Admiral Michael Mullen: A Navy Man Looks Out for the Army

Good Admiral

Good Admiral Mike has combat experience in that he sailed 50 milem the action in viet during the iran hostage crisis. He has flown over Iraq. I'm glad they have someone with combat experience to lead the Army during these wars. Increasingly the Navy, Marines and to lesser extent the Air Force do not have a Mission... except to tell the Army how to do it's job. The Defense dept has been led down the primrose path of Naval and Airforces ever since Hiroshima .. Now we realize that these Naval and Air Forces are almost useless in Warfare as Nuclear weapons are really not an option.

The American Military and Naval forces are in need of a real reorganizatin giving emphasis to missions rather than equipment which appears flashy but has little combat role.

wtc 11/9 job of Henry Kissinger

http://www.realjewnews.com /?p=238

tells about how Larry Silverstein made money 11/9

Adm. Mullen is the best of the best

I served with both Admiral Mullen and Rear Admiral Cobb aboard the USS Fox CG-33 when they were both LCDR's and department heads (Mullen - Engineering, Cobb - Weapons). I came on board in Bremerton, WA at the beginning of a regular overhaul. The USS Fox was one of the best Cruisers in the fleet and both these men served under a exceptional CO, Captain Robert Steele (Who retired as a Rear Admiral as well).

LCDR Mullen was a hands on guy. He was right down in the engineering spaces with the snipes during the rip out phase and many a day he came out with more soot on his face and clothing as any enlisted man. He expected 100% and gave the same. He operated with the highest of standards, and we came out of the overhaul with an engineering plant that was flawless. We passed OPPE and all the other engineering sea trials dead nuts and depoloyed to WESTPAC but ended up relieving the USS Leahy CG-16 in the Persian Gulf during the hostage crisis and stayed there during the Iran-Iraq War to protect the straits and the Saudi/Kuwait oil terminals.

When I qualified as the first enlisted surface warfare specialist on the USS Fox, LCDR Mullen grilled me on every aspect of the engineering plant as I was a weapons type (FTM1). We all knew back then that LCDR Mullen would go far, and he made it to the top because he was mission oriented, takes no BS, doesn't accept excuses, and wasn't afraid to get his hands dirty and master what he was doing.

That is why he is focused on the Army and its needs vs being partial to the Navy. Adm. Mullen is our nation's top military commander and not just another Navy Admiral. He is not afraid to make tough decisions and showed thios when he relieved Adm Joe Sestak for being a poor leader/commander (Sestak is now in Congress).

Admiral Mullen is a dying breed who served during Vietnam and Iraq. He knows the cost of defeat.

We are very fortunate that both Mullen and Petraeus are guiding our military strategy in the middle east.

Let's not get carried away.

Before we go all ga-ga about how an Admiral is "protecting" the US Army. let's take a reality break. Since the beginning of the first Bush admin. the Army has had it budget raped repeatedly for everything except ongoing ground operations. Rumsfeld, and to a lessor extent Gates, has decided that the entire US Army should be 'special ops' troops. Somebodyhas sold them a bill of goods. There are artillery units all over the Army who havn't seen their guns(no less fired them)in YEARS. They remain "stored" somwhere while whole artillery units rotate personnel without ever having fired a shell.This is just one example, the situation is the same over all the combat arms branches except special operations. So while the good Admiral's concern for the troops is laudible, I am left wondering who worries about the Army as a complete fighting force? If Kim il Sung decides to go for broke in South Korea what trained up and equipped heavy divisions will the Army have to throw back at him? The 2nd Infrantry (half in Korea and half in the US) has the responsibility but the US half has been scavenged for Iraq service and disconnected from their equipment. The real answer, I'm afraid, will only come in the multitude of congresssional investigations after the US is forced to withdraw from the Korean peninsula and South Korea is forced to make a bad "peace" with the nuclear armed North Korea.

Perhaps some members from other branches can be cross trained and help in the ground role. We've already witnessed Coast Guard personnel playing a larger role in the beginning of this conflict. Can the Navy sailors look for ways to augment the forces in this situation?