'Nuff said … 🤐

Legion, the role of the Australian infantry is to "Seek out and close with the enemy, to kill or capture him, to seize and hold ground and to repel attack, by day or by night, regardless of season, weather or terrain." I think we have the better role/mission statement. :-)

Close enough … to the US Army's … so I give it 👍👍😎

I think that's what ARDO is getting at- "kill or capture him"- in the combat arms you have to be ready to kill people. Even if 99% of your career is doing courses, parades, inspections and assisting at fires, floods and other natural disasters, the expectation is there from Day 1, Week 1 of your corps training.

Agreed … But much of our daily training was geared to going to war and killing the enemy. In Combat Arms branched, e.g. Infantry, Tanks, FA, etc. especially …

This is a breach of regulation in which military members are prohibited from entering into political conversations.

As many of us understand/understood … the US Military is not a democracy …

@Inari7

Tucker a couple of hundred years ago would have argued that African Americans are not fit to serve

He did no such thing. He called attention to highly questionable policies, and never attacked those serving. In an atmosphere in which China is being more aggressive and has senior military leaders openly discussing how they will attack the US (and it's "when," not "if" in their minds), and other real security threats to the nation, Carlson rightly called attention to the dangerously bizarre state of our military.

1. Our CinC has said his top military reform priorities are better fitted pants (with what, roomier hips??) for women, body armor for bloobs, more hairstyle choices for women, and maternity flight suits for pregnant pilots.

2. Our new SecDef (courtesy of Raytheon) has as his top priority fighting "white supremacy" in the military to the point where he has ordered service-wide stand-downs, political indoctrination and political loyalty tests.

Those are their expressed priorities. Not warfighting. Not defense preparedness. Not readiness against potential Chinese aggression. Not new warfighting capabilities.

Instead – Hairstyles. Pants. Political indoctrination. Loyalty tests. Pregnant pilots.

When Carlson pointed this out the US Military crossed the uncrossable line and launched a coordinated attack on a US media outlet and opinion journalist. They didn't explain why POTUS thought new hairstyles was a top priority. Or why the Army is dropping gender neutral physical tests. Or why the SecDef is purging the military. Nope. They attacked – which tells you they KNOW what they are doing is political and not focused on national defense. They KNOW what they are doing is ideological and not practical.

Don't like my opinion? How about the opinion from the nation's first female combat infantry officer?

Army's first female infantry officer says lowering fitness standards for women would put 'mission at risk'
Capt. Kristen Griest, an Army Ranger School graduate, on the Combat Fitness Test
"While it may be difficult for a 120-pound woman to lift or drag 250 pounds, the Army cannot artificially absolve women of that responsibility; it may still exist on the battlefield," Griest wrote in an essay published Thursday by the Modern War Institute at West Point. "The entire purpose of creating a gender-neutral test was to acknowledge the reality that each job has objective physical standards to which all soldiers should be held, regardless of gender.

"The intent was not to ensure that women and men will have an equal likelihood of meeting those standards. Rather, it is incumbent upon women who volunteer for the combat arms profession to ensure they are fully capable and qualified for it," she continued. "To not require women to meet equal standards in combat arms will not only undermine their credibility, but also place those women, their teammates, and the mission at risk."

Griest also wrote that "under a gender-based system, women in combat arms have to fight every day to dispel the notion that their presence inherently weakens these previously all-male units."

"Lower female standards also reinforce the belief that women cannot perform the same job as men, therefore making it difficult for women to earn the trust and confidence of their teammates," she added.

link

We are one step away from having a Political Officer in each company.

SBminisguy & Irish Marine 👍👌

Ah c'mon man – Tucker Carlson and his "outrage" is just funny and it makes you think. He is basically pulling a classic Ron Burgundy on everyone. In my opinion this is way better than the moralising "let's all feel bad about life" that CNN, MSNBC, CBS, et al, indulge in. Way better than the sneering, "I can't believe you are that dumb" excuse that goes for humour from people like Colbert, Noah and Stewart, whenever something happens that they don't like.

Women can be in the military as long as they are fit and want to blow things up. The Israeli military is proof of this. An unfortunate fact is that most young adults in the USA are just too fat to be able to do very much at all. And the rest of us in the western world are rapidly catching up with the US. I know I am, but then I am well past it.

William,

Women in Israeli army are generally in non-combatant roles.

The one exception was Caracal Battalion, which was 70% female and which according to some reports had mixed performance.

Even then it was noted women physically can't carry as much weight which is meaningful in a job where you're carrying things you need to survive and do your job.

(Or do they expect simply that the 30% of men in a unit are essentially pack mules?!?)

---

Here in Australia recent recruitment has been almost exclusively women for many roles in ADF.

And unlike men the women have easier physical standards, have priorities for postings of their choice (which men generally don't), have reduced service terms (2 years instead of 4) and have access to perks like cosmetic surgery (eg breast enlargement for cosmetic purposes).

Literally women now get treated with favouritism in the Aussie military.

No doubt it's probably also causing resentment among male troops who see it as a double standard.

It's ridiculous especially as all concessions they get actually reduce the value of their service.

Yes – I know from personal experience that women in the military started causing resentment in the 1990's. That's nothing new. And they were crap going over the basic training obstactle course because they couldn't carry everything…I prefer not to dwell on my own personal sense of grievance.

The principal point I make is that these days the US military is having problems getting enough young people that are fit enough for any sort of in theatre role, whether they be male or female. It must be true – I saw it on the Joe Rogan Experience!

Regarding Israel – Yes, but in the 1990's I saw many Israeli women doing military police and check point duties during the intifada. That may not have been front line combat, but it wouldn't have been Sunday school either.

I do think women have a place in the military and even combat roles such a fighter pilots or say long range missile units but some roles should such as infantry or other heavily physical jobs should be reserved for males.

As for pregnant women, they have no place in a combat zone or required to do dangerous duties. The argument is as moral as it is about physical issues – there's a second life involved here.

That includes deployed rear echelon units (which in a warzone are still under threat).

I asked my wife about the pregnant women issue. She is a hardcore feminist but even she was opposed to pregnant women performing any roles in a combat zone or where they could be under threat.

Well deadperson, this isn't much of an argument is it?

Served in the US ARMY, '79-'90. Mostly in Combat Infantry units, 4 Infantry Bns – 1 Air Asslt, 3 Mech. Back then no females were in combat branches, i.e. Infantry, Tanks, FA, CEs and certain ADA units. But I was assigned to a CBT SPT Bn at one point, which was about 1/3 Female. I saw no resentment, etc. … at that time.

But what I did see was young soldiers, like anyone else at that age, added to their Cdr's leadership "challenge". Boys & girls at that age will do "what comes naturally" … 🤭

Also note, some of those Female SPT Bn truck drivers … were some tough sisters ! 😦

@ SBminisguy

Your right Tucker did no such thing! LOL He's not 200 years old, but people just like him were saying things like that! As to your weird outrage about females being able to fit into their uniforms, and classes and or purging of white supremist's when the Army is 43% African American seems to say a lot about you. My post was simply saying that contrary to popular opinion on this thread is that the military has always been a test bed for social change. I did not state my opinion on females in the military. I did point out that females have seen combat in the past and were not taken lightly.

My experience in the Army back then, in many units, especially combat arms. There were a lot of African-Americans, Latinos, and even an American Indian or Asians or two. I saw little to no of even what they call racism today or even White Supremacist behavior, etc.

that the military has always been a test bed for social change.

Didn't see any of this either and I was Rifle Plt Ldr and later Mech Co Cdr. At that level where the "rubber meets the road"/at pointy end of the spear. We didn't have the time, inclination, etc., be concerned about these things. It was about combat readiness, prep for combat, training for combat operations, etc., etc. There was no white or black or brown or red or yellow … it was green or camo.

Today it seems for some reason, the woke, cancel culture, etc., etc., has some how taken root in many in the upper levels of leadership. I saw on the news today, the suggested reading list the USN Cmd posted. None of it had to do with history, combat operations, etc. But more of the woke, cancel culture, Left, Liberal, SJW, etc., subjects. I find it a bit disturbing … nothing there was about war fighting ?

I remember as a young Lt in the 101, our Bde Cdr, a Vietnam Combat Vet, like many of our senior leadership in both officers & NCO ranks. Recommended reading Rommel's book "Infantry Attacks". Which was a very good example of Light Infantry operations in WWI, etc. I even briefed that book at Combined Arms School as a CPT a few years later. No doubt some today would find that having to do with Nazis, white supremacy, etc., etc. It was Not … we learned about war fighting, etc. Sun Tzu another recommended read – Known your enemy …

Students of history study the good, bad & ugly of history. We must learn lessons in warfighting as military officers and senior NCOs. The big lesson from WWII, was combined arms warfare. And in 1939-40, 41 only the Germans knew how to do that effectively operationally. They took much of Europe to school. Then Allies had to play "catch-up" to eventually defeat the evil of Nazi Germany, at a very high cost. We here all know this.

I'm afraid the woke, SJW, etc., wave that is rampant in the US is forgetting the lessons learned about warfare. Those books that the USN leadership, and I'm sure they are not the only ones to do something like this, recommended. Should have had more to do with warfighting, about sailors, marines, etc. like Halsey, Nimitz, Puller, etc., etc., not if you are woke or a SJW, etc., etc. This type of thinking may cost us in the future.

@ Legion 4
True I agree, that the military should be more concerned with Military Tactics/strategy and not political ideology. I must correct you, you did see social change while you were in the military. Did you work with African Americans in your unit? Before 26 July 1948 you would not have. Did you work with an open homosexual? Before 20 September 2011 you would not have. Did you serve with a woman? Before 12 June 1948 you would not have. I am sure there are many more examples like in 1861 Lincoln allowed the IRISH to serve in the army. (can you believe that? LOL sarcasm) The military has always been at the forefront of social change. I'm not saying one way or another that it should be, just that it is.

Inari7 Supporting Member of TMP 19 Mar 2021 7:48 a.m. PST
@ SBminisguy

Your right Tucker did no such thing! LOL He's not 200 years old, but people just like him were saying things like that! As to your weird outrage about females being able to fit into their uniforms, and classes and or purging of white supremist's when the Army is 43% African American seems to say a lot about you.

Nah, you're just spinning and throwing out lazy a$$ racism attacks. Show me where he attacked women serving in the military? Come one tough guy, review the transcript for me.

Good luck with that. He didn't.

He attacked the nominal POTUS saying that hairstyles were a top military preparedness issue. He attacked relaxing gender neutral COMBAT MOS-based fitness standards, and then I posted a female combat officer's oped doing the same. Is SHE anti-woman??

Come one, go for it. Attack a female combat officer…

As for fighting "white supremacy" in the Military -- as you know the military was formally integrated in 1948, and after over 70 years of evolution and experience it had become the least racist, most color-blind institution of our government? Until now.

Given the brutally divisive racial politics being used and abused by a certain party's leadership (and which you seem EAGER to engage in yourself), the charge "white supremacy" now really just means "people I don't like 'cause they don't support my views." It's a smokescreen being used to try and enforce political loyalty tests to the new regime, and most people get that.

Which goes back to the original point of this thread -- Carlson pointed out that the SecDef and POTUS* are pursuing frivolous and divisive ideological goals while ignoring real defense issues that THEY ARE EXACERBATING!

Under the last guy in office, we had no new wars for 4 years and a series of MidEast peace deals. And now in just over 2 months we have bombed Syria and sent in troops(and the Biden regime still has not briefed congress), re-inflamed the war in Yemen, insulted the leader of Russia who has withdrawn diplomats from the US, and now the US is threatening war on North Korea. Oh, and we have also found out that the out-going Trump (Establishment) SecDef lied to the president and then maneuvered behind the scenes to sabotage Trump's troop withdrawal plan from Afghanistan. The Pentagon sabotaged a peace deal to keep a war going!!

But oh no, the real problem is Carlson criticizing skewed defense priorities…

Say, I wonder if our current SecDef ever divested his defense sector stock holdings…the Biden family still maintains active investments in China…time to buy Raytheon stock??

And now Putin has challenged Biden to do a live, joint, open and unscripted discussion with him: "I want to propose to President Biden to continue our discussion, but on the condition that we do it basically live, as it's called. Without any delays and directly in an open, direct discussion. It seems to me that would be interesting for the people of Russia and for the people of the United States."

Guessing Biden will decline…whattya think?

Russia and white supremacists are the new bogeymen to distract from China. Globalists hate Russia because it escaped their control after they threw off Communism.

Putin is a nationalist and openly critical of Globalism.

Globalists hate Russia because it escaped their control after they threw off Communism.

Putin is a nationalist and openly critical of Globalism.

I think it's simpler than that. I think certain political powers thought that picking Russia as a bad guy (Russian election interference!) would be likely to gain the support of "the Right" which had traditionally been anti-Soviet in the US.

They really calculated this would "flip" people against the last president. But what they didn't get is that anti-Soviet doesn't necessarily mean anti-Russian (just like being anti-CCP doesn't necessarily mean anti-Chinese). And most of the folks they thought they'd sway realized that the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990/1991, and the world changed. Russia at that point devolved from a global threat to a regional power with nukes. And I think *they* know this too, that Russia doesn't have a lot it can do to respond to their tough guy posturing – it is no longer an existential threat, and it doesn't have the deep pockets economic lucre of the CCP.

In other words, they felt it was a repercussion-free "bad guy."

What made this more bizarre is that the same party doing this had a long track record of Soviet appeasement, that made the whole Russia thing seemed especially artificial.

But, having created the threat from thin air they couldn't admit what they'd done, so they have doubled down, even tripled down to avoid being caught in their fabrication to the point that they risk *creating* the very threat they've been screaming about…

…and it's certainly helped the CCP. It would be in the US' interests to have better relations with Russia as a foil against CCP ambitions. Instead these domestic political moves have driven a wedge between US and Russia, and shifted Russia into the CCP camp.

I must correct you, you did see social change while you were in the military. Did you work with African Americans in your unit? Before 26 July 1948 you would not have. Did you work with an open homosexual? Before 20 September 2011 you would not have. Did you serve with a woman? Before 12 June 1948 you would not have.

Yes I am well aware of all those dates. But I served '75-'79 in ROTC, '79-'90 Active Duty and '91 USAR.

My Rifle Plt in the 101, '80-to part of'82, was authorized 36 troops. Of that only 8 of us were considered "White". They kept track of those things back then so soon after Vietnam. Like I said most of my soldiers were Black and Latino. But again it didn't matter as long as everyone did their job. The worse thing anyone could be was lazy and someone else had to pick up the slack.

As a Mech Co Cdr, for 18 months, '87-'89, with a Mech Hvy Bde of the 18th ABN Corps. As I said many of my troops were Black or Latino then too. But again it never became a concern … Just do your job is all that was asked.

As far as Homosexuals … there were rumors, and some were discharged, but again the numbers were very small. Again it was not a much of a concern as we see today.

Females, none were in Combat Arms then. But in support units like the CBT SPT Bn, the Bde Cdr assigned me to, '86-part of '87. There were many females, and many I saw were good at their jobs. An E-4 female was my Driver/Clerk Typist in my Maint/Log Section and she was a pretty good soldier and at doing her job.

So the changes you mentioned either happened before I went into the Army or after I ETS'd. I guess I was too concerned like many of my fellow Officers and our NCOs with getting the job done/completing mission. Seems today that appears to be secondary and more concerned about PC, woke, gender, race, "witch hunting for White Supremacists", etc., etc. AFAIK that is not the way you have combat ready forces, etc. At least not in my experiences. You train to be warfighters, etc. … not all this other that is rampant in our society, etc., today …

As for fighting "white supremacy" in the Military -- as you know the military was formally integrated in 1948, and after over 70 years of evolution and experience it had become the least racist, most color-blind institution of our government? Until now.

Bingo !

A very wise man once said: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Why do some people obsess about race, gender, sexuality etc? It's because those same people are insecure and harbor within themselves the very things they rail against, racism, misogyny, etc.

The military should be concerned if a person meets the physical and mental qualifications of serving as well as being a person of good character. Everything else is political nonsense. All this "diversity" training is unneeded and all it does is create a problem where none existed. Training should focus on primary job skills which actually results in critical life and death skills.

Putin is a nationalist and openly critical of Globalism.

Putin is a kleptocrat and his nationalism is deeply rooted in his KGB background. He has openly and consistently stated that the fall of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century. The global acceptance of basic democratic norms such as open accounting principles are an existential threat to both the kleptocracy of Putin and the fundamental corruption of the Chinese Communist Party. The unity of the Russian Kleptocracy and the Chinese Communist Party is simply a recognition that basic democratic principles are an existential threat and that the example of successful plural and open societies need to be treated as such.

Do you think maternity flight suits are at the top of Putin's priorities for his military? Russia, and more significantly China are going to eat our lunch.

I can only agree with all of you, it is sad what the USMC has turned into. Incapable of combat, a bunch of woke wimps with glasses. I remember when I used to respect them, not so any more. I read what you write and agree, it is no longer a serious fighting force. Not compared to the Russians or Chinese at least.

The military should be concerned if a person meets the physical and mental qualifications of serving as well as being a person of good character. Everything else is political nonsense. All this "diversity" training is unneeded and all it does is create a problem where none existed. Training should focus on primary job skills which actually results in critical life and death skills.

BINGO !!!! 👍👍 If you are not training for combat ops, MOS skills, etc., … you are wasting time, IMO …

Putin is a kleptocrat and his nationalism is deeply rooted in his KGB background. He has openly and consistently stated that the fall of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century.

Once KGB … Always KGB …

He is probably very much upset he is a very far second to the threat the PRC posses to the USA.

Som leaders talk tough, while other leaders are tough. I think Putin is the later.

"In July 2020, Tucker Carlson Tonight broke the record for highest-rated program in U.S. cable news history,"

Sounds like a lot of people listen to his opinions.

Which says more about the viewers than the host. Sadly.

Which says more about the viewers than the host. Sadly.

Nice not so veiled insult. Sadly. Which fake news do you watch?

"Which fake news do you watch?"

Uh….. Tucker?

U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.'

"Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."

Sorry the joke was just hanging there LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Fox's Tucker Carlson had another good day on Thursday, winning the top spot among total viewers, as well as in the valuable demographic of viewers age 25-54.

link

it sounds like a Stallone Movie.

Imagine someone waking up only now after 20 years of coma.

Som leaders talk tough, while other leaders are tough. I think Putin is the later.

BINGO ! Ex-KGB vs. ? 🤔

Fox's Tucker Carlson had another good day on Thursday, winning the top spot among total viewers, as well as in the valuable demographic of viewers age 25-54.

Bingo ! That speaks volumes IMO … If I say anything else I'd go DH …
🐶🏠

Imagine someone waking up only now after 20 years of coma.

😆 I feel that way every time I turn on the morning news ! It's like the old Superman Comic with Bizarro World !!!! 🦸‍♂️ 🌌🪐 🦹‍♂️

Yes, we are living in Bizzarro World. I think the highly biased ‘drive by media' has a lot to do with it. They see racism in everything. I think the vast majority of decent, hard working people are starting to catch on and see through the fake news.

Well gentlemen, I feel entitled to a small boast.

I got up at 5.30am this morning and went to the gym where I managed to do three sets of 8 turkish get ups with a 16KG kettlebell and other only slightly less excruciating exercise – including carrying 48Kg for 400 meters. Beat that Putin. Not saying that I am training like Rocky, but I now feel less fat and less annoyed about the media. Things are looking up. Just bring it on Tucker, Lemon, Maddow, Cuomo, et al.

Yes, we are living in Bizzarro World. I think the highly biased ‘drive by media' has a lot to do with it. They see racism in everything. I think the vast majority of decent, hard working people are starting to catch on and see through the fake news.

Yep I think so too. Hopefully this will continue …

Beat that Putin.

Yes but William … you were not KGB !

Well … wait🤔 … maybe you were ? 😮