The military and the Presidency / by kevin murray

Our first President, George Washington, was General and Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, the highest military position in our land.  Grant was appointed General-in-Chief of the Union Army during the civil war and later became President for two terms.  Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of the Allied Invasion of Europe during World War II and was elected to two terms as President.  Another nine Presidents reached the rank of either Brigadier General or Major General in their careers before they too became elected as President.   In fact, most Presidents have served in the military in some capacity or other in their lives, with only twelve of our forty-four presidents having never been in uniform.  Should such a high percentage of Presidents having been at such a high military ranking worry us?  Yes, I believe so.


While I have the utmost admiration for Washington, Grant, and Eisenhower, there is a supreme danger in any top military leader becoming President of the United States.  Our defense department today is our largest employer, has a monstrous global footprint, and a budget that is somewhere around $650 billion to nearly $800 billion, depending on what departments that you do or don't assign to the Department of Defense.  Our military is second to none, and has the power, personnel, and strength to annihilate, dominate, overturn, control, or invade virtually any country in the world in which that country will either have to submit forthwith or bear the consequences of their obstinacy.


While you can make arguments either way, that for instance the United States given its awesome power has been remarkably restrained in its use of it in foreign endeavors, or you could also argue with validity that the United States has acted as the world's bully policeman with virtual impunity; what can't be argue, is that power of that sort is truly dangerous in the wrong hands.    A man that commands respect from the military knows the military, and how to use the military, is one or two steps removed from being a quasi-dictator in our country.  If a man has control of the military, what use are our laws, our courts, or our people (especially if unarmed), to stymie the tide.


The declaration of martial law is a distinct possibility in America.  But it is also something that has to be carefully planned and thought about.  One problem that the military has is that we have a civilian police force, but the military has already been working on that.  The bridge to control the police forces of America is Homeland Security, and through close cooperation between Homeland Security and police departments all over America, there has been created a symbiotic relationship between the two.  This is critical, because it is that civilian police force which will initially give our Department of Defense "boots on the ground" in every significant city.  The government is also actively promoting its agenda of taking back Americans' right to arms, and specifically the arms themselves.  They will do anything to take back those armaments from the wrong civilians, including simply buying the arms back at any price.  Taking those arms back is an important step, not absolutely mandatory, but highly desirable.  If the government is not successful in their actions they will make it their business to know precisely where the arms are located and when the time comes they will move in a military like precision to neutralize those people and to seize control.


It can't happen here.  It can and it will.  The government wants to believe that it knows best and prefers not to argue about it.  The more power that we cede to the government and to the military-industrial complex, the tighter the rope is around our collective necks.  Great USA military leaders who understood their responsibilities and had integrity and restraint of power appear to be a thing of the past.  If General Washington was to come back to life today, he would be marginalized, compromised, or assassinated.