Doubtful it would be NSA. The U.S. has no legal jurisdiction or authority to offer any kind of battlefield support in Ukraine it anywhere else, other than supplies. Remembers he's not a legitimate POTUS, so he has very limited Exec level access to official U.S. govt actions. It's the reason why "Buyden" has mainly, only, sent troops from logistical units to Poland, with only one or two combatant units acting as the logistics units' defense force. ONLY a legal and legitimate POTUS can order military units to attack any enemy infrastructure, including their interwebs networks. NSA is a military agency. So, this is where the Clowns In America come in. NSA doesn't work through clandestine, terror like orgs such as "Anonymous." But, the Clowns do. NSA works in an official capacity for DoD ISO NatSec and NetSec for the U.S. govt. The Clowns do, too, but [they]'re the only U.S. gov'tal group that uses terror groups to destabilize govts.
The "Buyden Admin" has no purview or jurisdiction over NSA because Trump made it a combatant command and then put Gen. Nakasone in charge. They ONLY answer to the legitimately elected and legally sworn in POTUS, as a combatant command, and since we don't have one of those at the moment, Devolution sets in and they basically run themselves under the last previously legally recognized POTUS's NatSec/NetSec policies, Trump's. DoD and the White House currently only have administrative authority over the normal, day-day military operations, i.e. everything non-combat related. Things like "diversity training," CRT "mandatory training," boot camps and job schooling, P.R. events, and the like.
The combatant commands are taking orders from some other entity or group outside of DoD, but not even those cammands are sure "who" that person or group really is. Official message traffic only ever shows the command where it originates from and the command recipients of the messages. Office names only, no personal names used as signatures, unless it's conveying an official address to the military commands like, say, Eisenhower's address to the troops on the eve of D-Day.
The one certain thing going around the military, and specifically the combatant commands right now is the thought that Buyden isn't in charge over the military like previous Presidents were. No one I've talked to is willing to speculate because of the current administrative climate under SecDef Austin right now. But they're quietly questioning amongst themselves atm. I don't know anyone in NSA, but I would include them in this because they're a combatant command now.
So what does that mean for the Afghanistan withdraw? Was that a military fuck up since they aren't answering to a legally elected president? Or was it Trump in command then, or rather them continuing to run on Trump's natsec policies? Trump was the one who initiated the command to withdraw about a year before it happened, a while before the election.
Doubtful it would be NSA. The U.S. has no legal jurisdiction or authority to offer any kind of battlefield support in Ukraine it anywhere else, other than supplies. Remembers he's not a legitimate POTUS, so he has very limited Exec level access to official U.S. govt actions. It's the reason why "Buyden" has mainly, only, sent troops from logistical units to Poland, with only one or two combatant units acting as the logistics units' defense force. ONLY a legal and legitimate POTUS can order military units to attack any enemy infrastructure, including their interwebs networks. NSA is a military agency. So, this is where the Clowns In America come in. NSA doesn't work through clandestine, terror like orgs such as "Anonymous." But, the Clowns do. NSA works in an official capacity for DoD ISO NatSec and NetSec for the U.S. govt. The Clowns do, too, but [they]'re the only U.S. gov'tal group that uses terror groups to destabilize govts.
The "Buyden Admin" has no purview or jurisdiction over NSA because Trump made it a combatant command and then put Gen. Nakasone in charge. They ONLY answer to the legitimately elected and legally sworn in POTUS, as a combatant command, and since we don't have one of those at the moment, Devolution sets in and they basically run themselves under the last previously legally recognized POTUS's NatSec/NetSec policies, Trump's. DoD and the White House currently only have administrative authority over the normal, day-day military operations, i.e. everything non-combat related. Things like "diversity training," CRT "mandatory training," boot camps and job schooling, P.R. events, and the like.
The combatant commands are taking orders from some other entity or group outside of DoD, but not even those cammands are sure "who" that person or group really is. Official message traffic only ever shows the command where it originates from and the command recipients of the messages. Office names only, no personal names used as signatures, unless it's conveying an official address to the military commands like, say, Eisenhower's address to the troops on the eve of D-Day.
The one certain thing going around the military, and specifically the combatant commands right now is the thought that Buyden isn't in charge over the military like previous Presidents were. No one I've talked to is willing to speculate because of the current administrative climate under SecDef Austin right now. But they're quietly questioning amongst themselves atm. I don't know anyone in NSA, but I would include them in this because they're a combatant command now.
So what does that mean for the Afghanistan withdraw? Was that a military fuck up since they aren't answering to a legally elected president? Or was it Trump in command then, or rather them continuing to run on Trump's natsec policies? Trump was the one who initiated the command to withdraw about a year before it happened, a while before the election.