LLoyd Austin
Jan 22, 2021 12:37:40 #
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/22/lloyd-austin-becomes-nations-first-black-defense-secretary/6661471002/
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/30/politics/biden-lloyd-austin-waiver/index.html
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/12/08/two-senate-democrats-oppose-waiver-for-bidens-secdef-pick/
There is good reason the National Security Act of 1947 bars ex-military officers from becoming SECDEF within 10 years (later amended to seven years) of retirement. Maintaining civilian control over the military is one reason. Another is the simple fact that senior military officers are trained to be apolitical.
Congratulations to Lloyd Austin...It just goes to show that the Democrats do NOT care about the laws of the US which they do not agree should be followed.
I didn't agree about the waiver for "Mad Dog" Mattis, either.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/30/politics/biden-lloyd-austin-waiver/index.html
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/12/08/two-senate-democrats-oppose-waiver-for-bidens-secdef-pick/
There is good reason the National Security Act of 1947 bars ex-military officers from becoming SECDEF within 10 years (later amended to seven years) of retirement. Maintaining civilian control over the military is one reason. Another is the simple fact that senior military officers are trained to be apolitical.
Congratulations to Lloyd Austin...It just goes to show that the Democrats do NOT care about the laws of the US which they do not agree should be followed.
I didn't agree about the waiver for "Mad Dog" Mattis, either.
Jan 22, 2021 12:42:01 #
“””” Another is the simple fact that senior military officers are trained to be apolitical.
“””””
That sounds like a big huge plus for being a SecDef.
Btw.. what law was broken. Seems they followed the law precisely in seeking and getting the waiver.
“””””
That sounds like a big huge plus for being a SecDef.
Btw.. what law was broken. Seems they followed the law precisely in seeking and getting the waiver.
Jan 22, 2021 13:08:07 #
captivecookie
Loc: Washington state
If the law was written with a provision to waiver, then it wasn't broken. That is, the letter of the law want broken. It SEEMS like the spirit and intent of the law was circumvented, but I can't say that for sure until such time as I read the law.
It also seems like there were other qualifications that convinced the President he was the man for the job.
It also seems like there were other qualifications that convinced the President he was the man for the job.
Jan 22, 2021 14:02:37 #
captivecookie wrote:
If the law was written with a provision to waiver, then it wasn't broken. That is, the letter of the law want broken. It SEEMS like the spirit and intent of the law was circumvented, but I can't say that for sure until such time as I read the law.
It also seems like there were other qualifications that convinced the President he was the man for the job.
It also seems like there were other qualifications that convinced the President he was the man for the job.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/113
10 U.S. Code § 113 - Secretary of Defense
(a)There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force.
The word waiver is not in the code.
Mattis was the first to have the waiver for appx 30+ years. I think that the 7 year waiting period should be more strictly enforced.
Jan 22, 2021 14:05:26 #
https://www.lawfareblog.com/military-waiver-requirement-secretary-defense-shouldnt-substitute-individuation
Pretty good analysis.
Pretty good analysis.
Jan 22, 2021 14:14:04 #
Please explain why you are so against a ex military to lead the department of defense.
1. They have the most experience in the field .
2. They are the single group of Americans that are must apolitical- which the DOD should always be.
4. They have lived and honored an oath to defend the Constitution their whole adult life.
1. They have the most experience in the field .
2. They are the single group of Americans that are must apolitical- which the DOD should always be.
4. They have lived and honored an oath to defend the Constitution their whole adult life.
Jan 22, 2021 14:24:47 #
Not against ex military at all. Just want the rules/laws followed. 7 years is what the law says, and the waiver is not in the law. After 40 years we have an accomplished Vet, but he needs some civie time to readjust and the 7 year requirement is a law.
Jan 22, 2021 14:39:22 #
Why ? Adjust to what ?
They are clearly the most qualified for the job.
They are clearly the most qualified for the job.
Jan 22, 2021 14:49:01 #
DennyT wrote:
Why ? Adjust to what ?
They are clearly the most qualified for the job.
They are clearly the most qualified for the job.
Is that why there is a law requiring a 7 year wait prior to being allowed?
Jan 22, 2021 15:59:34 #
So the only reason you have is it is the law. It’s also the law about transgenders .
Don’t forget when that law was written. It did not originate wit he founders. It was written in 1947 and was originally 10 years. Time to change again.
Different time different place .
Don’t forget when that law was written. It did not originate wit he founders. It was written in 1947 and was originally 10 years. Time to change again.
Different time different place .
Jan 22, 2021 16:35:00 #
DennyT wrote:
So the only reason you have is it is the law. It’s also the law about transgenders .
Don’t forget when that law was written. It did not originate wit he founders. It was written in 1947 and was originally 10 years. Time to change again.
Different time different place .
Don’t forget when that law was written. It did not originate wit he founders. It was written in 1947 and was originally 10 years. Time to change again.
Different time different place .
Indeed. Different rationale for approving the waiver also.
"I backed the waiver for General Mattis in large part because of Donald Trump's inexperience and temperament and had no intention of supporting another waiver so soon," Reed said. "That rationale seems almost quaint now considering the seismic forces we are currently facing."
Reed said he believes Austin is "the right person to lead the Pentagon through a unique, complex, and unprecedented set of challenges."
https://insidedefense.com/insider/path-cleared-austins-confirmation
Jan 22, 2021 17:03:37 #
Another thought concerning today’s world .
The reason all of trumps general officer selection were fired was because they were indeed s as political and kept their oath to the constitution above politics.
That is the world we live in and those types are hard to find no days.
The reason all of trumps general officer selection were fired was because they were indeed s as political and kept their oath to the constitution above politics.
That is the world we live in and those types are hard to find no days.
Jan 22, 2021 17:17:38 #
Jan 23, 2021 06:49:49 #
lbrande wrote:
Nothing illegal about it: Congress granted a waiver, so the law has been followed. If no waiver had been granted then the law would not have been followed.
Jan 24, 2021 12:50:46 #
National Park wrote:
Nothing illegal about it: Congress granted a waiver, so the law has been followed. If no waiver had been granted then the law would not have been followed.
Aside from Mattis, the last time a waiver was given was due to the Korean War, and Truman's selection.
This is an abuse by congress, plain and simple.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.