Australian general gets key US Army post

Dude I know Aussies I'd follow into any battle any day and I would listen carefully to them regarding most things Pacific so I can't see the problem with this...at all. I assume he was the most qualified and cleared for the post.
I bet he surfs

Originally posted by howmuch4another
Dude I know Aussies I'd follow into any battle any day and I would listen carefully to them regarding most things Pacific so I can't see the problem with this...at all. I assume he was the most qualified and cleared for the post.

I bet he surfs

Agreed, they are excellent troops.
The problem is the slippery slope. President has now been set, what other United Nation commanders will take over American military posts? Would you be comfortable with an Afghanistan military officer commanding your troops? How about a Chinese (UN member since 1945), or Iranian (UN member since 1945) commander?
Like I said in my OP, the blue hats are coming! This is the beginning of the militarisation for the NWO.

reply to post by Violater1


I actually applaud this move if it is from a strategic stand point. If it is political...well, then never mind.

I've worked with our AUS/NZ cousins plenty of times as well as the many of NATOs SOF. All great guys in my opinion.

Nothing beats “Eyes on the Ground.”

Originally posted by DaRAGE
reply to post by Violater1

 

Doesn't this sort of thing happen all the time, like NATO?

Hit the nail on the head.

Often results in heated arguments, but the mission for the most part gets done.

But Operation Market Garden was nor so well executed due to regional rivalry.

reply to post by Violater1


I don't see the appointment of an ally as anything close to your "what if's". I also don't see a slippery slope and I don't get the UN heebie jeebies from it. Pretty good credentials and experience in that link you provided.

reply to post by Violater1

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!!
First Australia then China??
Globalism...creeping into the military.

reply to post by howmuch4another


I don't think he read his own link.
Nor do I believe he has heard of the ANZUS pact. ( who said anything about the UN?)

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by howmuch4another
Dude I know Aussies I'd follow into any battle any day and I would listen carefully to them regarding most things Pacific so I can't see the problem with this...at all. I assume he was the most qualified and cleared for the post.

I bet he surfs

Agreed, they are excellent troops.
The problem is the slippery slope. President has now been set, what other United Nation commanders will take over American military posts? Would you be comfortable with an Afghanistan military officer commanding your troops? How about a Chinese (UN member since 1945), or Iranian (UN member since 1945) commander?
Like I said in my OP, the blue hats are coming! This is the beginning of the militarisation for the NWO.

What are you going on about? I guess you have never heard of NATO or any other allied joint commands? Australia is a close ally. If this freaks you out then I worry when somebody tells you that since 1968 a Canadian has been the Deputy Commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command. That is on US soil and position of much much more power.

And what is with the UN rant? What does this have to do with the UN? Have you ever worked with UN forces? It is not like whomever is the commander can really tell them what to do, they all still call home to get an order approved. That is why UN forces have a terrible reaction time in peace keeping op. It is a nightmare. So you can put the UN taking over fantasy away.

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by howmuch4another
Dude I know Aussies I'd follow into any battle any day and I would listen carefully to them regarding most things Pacific so I can't see the problem with this...at all. I assume he was the most qualified and cleared for the post.

I bet he surfs

Agreed, they are excellent troops.
The problem is the slippery slope. President has now been set, what other United Nation commanders will take over American military posts? Would you be comfortable with an Afghanistan military officer commanding your troops? How about a Chinese (UN member since 1945), or Iranian (UN member since 1945) commander?
Like I said in my OP, the blue hats are coming! This is the beginning of the militarisation for the NWO.

What are you going on about? I guess you have never heard of NATO or any other allied joint commands? Australia is a close ally. If this freaks you out then I worry when somebody tells you that since 1968 a Canadian has been the Deputy Commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command. That is on US soil and position of much much more power.

And what is with the UN rant? What does this have to do with the UN? Have you ever worked with UN forces? It is not like whomever is the commander can really tell them what to do, they all still call home to get an order approved. That is why UN forces have a terrible reaction time in peace keeping op. It is a nightmare. So you can put the UN taking over fantasy away.

edit on 1-2-2013 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)

Your analysis is wrong.
The North American Air Defense Agreement, signed on May 12, 1958 by the United States and Canada, created a response to Cold War fears
The United States and Canada, formed The North American Air Defense Agreement, on May 12, 1958. The Soviet Union was making forays into both Canada and The U.S. This JOINT effort was to deter and warn both Canada and the U.S of an airborne attack by the Soviet Union.
The post that Mr Obama has filled HAS ALWAYS been filled by a U.S. Officer. This post is “The U.S. Army Pacific's deputy commander for operations.”
Your attempt to compare apples with snowballs is simply wrong.

Originally posted by Timely
reply to post by howmuch4another

 

I don't think he read his own link.
Nor do I believe he has heard of the ANZUS pact. ( who said anything about the UN?)

You are ignorant of the Australia, New Zealand, United States (ANZUS) pact. There is NO part of this pact that has a foreign commander, filling another sovereigns military post.
Get your facts together.

Australian Generals wouldn't have any problems with gun grabs either...would they?

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by Violater1

 

And so it begins...
They know that American soldiers will have trouble firing on their own so this is the beginning of implementing non Americans in the American military, soon they'll be inside the US, mark my words ...
game over, it was over when Spain counted the votes and decided the 2012 election for us.

Your insight is impeccable. This will only cause more problems, and condition the U.S. troops to follow orders from a non-American.
It's sad that some of the sheeple are so near sighted. It only adds, to this once great countries down fall, and escalates the proliferation of a one world order.

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by howmuch4another
Dude I know Aussies I'd follow into any battle any day and I would listen carefully to them regarding most things Pacific so I can't see the problem with this...at all. I assume he was the most qualified and cleared for the post.

I bet he surfs

Agreed, they are excellent troops.
The problem is the slippery slope. President has now been set, what other United Nation commanders will take over American military posts? Would you be comfortable with an Afghanistan military officer commanding your troops? How about a Chinese (UN member since 1945), or Iranian (UN member since 1945) commander?
Like I said in my OP, the blue hats are coming! This is the beginning of the militarisation for the NWO.

What are you going on about? I guess you have never heard of NATO or any other allied joint commands? Australia is a close ally. If this freaks you out then I worry when somebody tells you that since 1968 a Canadian has been the Deputy Commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command. That is on US soil and position of much much more power.

And what is with the UN rant? What does this have to do with the UN? Have you ever worked with UN forces? It is not like whomever is the commander can really tell them what to do, they all still call home to get an order approved. That is why UN forces have a terrible reaction time in peace keeping op. It is a nightmare. So you can put the UN taking over fantasy away.

edit on 1-2-2013 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)

Your analysis is wrong.
The North American Air Defense Agreement, signed on May 12, 1958 by the United States and Canada, created a response to Cold War fears
The United States and Canada, formed The North American Air Defense Agreement, on May 12, 1958. The Soviet Union was making forays into both Canada and The U.S. This JOINT effort was to deter and warn both Canada and the U.S of an airborne attack by the Soviet Union.
The post that Mr Obama has filled HAS ALWAYS been filled by a U.S. Officer. This post is “The U.S. Army Pacific's deputy commander for operations.”
Your attempt to compare apples with snowballs is simply wrong.

So wait it is ok for US forces to be under French command in WW1, British command in Russia post WW1, by the French, UK, and Australians in WW2, by Canadians in NORAD, by (inesert European nation here) in NATO, By South Koreans as the Deputy Commander in the RoK. But you get upset when a an Australian is Deputy Commanding General, Operations in ARPAC? They guy who is in charge of running joint exercises in Australia and other Pacific nations? You do understand that is what he does right? He is not the Deputy Commander of ARPAC that belongs to Brigadier General Roger F. Mathews. He is in charge of joint military exercises. He answers to an American. So try and pull yourself together.

Sorry, usually I side with the conspiracy; however, in this case I fail to see one.

The US Army has several posts each year that are staffed in an exchange type program. There is a Battalion in the 82nd Airbore that has a British Major as the S3 or Operations Officer. I did a tour in the Training Detachment as the Executive Officer with the SAS.

I did all the things a British Officer would do in that position. Handle personnel, trian people, staff meetings, I as 2IC even assumed Command in his absence with complete legal authority.

We have these type exchanges primarily with the UK, Australia, NZ. The purpose is to foster an understanding of our closest allies and how they manage and lead their forces.

This is silly. To think that American troops would somehow be conditioned to take orders from "just anybody" is absurd. We have an amicable relationship with the Aussies. Not so much the Iranians/Chinese as previously stated.

Also, I am an officer working on an American military base, and we have a British major in charge of one of our flights in a different squadron. Though not my direct superior, he's still a higher ranking officer and I would take orders from him out of respect for his rank and duty position. This happens EVERYWHERE. Stop making such a big deal out of it.

Originally posted by qalameid
This is silly. To think that American troops would somehow be conditioned to take orders from "just anybody" is absurd. We have an amicable relationship with the Aussies. Not so much the Iranians/Chinese as previously stated.

Also, I am an officer working on an American military base, and we have a British major in charge of one of our flights in a different squadron. Though not my direct superior, he's still a higher ranking officer and I would take orders from him out of respect for his rank and duty position. This happens EVERYWHERE. Stop making such a big deal out of it.

As you said" we have a British major in charge of one of our flights", and "Though not my direct superior, he's still a higher ranking officer and I would take orders from him out of respect." So your OK taking an order to fire on Americans?
And what American base, located on the CONUS, are you? Not that I don't doubt you, but I do.

Originally posted by Golf66
Sorry, usually I side with the conspiracy; however, in this case I fail to see one.

The US Army has several posts each year that are staffed in an exchange type program .

Yes, but it is not a permanent position.

There is a Battalion in the 82nd Airbore that has a British Major as the S3 or Operations Officer. I did a tour in the Training Detachment as the Executive Officer with the SAS.

And what part of the CONUS were you stationed at?

I did all the things a British Officer would do in that position. Handle personnel, trian people, staff meetings, I as 2IC even assumed Command in his absence with complete legal authority.

We have these type exchanges primarily with the UK, Australia, NZ. The purpose is to foster an understanding of our closest allies and how they manage and lead their forces.

I respect your opinion 04. But to have a United States Army position, that has been historically filled by a United States commissioned officer, occupied by any U.N ally is absurd. I too have no problem with Canadian, U.K, or Australian soldiers, but the president is being set to allow non-Americian troops, to take leadership positions in the American Military. Or visa verse. I am not OK with this.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Violater1

 

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!!
First Australia then China??
Globalism...creeping into the military.

Your the only bloke who see's it for what it is.

The only thing these LUNATIC american's can talk about is war.

They owe $16 trillion to a private bank and still talk about war, make no bones about it folks, the americans are in for the greatest shock of their lives in March when Greek style austerity comes to town.

YAWN, nothingburger.

I'd be a bit concerned if any foreign officer were 2nd in command of a CONUS based formation, but I don't really have a problem with such a position in a theater command being held by members of any of our major Pacific allies (Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand). There seems to be plenty of precedent of such from our forces whose AO is Europe.

Let me be the next to say that if I'm going to be fighting beside anyone but another American, I'd like it to be either a Brit, Canadian, Australian, or New Zealander in no particular order. Though we have minor cultural differences, we are more alike than we are different. I think a family analogy is most appropriate. In a family you may have several different personalities and beliefs that can cause anything from good natured ribbing, to heated arguments to fist fights, but let someone from outside the family threaten one of the others and differences are forgotten with the appearance of an outside threat.

Originally posted by Violater1
Yes, but it is not a permanent position.

The position Operations Officer is a permanent position - it is filled every once in a while by an Officer from the US Canada, AUS, or UK on a rotational basis. While it is not always in the same battalion there are more than one exchange officers at all times in the Division.

The position this Australian General is filling was last filled by a US guy and probably will be next time they rotate out. They might then make the Deputy Commander of Logistics an exchange position.

Originally posted by Violater1
And what part of the CONUS were you stationed at?

I was in England - didn't I say that? However, the exchange officers assigned to the 82nd will serve wherever the Battalion does. If they deploy he deploys with them, if not he will live, work and play right there at Fort Bragg.

Originally posted by Violater1
I respect your opinion 04. But to have a United States Army position, that has been historically filled by a United States commissioned officer, occupied by any U.N ally is absurd.

I served 24 years, I have seen exchange officers from Germany, UK, Australia and Canada serving in permanent positions in CONUS units and on deployments in a combat theater. I have never heard of one from a non-NATO country. I have worked with and directly for a South Korean Officer in an American unit also but nowhere other than in S. Korea - I don't think they exchange out of the theater.

We won't be having any Rwandan or Kenyan Officers on our rosters anytime soon. I met a 27 year old "Colonel" once who was royalty of some kind in Saudi Arabia. His Highness' authority was somewhat of a running joke even among their own military. We don't exchange with countries who do business in that manner. We might work with them but not for them.

We limit our exchanges to nations whose standards of selection and training for officers closely mirrors our own, not those shake-n-bake countries that will make their uncles, brother's, sister's son a General because they can...

I have confidence we are not going to turn over our troops to the Command of Officers of another nation who do not have a professional Officer Corps.

Originally posted by Violater1
I too have no problem with Canadian, U.K, or Australian soldiers, but the president is being set to allow non-Americian troops, to take leadership positions in the American Military. Or visa verse. I am not OK with this.

I've seen Officers from almost every nation on the globe at our professional development schools; however, I have yet to see true exchanges with other than NATO forces and then only Germany, UK, Australia, and Canada. I think NZ is in the same category but I have never met anyone from there.

I doubt we will see any forces subjected to third world military authority any time soon. I don't suspect we ever will.