Mother's Day

As we approach Mother's Day, take a moment to pray for the many American mothers who wear the cloth of the nation.  I was in their ranks. And my children also made sacrifices when I was on orders. What was not in the category of a sacrifice, was the news received when I returned from Africa. My youngest son informed me that "Daddy let me eat the macaroni and cheese out of the pot while you were gone."  wink

 It takes a special woman to consider taking the oath of office if she has children.  It certainly isn't about the pay scale. And surely not about eating a field stripped MRE in extreme heat or within a cold environment.  They are decent.  But after a few days, I could become fixated on something as simple as a taco or a nice cheeseburger.  

Many mothers have deployed to combat zones and left their children in the care of a spouse, grandparents, or another relative. It is tough.  Undoubtedly, our Fleet assets currently deployed in the Persian Gulf region are populated by mothers hoping to hear the sound of their children's voices tomorrow. This will depend on operational safety.  So take a moment and thank God for our women in service.

On the news front for the day:

The IRGC continues to bait us with FAFO and put up the usual images.  

Here are two of the latest rat-a-tat-tats:

"Any aggression against Iranian oil and commercial vessels will trigger a heavy strike on a designated American site in the region and its ships."  CDR of IRGC Navy

"Our missiles and drones are locked onto American targets across the region and its naval vessels. We are awaiting the order to fire."  CDR of IRGC Aerospace Force

In a prior post I mentioned the "Vacancy" sign at some of our bases. It is great that our POTUS and Pentagon desire to keep the number of combat-related deaths to a minimum.  It is a good goal.  But excessive removal of boots on the ground just might come back to bite us in the ass.

Here is an assessment which I found interesting:

Three scenarios compete in strategic assessment circles: The First Scenario — Complete Withdrawal: Complete closure of U.S. military bases in the region. This is the politically costliest option, as it sends a signal of dismantling the security structure Washington has built over decades, and radically redraws the balances of deterrence. The Second Scenario — Repurposing: Maintaining a military presence in form only, but shifting its mission from containing Iran to supporting the internal stability of Gulf regimes—with the withdrawal of offensive systems and weaponry targeted at Iran. An equation that calms Tehran without officially declaring withdrawal, but alarms allies who see it as emptying security guarantees of their substance. The Third Scenario — Exit from the Line of Fire: Moving U.S. forces and assets out of range of Iranian missiles—ballistic, cruise, and drones—without an official closure of the bases. A shift in geographical depth, not in declared presence. Washington retains the symbolic footprint and relinquishes field vulnerability. The Analytical Reading: The difference between these scenarios isn't just about geography—it's about the nature of the message directed simultaneously at three addresses: Tehran, which reads every step as an indicator of negotiation seriousness; the Gulf allies, who measure the credibility of American guarantees; and Tel Aviv, which monitors any retreat in commitment as a variable in its operational calculations. The likely scenario isn't one specific to itself—but a gradual mix that starts with the third and leads incrementally to the second, while keeping the first as a negotiating card rather than an adopted decision.

Final note from Tammy:

Take a moment not only to remember the American mothers who wear the uniform. But offer a special prayer for the mothers who will spend tomorrow shipboard in a combat zone.

Tammy Swofford (a mother who proudly served as a  LCDR in Fleet Hospital Dallas, Det E)