|
| Tom Watson's look at Foreign and Defense Policy |
Published: 08/05/2010 Author: Tom Watson
Posted On: August 5, 2010 at 9:56 AM By: |
Tom Watson is a third generation Naval Academy graduate whose grandfather was killed in action in World War II and whose father was an aviator, aircraft carrier CO and retired Rear Admiral. Tom is a retired Naval Officer and was also a flight officer who served three operational tours in the F-14 Tomcat including Desert Shield and as an instructor. A graduate of TOPGUN and the US Naval Test Pilot School, Tom performed flight testing at NAS Point Mugu for the F-14 and F/A-18 aircraft amassing nearly 3000 flight hours in tactical jets and almost 500 carrier arrested landings during his Naval career. Tom was nominated for the NASA Astronaut program and held the highest available security clearance. Tom’s experience in the Navy in both the operational and acquisition communities gives him a unique perspective and understanding of the challenges faced by our military.
Tom’s education includes a Bachelor of Science from the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD, a Master of Science in Systems Management from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles and a Master of Science in Aeronautical Engineering from the US Naval Post Graduate School in Monterey, CA. Tom is also a graduate of the prestigious US Naval Test Pilot School and the Navy Fighter Weapons School, TOPGUN.
Chris Hill
Foreign and Defense Policy
The first charge of our Federal government under our Constitution is to defend our individual liberties.
That is why the Bill of Rights was enacted shortly after the original Constitution was approved. The second is to provide
for our common defense. The current administration is getting an on the job education that we do in fact have enemies that
are determined to kill us. Hopefully, they will absorb that lesson and effectively defend the country and improve our
existing alliances and isolate our enemies. Unfortunately, this administration has tended to follow a policy of antagonizing
our allies and embracing our enemies. From slights against the United Kingdom to making the Israeli’s nervous about
our commitment to their country to a passive approach to Iran and North Korea, this administration has emboldened our
adversaries and made our traditional allies uncomfortable.
An unexpected irony of the struggles of the Cold War is that the demise of the Soviet Union has in some respects made the world
more dangerous, not less. We need to be clear headed regarding the threats we face from irreconcilable and irredeemable Islamic Terrorists
that would happily detonate a nuclear, biological or chemical weapon in any American city if they could. They will happily
detonate themselves and kill as many people as they can. This is an unfortunate fact of life in our world today. As John
Adams so wryly observed, facts are stubborn things. These enemies will not rest, quit or concede in our lifetime. We
need to acknowledge and accept that unfortunate reality and act accordingly. It is critical for the long-term survival of this
country that we retain our technological advantage and operational military edge. Threats always arise from
unforeseen places and operational readiness is the key to deterring aggression.
As a former military officer, I believe the best battle or war is the one you never have to fight. The
best way to never have to fight is to be so strong nobody wants to pick a fight with you. That simple reality seems lost on
many in our national leadership, and that is indeed a tragedy, as their more passive approach has historically always proven
to be hugely costly on a human scale. History has shown us again and again that weakness begets aggression. We have the
best military and we should aggressively commit to continuing to make that the case.Terrorists are just that, terrorists, and
should not be afforded rights granted only to legal American citizens or authorized visitors to this country. Terrorists are
simply unlawful enemy combatants and should be treated and tried under military, not civil, courts. We should be spending
our resources pursuing and eliminating terrorists threats, not defending them in our civil court system. Far too many
people in our government appear more concerned with the rights of terrorists than they appear to be in protecting the
country, this is hopelessly misguided and mirrors the mindset of the Federal bureaucracy preceding the 9/11 attacks.
|
|
| Posted on August 5, 2010 at 9:56 AM by
|
|
|
|
