Several articles posted on such stellar, and utterly reliable, news sources like RedFlagNews and rightwingnews and nowtheendbegins are screaming about Obama putting a foreign officer in command of U.S. troops in Europe. This is not a completely bogus story, as many of the stories on those websites are, but is founded in a grain of truth. Well, as close to truth as those websites are likely to get anyway.

The story is based on THIS (click for link) story appearing in the Stars and Stripes announcing that a German Military Officer will be the new Chief of Staff for USAREUR, the U.S. Army’s European command.  The article announces that Brig. Gen. Markus Laubenthal of the German Army will be the foreign officer holding the position.

The announcement, of course, threw virtually every so-called “patriot” group, militia, conspiracy theorist, and general “The UN is going to invade us” types into a retarded frenzy.  Internet MEMEs immediately cropped up and were widely distributed proclaiming that “For the first time in U.S. history, a foreign officer will be in command of U.S. troops!”  It’s TREASONOUS!  You BASTARDS!


There are just a few problems with the entire notion.  Let me lay them out for you as simply as possible.  This will be useful to you civilians, even those of you who are in militias but never served in the military, and, sadly, many military veterans who never took the time to understand their own service.  Ahem…   here we go.

1 – When a military officer hold the position as commander of a unit, his title is what?  Commander!  That’s right.  Very good.  At higher level commands, the Commander has a Deputy and his title is what?  Right AGAIN!  Deputy Commander.  I knew you could get this.  Now, what is the German General’s title going to be when he joins USAREUR?

Chief of Staff.  Yes, right again.

That means he’s the boss.

No, it doesn’t!

But, I read it on a Facebook MEME!  It has to be true!

Okay, shut up now.  Go sit at the kids’ table while the adults have a chat.

The Chief of Staff is NOT a commander of troops.  His job is exactly what it sounds like – the person in charge of the STAFF.  He’s a staff officer.  A management guy.  A paper-pusher.  He has no troops to command and therefore is NOT a commander.  But, what about the Army Chief of Staff, you ask?  He’s the top ranking General in the Army!  He’s a commander.  No he isn’t.  He has no command to command.  He is Chief of Staff.  The End.  He’s a policy maker and administrator.


2 – Even if it WERE true, which it isn’t, this would NOT be the first time in U.S. history that U.S. troops have fallen under a foreign commander.  In fact, historians can find no less than 17 examples of it occurring in the last century.  Since I hate repeating other people’s research, I will simply link you to an article that lays them out for you.  You can find that article HERE.  That article is on from an article they wrote correcting Karl Rove for saying the same thing, that U.S. troops have NEVER been under foreign control.  Hell, they even cite a case from the Revolutionary War.

I have served under the operational control of foreign officers TWICE during my career.  Many of you veterans have done so probably more times than that.  Oddly enough, it was a German General who commanded RC North in Afghanistan during my tour there.  And, it was all a plot by the New World Order to help the UN take over America.  At least I guess it was, based on what I read on the internet these days.


As always, the bottom line is DON’T BE AN IDIOT.  If enough of you would just stop visiting and sharing the bullshit found on these websites, they would eventually disappear from memory.  We need to make that happen.  And, when I see you post that garbage on my timeline, unless it is aimed at spurring me to action in an article such as this, I’m going to web-punch you in the face, in public, for everyone to see.

Stop it.

Just stop being an idiot.

That is all.








2 thoughts on “FOREIGN FORCES IN COMMAND OF U.S. TROOPS!! (Not Really)

  1. Yes, quite true, except for one thing. The Revolutionary War example that was cited is misleading.

    Lafayette was indeed a major general who was French. But he wasn’t a “French general.” (At least, not at that time).

    He wasn’t a general in a foreign army in charge of U.S. troops. Instead, Lafayette, a man from France, was a major general in the Continental Army. He therefore rightfully commanded American troops as a de facto American general and, in turn, reported to an American general (Washington) and thus to the American government.

  2. Cant speak for most US operations/wars but being Australian and knowing about Australia’s history in warfare I can say for a fact that US troops have been put under the command of Australian forces in WWI.

    The First occasion being the Battle of Hamel on July 4th 1918. There was meant to be more troops under our command but then Pershing got involved not wanting US troops (elements of US 33rd div) under command of another nation so half the US troops that were meant to take part in the battle got taken away, In any case the battle was a remarkable success. In earlier comparable battles what was achieved would have taken weeks with thousands upon thousands of casualties, Hell in the Meuse-Argon offensive the US forces (No offense intended) advanced 15km between 26 September and 31st of October, While at Hamel the Combined Australian-US force under command of Sir John Monash advanced 2.4km in just 93 minutes, US forces did fall apart in battle but when not knowing what to do they simply joined up with Australian units, Better to keep on fighting with others then sitting around confused.

    Another battle with US forces [27th and 30th divisions from US II Corps] (And British forces) again under the command of Monash in the battle of St. Quentin Canal. It was in this battle that the Hindenburg line was fully breached.

    For WWII I’m not sure however I shall look into it as there may have been US forces at times under Australian command in Papua and New Guinea though unlikely with Dug out Doug in charge.

Comments are closed.