'INSULTING TO THEM': Gen. Keane SLAMS Dem lawmakers over 'illegal orders' statements

Key Concepts

• Re-attack Authorization: The authority granted to military commanders to conduct follow-up strikes against identified terrorist targets if the initial strike is not fully successful.
• Target Identification: The principle that the mission to eliminate terrorists is based on their identity and representation, regardless of their immediate armament status or location (e.g., at a meeting).
• Illegal Orders: The military's prohibition against obeying unlawful commands, with accountability for refusing such orders.
• Chain of Command: The hierarchical structure within the military responsible for issuing and executing orders, with built-in legal review mechanisms.
• Security Guarantees: The essential requirement for robust assurances of future safety and deterrence against aggression, particularly in the context of ending conflicts.
• Deterrence: The act of discouraging an opponent from taking action through the threat of retaliation or overwhelming force.

Debate Over Killing Survivors and Re-attack Authorization

Retired Four Star General Jack Keane addresses a misunderstanding surrounding the authorization of military strikes, particularly concerning the concept of "killing survivors" and re-attacks.

Main Topics and Key Points:

• Pentagon vs. Congressional Investigation: General Keane expresses concern about the political involvement in a congressional investigation into a specific incident, advocating for an independent investigation by the Pentagon, which he believes is more adept at uncovering facts and ensuring accountability.
• Historical Precedent: For 20 years of the "9/11 War," both Republican and Democratic presidents have authorized the military to conduct air strikes against isolated targets using drones or other means.
• Mission Objective: The primary mission in these strikes is to kill terrorists based on "who they are and what they represent," irrespective of whether they are armed or at a meeting.
• Re-attack Authority: Commanders have consistently been authorized to conduct re-attacks if the initial strike does not eliminate all identified terrorists. This practice has occurred at a minimum of 25% of the time.
• Specific Case Context: In the discussed incident, the facts are not fully known regarding the proximity of other ships to rescue survivors or the feasibility of such a rescue without endangering assets. However, the principle of re-attacking to eliminate identified terrorists, whether wounded or armed, is deemed irrelevant to the mission's objective.
• Commander's Authority: The destruction of the boat and its cargo, along with the elimination of terrorists, was well within the commander's authority to complete the assigned mission.

Key Arguments and Perspectives:

• General Keane's Perspective: The core argument is that the authorization for re-attacks against identified terrorists is a long-standing and established military practice, not a new or controversial development. The focus should be on the mission's objective of eliminating threats, not on the status of individuals after an initial strike.
• Supporting Evidence: The evidence presented is the historical precedent of such authorizations under multiple administrations and the inherent nature of counter-terrorism operations where complete elimination of targets is paramount.

Notable Quotes:

• "IT'S IRRELEVANT WHETHER THEY ARE AT A MEETING AND NOT ARMED. MAYBE THEY ARE ARMED BUT THE MISSION IS TO KILL THE TERRORISTS BECAUSE OF WHO THEY ARE, AND IF THEY DON'T KILL THEM ALL WITH THE FIRST STRIKE, THOSE COMMANDERS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT RE-ATTACKS." - General Jack Keane
• "THE PRINCIPLE OF RE-ATTACKING, TO KILL A TARGET, THAT'S IDENTIFIED AS TERRORISTS, WHETHER THEY'RE WOUNDED, WHETHER THEY'RE ARMED IS IRRELEVANT. IT'S WHO THEY ARE." - General Jack Keane

Military Orders and Accountability

The discussion shifts to the implications of ignoring military orders and the ethical framework within the armed forces.

Main Topics and Key Points:

• Illegality of Orders: Military leaders and soldiers are explicitly not permitted to obey illegal orders and are held accountable for refusing them.
• Moral Clarification: This prohibition provides a clear moral framework within the military.
• Insulting Statements: General Keane finds statements that encourage the chain of command to disobey illegal orders to be insulting to military personnel, who are well-versed in their ethical obligations.
• Legal Review Process: The military has a robust system with lawyers at various levels of the chain of command to ensure that orders are legal.
• Commander's Discretion: High-level officers are expected to identify and refuse illegal missions.

Key Arguments and Perspectives:

• General Keane's Perspective: The military is built on a foundation of ethical conduct and adherence to the law. The idea that soldiers need to be told not to obey illegal orders is patronizing and undermines the integrity of the institution.
• Supporting Evidence: The existence of legal review processes and the inherent understanding of military personnel regarding lawful versus unlawful orders serve as evidence.

Notable Quotes:

• "OUR MILITARY LEADERS AND SOLDIERS ARE NOT PERMITTED TO OBEY AN ILLEGAL ORDER. THEY ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO REFUSE THAT ORDER." - General Jack Keane
• "THAT GIVES YOU A SENSE OF THE MORAL CLARIFICATION WE HAVE IN THE MILITARY. THAT'S WHERE I FIND THESE STATEMENTS BEING MADE BY OTHERS TRYING TO ENCOURAGE THE CHAIN OF COMMAND NOT TO OBEY ILLEGAL ORDERS IS INSULTING TO THEM." - General Jack Keane

Ending the War in Ukraine and Security Guarantees

The conversation transitions to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the implications of recent diplomatic engagements.

Main Topics and Key Points:

• Putin's Narrative vs. Reality: General Keane disputes the notion that Putin is winning the war, characterizing his public statements as propaganda designed to project strength and justify the invasion.
• Negotiation Dynamics: The outcome of negotiations hinges on what Ukrainian President Zelenskyy and Putin are willing to agree to, likely involving concessions from both sides.
• Crucial Element: Security Guarantees: For any agreement to be enduring, robust security guarantees are essential to prevent future attacks by Russia.
• US Role in Guarantees: These guarantees would likely involve the United States leading command and control, providing air and ground force security, and ensuring maritime security.
• Logistical Support: The United States would also be responsible for providing logistical infrastructure.
• Ukrainian Military Strengthening: A key component of the security guarantees is the robust build-up and reform of the Ukrainian military to enable it to deter Russia independently in the future.
• Ukraine's Current Military Standing: Ukraine currently possesses the second-most powerful military in Europe, surpassing most Eastern and Western European nations except for Turkey.
• Deterrence Mechanism: The goal is to make the Ukrainian military even stronger, capable of deterring Russia on its own, thereby reducing dependence on the United States.

Key Arguments and Perspectives:

• General Keane's Perspective: Putin's narrative of victory is false. The path to a lasting peace requires not just an agreement but also concrete security assurances for Ukraine, with the US playing a central role in establishing these guarantees and empowering Ukraine's defense capabilities.
• Supporting Evidence: The current military strength of Ukraine and the historical pattern of Russian aggression are implicit evidence supporting the need for robust security guarantees.

Notable Quotes:

• "NO, I DON'T THINK PUTIN IS WINNING. I MEAN, HE ADVERTISES THAT HE'S WINNING. HE ADVERTISES THAT HE'S GOING TO ROLL OVER UKRAINE, THAT THEY'RE BACK ON THEIR HEELS AND THAT'S HIS NARRATIVE. IT'S JUST AS FALSE AS HE ADVERTISES HE'S COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED TO INVADE UKRAINE..." - General Jack Keane
• "IF ANY DEAL IS GOING TO BE ENDURING, WE NEED TO INSURE THAT THEY HAVE SECURITY GUARANTEES BACKED UP BY PEOPLE ON THE GROUND AND IN THE AIR, AND ALSO AT SEA. THAT HAS TO TAKE PLACE OR PUTIN WILL LIKELY RE-ATTACK." - General Jack Keane

Synthesis/Conclusion

The YouTube transcript features General Jack Keane discussing two critical geopolitical and military issues: the authorization of military strikes against terrorists and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Regarding military operations, Keane clarifies that the authorization to re-attack identified terrorist targets, regardless of their immediate status, is a long-standing and legally sound practice within the U.S. military. He emphasizes the military's robust system for ensuring the legality of orders and the ethical responsibility of soldiers to refuse unlawful commands. In the context of Ukraine, Keane refutes Putin's claims of victory, arguing that any lasting peace agreement must be underpinned by strong security guarantees for Ukraine, with significant U.S. involvement in providing military and logistical support, and a focus on strengthening Ukraine's own defense capabilities to ensure future deterrence. The overarching takeaway is the importance of clear objectives, established protocols, and robust security measures in military actions and international conflict resolution.