One of the most harmful legacies of the Obama administration was its trashing of our military. From the politicized generals and the depleted resources to the war on religious liberty in the service, shoving women into infantry, and promotion of transgenderism, Obama’s Pentagon used our military as a social engineering petri dish that resulted in the plummeting of morale. The good news is that all of this can easily be overturned administratively by Secretary Mattis, in the same way that it was perpetrated. The bad news is that there are no signs of significant change. Now conservatives must demand that the current defense authorization bill (NDAA) winding its way through the authorizing committees directly address each one of these issues.

Turning our military into a freak show

Last week, our soldiers were forced to attend training for integrating transgenders into our military. You heard that correctly. Five months into the Trump administration, while our troops are precariously flung out across the Islamic world, they are spending time dealing with the logistics of those who castrate themselves or pretend to castrate themselves. This was part of Obama’s end run around Congress to promote transgenderism in the military, once he got tired of promoting the other aspects of the sexual identity alphabet soups. Thus, this policy can easily be overturned administratively, yet, much like with Obama’s executive amnesty, his legacy lives on under the Trump administration.

Why is it that every conservative policy is immediately terminated by a new Democrat administration, but even the most disruptively radical policies imaginable, implemented by the Left, remain during Republican administrations?

Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work, an Obama holdover, made it clear that the Pentagon is going full steam with its transgender recruiting mandates. Some might blame this on the “deep state,” but it is clearly supported by Mattis and the shallow state. Moreover, why has it taken over five months to fill the top positions in the Pentagon with conservatives?

In addition to the transgender agenda (or closely related to it), the Obama administration was so obsessed with gender-bending and eradicating all differences between men and women that it shoved women into infantry even after the Marines conducted a painstaking study showing how co-ed integration harms women, men, and combat readiness. The military brass are now doing everything possible to get women everywhere in infantry training and even in special forces. This is sheer lunacy.

During a presidential town hall last year, Lauren Serrano, a Marine captain whose husband is also in the service, confronted Obama about the study, showing how it took mixed units 159 percent longer to evacuate casualties than all-male units. She asked him, “Why were these tangible negative consequences disregarded and how does the integration of women positively enhance the infantry mission and make me and my husband safer?”

Is there nobody in Congress or within this administration who is willing to ask the same question of Trump and Mattis?

Then there is the problem of pregnancies in the military. According to one study, women were sent home from Iraq at three times the rate of men, and three quarters of them were evacuated for getting pregnant. As former Marine Jude Eden warned, “The military seems more ready for motherhood than for warfare.”

According to a survey done by the DOD in 2008, 11 percent of women surveyed reported an unplanned pregnancy. For those of you keeping score at home, that’s 50 percent higher than the average in the United States. According to Time, “[U]nwanted pregnancies are a significant contributor to healthcare expenditures… more than 13% of total bed days, and about 5% of total lost work days in 2011, among all U.S. service members were pregnancy and delivery-related.” The end goal of co-ed social engineering in the military has wasted an ocean of taxpayer money and has hurt mission readiness.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence that any of this has changed under Mattis, even though none of the Obama-era changes were dictated by statute. They were all implemented administratively by Obama’s defense secretary, Ashton Carter.

The opportunity with the NDAA

As Congress debates the FY 2018 NDAA, almost all the focus will be on the spending figures and the procurements for the military. While the size and cost of the military are important, any increase in funds and assets is meaningless if we are going to turn the military into a freak show straight out of Sodom and Gomorrah. To that end, conservatives should demand the following issues be addressed either in the NDAA or by the administration:

Bar recruitment of transgenders: Putting moral and social issues aside, even the transgender lobby admits transgenderism is a disability (when suing under the ADA). Why in the world would we then place them into the military during a time of danger?

Freeze all integration of women into infantry until the other branches of the military conduct a study similar to that by the Marines in 2015. The results would have to be submitted to Congress, and the legislative branch would have to sign off on any decision to continue placing women in infantry units. They should also insert a general prohibition on lowering any standards for women in training and testing in order to serve in various military positions related to combat.

Attach a provision banning the dismissal of any service member for expressing his or her religious beliefs or any chaplain who declines to perform a service against his or her religious beliefs.

Attach the “Russell Amendment,” barring the federal government from discriminating against any defense contractors who don’t accommodate the transgender agenda or who believe in traditional marriage. Obama implemented this policy under his watch, and when conservatives planned to overturn it in last year’s NDAA, Mike Pence called off the dogs and promised that Trump would take care of it executively. He has not done so. As such, there is a need to deal with this through legislation.

Fire Obama generals: It’s a known secret in the military that much of the leadership structure has rotted away from years of political correctness and social engineering. One of the boldest statements from Trump during the campaign was when he declared at the “Commander-In-Chief Forum” that “generals have been reduced to rubble” and that “they have been reduced to a point where it’s embarrassing to our country.” He was right. Now he should direct Mattis to correct the situation.

Today, The Hill.com referred to Mattis as one of the most powerful defense secretaries in recent memory, with full access to and the confidence of the president. This all lies at his feet. In a recent interview, when Mattis was asked what challenges in the world keep him awake at night, Mad Dog quipped, “Nothing. I keep other people awake at night.” Mattis must now ask himself, are the Iranians, North Koreans, and Sunni Islamists really scared of a transgendered social experimentation?

Fortunately, only five months into this administration, it’s not too late to change course, if Mattis cares to do so and if conservatives care to demand it. (For more from the author of “Under Trump and Mattis, Gender Engineering in MILITARY Rages On” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Testifying in front of the Senate Appropriations’ defense subcommittee last Wednesday, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley was characteristically blunt.

When asked, he told the assembled senators that in his opinion, the Army does not have enough soldiers to accomplish the missions it has been assigned.

Acknowledging that Secretary of Defense James Mattis is currently conducting a defense strategy review, Milley gave his assessment that to accomplish the Army’s portion of the defense strategy, the active component size of the Army should be between 540,000 and 550,000, the National Guard between 350,000 and 355,000, and the Army Reserve between 205,000 and 209,000.

In the active component, after enduring four years of debilitating Obama-era force reductions, the active Army now stands at 476,000, the National Guard at 343,000, and the Army Reserve at 199,000.

To regrow the Army to the level recommended by Milley in the active component alone will require an addition of a minimum of 64,000 soldiers, which will be costly, difficult, but in his judgment, necessary.

In making his assessment, Milley and acting Secretary of the Army Robert Speer reminded the committee that the U.S. faces a much more dangerous international situation than it did five years ago.

They highlighted the growing capabilities of Russia, characterizing it as “formidable;” an “increasingly dangerous” North Korea; China’s “assertive actions;” and a host of challenges in the Middle East ranging from Iran’s missile threat to the terrorist threat from the Islamic State and its ilk.

Milley’s recommendation on Army force structure generally aligns with statements made by President Donald Trump, who has pledged to regrow the Army back to 540,000.

But to the surprise of many, Trump’s 2018 defense budget request unveiled last month did not include a request for any additional soldiers for the Army. Instead, it seeks to maintain the levels authorized in 2017.

Administration representatives endeavored to explain that the rebuilding of the military’s size and equipment will await the completion of Mattis’ strategy review that is now underway, but which is not expected before the fall of 2017.

The Army’s list of unfunded priorities, submitted at the end of May to meet a new requirement in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, does however include a requirement to increase the strength of the Army, with a request for 10,000 active, 4,000 National Guard, and 3,000 in the Army Reserve.

The Congress acted correctly and courageously in 2017 to begin to regrow the Army by adding 17,000 active-duty soldiers to President Barack Obama’s proposed request for 460,000. There is near consensus that the last four years of strength cuts have reduced the Army’s ability to execute its missions and significantly raised strategic risk to the country.

Now faced with a similar situation for fiscal year 2018, Congress should act again to incrementally increase the size of the Army and authorize the prudent growth requested in the Army’s unfunded requirements list.

Mattis’ strategy review is a necessary assessment, but there is no danger of “over-growing” the Army. The addition of the requested 10,000 soldiers on the Army’s list would bring them to 486,000, still well below what the chief of staff of the Army believes is needed.

The Army today is too small. Milley and Speer related that today soldiers and units are being deployed at a grueling and relentless pace, stressing service members and their families.

Congress should not allow a “pause” in the rebuilding of the Army. It should instead continue to reverse Obama’s ill-advised cuts to the Army. (For more from the author of “With Army Stretched Too Thin, Military Buildup Should Begin Right Now” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.