Open Letter from Retired Generals and Admirals Regarding Afghanistan

The retired Flag Officers signing this letter are calling for the resignation and retirement of the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) based on negligence in performing their duties primarily involving events surrounding the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. The hasty retreat has left initial estimates at ~15,000 Americans stranded in dangerous areas controlled by a brutal enemy along with ~25,000 Afghan citizens who supported American forces.

What should have happened upon learning of the Commander in Chief’s (President Biden’s) plan to quickly withdraw our forces and close the important power projection base Bagram, without adequate plans and forces in place to conduct the entire operation in an orderly fashion?

As principal military advisors to the CINC/President, the SECDEF and CJCS should have recommended against this dangerous withdrawal in the strongest possible terms. If they did not do everything within their authority to stop the hasty withdrawal, they should resign. Conversely, if they did do everything within their ability to persuade the CINC/President to not hastily exit the country without ensuring the safety of our citizens and Afghans loyal to America, then they should have resigned in protest as a matter of conscience and public statement.

The consequences of this disaster are enormous and will reverberate for decades beginning with the safety of Americans and Afghans who are unable to move safely to evacuation points; therefore, being de facto hostages of the Taliban at this time. The death and torture of Afghans has already begun and will result in a human tragedy of major proportions. The loss of billions of dollars in advanced military equipment and supplies falling into the hands of our enemies is catastrophic. The damage to the reputation of the United States is indescribable. We are now seen, and will be seen for many years, as an unreliable partner in any multinational agreement or operation. Trust in the United States is irreparably damaged.

Moreover, now our adversaries are emboldened to move against America due to the weakness displayed in Afghanistan. China benefits the most followed by Russia, Pakistan, Iran, North Korea and others. Terrorists around the world are emboldened and able to pass freely into our country through our open border with Mexico.

However, it is advisable that, the disease should be cialis tablets india provided in the form. The internet based technique is addressed to several categories of age, but the most exhilarated clients are teenagers who adore cialis soft tablets user-friendly software programs. The ingredients of this herbal massage oil is prepared for massaging the male genital organ. raindogscine.com generic viagra Secondly, they might cialis prescription browse this be the best supplement for Beautiful Skin and a younger-looking appearance.

Besides these military operational reasons for resignations, there are leadership, training, and morale reasons for resignations. In interviews, congressional testimony, and public statements it has become clear that top leaders in our military are placing mandatory emphasis on PC “wokeness” related training which is extremely divisive and harmful to unit cohesion, readiness, and war fighting capability. Our military exists to fight and win our Nation’s wars and that must be the sole focus of our top military leaders.

For these reasons we call on the SECDEF Austin and the CJCS General Milley to resign. A fundamental principle in the military is holding those in charge responsible and accountable for their actions or inactions. There must be accountability at all levels for this tragic and avoidable debacle.

Signed

RADM Philip Anselmo, USN, (ret) MG Joe Arbuckle, USA (ret) BG John C. Arick, USMC (ret) BG Billy A. Barrett, USAF (ret) RADM Jon Bayless, USN, (ret) BG Charles Bishop, USAF (ret) BG Don Bolduc, USA (ret) MG William Bowdon, USMC (ret) LTG William Boykin, USA (ret) MG Edward Bracken, USAF (ret) VADM Toney Michael Bucchi, USN (ret) MG Bobby Butcher, USMC (ret) BG Jim L. Cash, USAF (ret) LTG James E. Chambers USAF (ret) MG Carroll D. Childers, USA (ret) RADm Arthur Clark, USN (ret) VADM Ed Clexton, USN, (ret) MG John J. Closner III, USAF, (ret) BG Peter b. Collins, USMC (ret) MG David L Commons USAF (ret) MG James l. Dozier, USA (ret) BG Keith B. Connolly USAF (ret) BG Bob Floyd, USA (ret) MG Larry Fortmer, USAF (ret) BG Jerome V. Foust, USA (ret) BG Jimmy E. Fowler, USA (ret) BG Jerome V. Foust, USA (ret) RADM J. Fraser, USN (ret) MG John T. Furlow, USA (ret) MG Francis C. Gideon, USAF (ret) MG Lee V. Greer, USAF (ret) BG John H. Grueser, USAF (ret) MG Ken Hageman, USAF (ret) Gen Alfred Hansen, USAF (ret) MG Bryan G. Hawley, USAF (ret) MG John W. Hawley, USAF (ret) BG Norman Ham, USAF (ret) RADM Donald Hickman, USN (ret) MG William B. Hobgood, USA (ret) MG Bob Hollingworth, USMC (ret) MG Jerry D. Holmes, USAF (ret) ADM. Jerome L. Johnson USN (ret) RADM John King, USN (ret) BG Douglas E. Lee, USA (ret) MG J.S. Lynch, USMC (ret) RADM(L) Grady L. Jackson USN (ret) RADM Ronny Jackson USN (ret) MG Anthony Kropp USA (ret) RADM Chuck Kubic, CEC, USN (ret). MG James E. Livingston, USMC, MOH (ret) MG John D. Logeman, USAF (ret) MG Jarvis D. Lynch, USMC (ret) LTG Fred McCorkle, USMC (ret) LTG Thomas McInerney, USAF (ret) BG Michael P. McRaney, USAF (ret) BG James M. Mead, USMC (ret) BG Joe Mensching, USAF (ret) MG John F. Miller, USAF (ret) RADM John A. Moriarty, USN (ret) RADM David R. Morris, USN (ret) BG Ben Nelson, USAF (ret) BG Joe Oder, USA, (ret) MG Ray O’Mara, USAF (ret) MG Joe S. Owens, USA (ret) BG John a. Paterson, USAF (ret) RADM Russ Penniman, USN (ret) MG Richard Perraut, USAF (ret) VADM John Poindexter, USN (ret) RADM J.J. Quinn, USN (ret) LTG Clifford H. Rees, USAF (ret) BG Teddy E. Rinebarger, USAF (ret) RADM Norman Saunders, USCG (ret) LTG Hubert G. Smith, USA (ret) MG James Stewart, USAF (ret) RADM Jeremy D. Taylor, USN (ret) LTG William Thurman, USAF (ret) BG Robert Titus, USAF, (ret) LTG Lansford E. Trapp Jr, USAF (ret) BG Richard J. Valente, USA (ret) MG Paul Vallely, USA (ret) BG William L. Welch, USAF (ret) MG Kenneth W. Weir, USMCR (ret) MG Mike Wiedemer, USAF (ret) MG Richard O. Wightman, Jr. USA (ret) BG Robert E. Windham, USA (ret) RADM Denny Wisely, USN. (ret) BG Robert V. Woods, USAF (ret.)

Quick Analysis

Putin’s Saber Rattling

Earlier this week, President Biden reversed his 2022 decision, authorizing the provision of antipersonnel land mines to the Ukrainian government. It follows an earlier Administration authorization to allow the use of an advanced American missile system capable of striking as deep as 100 miles inside Russian territory. The US election season may be ending, but both Russia and the West show no indication of stepping down the conflict. Russian propaganda continues to swell as the Kremlin increases its threats to use nuclear weapons against the West. Last week Andrey Sushentsov, program director of the pro-Kremlin think tank Valdai Discussion Club (VDC), published an article on growing nuclear tensions in the region. Official Russian language in the last few years has been threatening. Since the US election, rhetoric like that in the Sushentsov article, has approached the level of nuclear blackmail. The VDC article’s main theme centers on Russia’s intent to directly confront the West militarily if the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) becomes involved in Russia’s conflict with Ukraine. “On the one hand, these threats are intended to frighten the West, but on the other, Russian propagandists themselves are starting to believe in the inevitability of escalation,” according to Ksenia Kirillova of the Jamestown Foundation. On November 11, Sushentsov wrote that “The conflict will reach a completely new level, with unpredictable consequences for Europe and the entire world.” Kirillova points out that Putin’s distorted image of the world is divorced from reality and is causing the Kremlin to issue demands that are impossible to fulfill. Financial and other Russian resources needed to support Putin’s war are growing scarcer at the same time. This week the Kremlin announced a reduction of payments to its soldiers. Recently North Korea acknowledged it was sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine as Putin is running out of bodies to use as cannon fire. The war is not going well for Russia. One question floating around the Washington intelligence community is whether Putin will act out of desperation before President-elect Trump assumes office. In recent months the Russian propaganda machine is spewing out materials from fairly reputable analytical platforms inside the country. Kirillova says that “Kremlin ‘experts’ do not conceal that such threats are only intended to break the West psychologically, as they themselves are not prepared for full-scale nuclear war.” Despite Russia’s lack of preparation for an all-out war with the West, the expanding nuclear rhetoric carries with it an increase in the threat of a full-scale war in multiple theaters of operation. In June 2023 a founder of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, Sergey Karaganov, called for “delivering a pre-emptive strike of retaliation” on Poland to force the West to surrender. In the previous month, Dmitry Suslov, a direct of research programs at the policy center proposed organizing “a demonstration nuclear explosion” aimed at intimidating the West. In September, President Putin announced a reappraisal of Russian nuclear doctrine after speaking earlier in the year at the plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and jokingly calling Suslov a “scary person.” Pavel Baev, writing in the European Daily Monitor, says “Putin intends his announcement to mark an escalation of nuclear brinkmanship and influence the proceedings of future Ukrainian peace efforts.” Putin is expanding the list of environmental conditions that are acceptable for using a nuclear weapon and incorporating it into Russian military doctrine. Baev adds that “The ups and downs of Russian brinkmanship are disconnected from the kinetic battles of the war, correlating instead with Ukrainian peace offensives, such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s first peace summit in Bürgenstock, Switzerland.” Despite the increase in vitriolic language, in a You Tube video published a week before the US presidential election, Karaganov openly assured the West the primary goal of the escalation is to break the American spirit and that of the West, not outright nuclear war. By Election Day in the US, with political prognosticators predicting a win for former president Trump, Karaganov changed his tune and called for an increased role in nuclear deterrence. Kirillova points out that Western concessions to Russia are unlikely to reduce the risk of nuclear escalation. The distorted reality inside the Kremlin continues to push that President-elect Trump is an adherent of “world government,” that Ukraine will create a nuclear weapon, and Russia must prepare for a nuclear conflagration to achieve its ambitions for a new world order. President-elect Trump has indicated he will not agree to concessions that destabilize Europe, the Middle East or other regions. Going forward a strong US foreign policy may be the most stabilizing course the West can count on to restrain Putin and his intent to rebuild the Russian empire. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. Illustration: Pixabay

Our Latest Television Program

War, Diplomacy and Human Relations

Have humans become less or more “tribal” in recent years? What are the implications for war, peace, and diplomacy? Watch our discussion with Professor John M. Ellis, author of “A Short history of Relations Between Peoples.” The stay tuned for a fascinating debate on the Ukraine crisis with Douglas Ernest, author of The Spirit of a True Patriot: The Inspiring story of Ret. Captain Douglas Ernest.” If you missed the program on your local station, watch it here: https://rumble.com/v5reraw-the-american-political-zone-november-19-2024.html