Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
Are you concerned about our military and our national defense?
If so who do you trust more?
Donald Trump?
Or these guys?
Army General Colin Powell, Sec. of Defense under George W Bush
Marine Four Star Gen John Allen
Navy Admiral William McRaven, commander of Special Operations Command Europe under George W. Bush and commander of Joint Special Operations Command under Barrack Obama
Marine Gen. Jim Mattis, Sec. of Defense chosen by Donald Trump
Leon Panetta, Sec. of Defense under Obama
Marine General John Kelly, Chief of Staff chosen by Donald Trump
William Perry, Sec. of Defense under Clinton
Sean O'Keefe, Sec. of Navy under George H Bush
Navy Admiral Glenn Mullen, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff under George W Bush
Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff under Obama
Chuck Hagel, Republican Senator (Nebraska) and Sec. of Defense
Ash Carter, Sec of Defense chosen by Donald Trump
Ray Mabus, Sec. of navy under Obama
William Cohen, Republican Senator (Maine) and Sec. of Defense
Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, Director of National Intelligence and CIA under George W Bush
All of these guys are highly critical of Trump's policies.
If you really care about our military and/or national security then help vote Trump put of office.
Posts: 10,718
Threads: 63
Reputation:
57608
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
Neither nor?
One is an idiot whose solution is to bomb everything, the other is a group of guys that brought us a two decades quagmire.... And there solution is to bomb everything.
Posts: 345
Threads: 36
Reputation:
614
Joined: Nov 2016
Mood: None
Posts: 5,173
Threads: 62
Reputation:
23304
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
That actually looks like a tough one.
Trump, for all his faults, has actually not started a war yet and doesn't seem quite inclined to do so. Some of those other guys though...
Posts: 10,718
Threads: 63
Reputation:
57608
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 02:14 AM)hollodero Wrote: That actually looks like a tough one.
Trump, for all his faults, has actually not started a war yet and doesn't seem quite inclined to do so. Some of those other guys though...
Well, there was that one time...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/after-soleimani-killing-u-s-braced-iranian-drone-missile-strikes-n1126556
... and that other time...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korea-crisis-how-events-have-unfolded-under-trump-n753996
Trump is far from a warmonger, but I think that's largely because the dog doesn't want him holding the leash in a new fight. He's fine being CiC for the current fights as they've already got all that rubber stamped.
Posts: 11,843
Threads: 131
Reputation:
32591
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 10:53 AM)Benton Wrote: Well, there was that one time...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/after-soleimani-killing-u-s-braced-iranian-drone-missile-strikes-n1126556
... and that other time...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korea-crisis-how-events-have-unfolded-under-trump-n753996
Trump is far from a warmonger, but I think that's largely because the dog doesn't want him holding the leash in a new fight. He's fine being CiC for the current fights as they've already got all that rubber stamped.
The only things that have kept Trump out of war are Mattis, McMaster, and, primarily, fear of how it might hurt his election chances. Even Bolton had difficulty restraining him.
Were he re-elected I think his recklessness, the absence of competent counsel, and frequent need of diversion from domestic crises of his own making, would reveal he is not far from a warmonger at all.
Still four months to election, however. As support for Biden grows, he might be thinking "what have I got to lose?"
Posts: 11,843
Threads: 131
Reputation:
32591
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 02:14 AM)hollodero Wrote: That actually looks like a tough one.
Trump, for all his faults, has actually not started a war yet and doesn't seem quite inclined to do so. Some of those other guys though...
??? 
You've watched most those guys straining to hold Trump back for three-and-a-half years,
and then conclude Trump "has actually not started a war yet" but you are unsure about the guys holding him back?
Posts: 11,044
Threads: 38
Reputation:
48466
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
That list is like a Who’s Who of people Trump has insulted.
Posts: 11,044
Threads: 38
Reputation:
48466
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
Posts: 11,044
Threads: 38
Reputation:
48466
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
Posts: 5,391
Threads: 52
Reputation:
16267
Joined: May 2015
Location: Blue Ash
Mood: None
What a list! Aren't most responsible for the messes we have been in for the last few decades? Hmmm tough choices.
Posts: 11,044
Threads: 38
Reputation:
48466
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 04:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: What a list! Aren't most responsible for the messes we have been in for the last few decades? Hmmm tough choices.
Not a single person on the list could or has voted for the authorization for the use of military force, except for maybe Hagel and Cohen.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 04:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: What a list! Aren't most responsible for the messes we have been in for the last few decades? Hmmm tough choices.
There is more to national security than just starting wars.
-Trump was duped by Kim Jong-Un into cancelling joint military exercises with South Korea. Now our relationship with South Korea has cooled and they are getting more cozy with China.
-When Trump took office we had limits on Iran's Uranium enrichment program. Those are now gone.
-Trump defended Putin against allegations of interfering with our elections even after our entire intelligence community agreed that he did.
-Trump abandoned our Kurdish allies in Syria after they helped us defeat Isis.
-Trump has appointed incompetent "yes-men" to crucial positions like Thomas Modly as Sec of the Navy and Jared Kushner as developer of a peace plan for the Middle East.
Posts: 5,391
Threads: 52
Reputation:
16267
Joined: May 2015
Location: Blue Ash
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 05:44 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Not a single person on the list could or has voted for the authorization for the use of military force, except for maybe Hagel and Cohen.
I specifically saw the words "who do you TRUST" and responded to that.
The only part using the word vote was "help vote Trump put of office". Nothing about votong for Authorization. I'm sure none of them have ever lobbied or used their influence in any way for war right?
Posts: 11,044
Threads: 38
Reputation:
48466
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 06:47 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I specifically saw the words "who do you TRUST" and responded to that.
The only part using the word vote was "help vote Trump put of office". Nothing about votong for Authorization. I'm sure none of them have ever lobbied or used their influence in any way for war right?
I was responding to your claim most our responsible for the messes of the last two decades. The use of military force couldn’t have occurred without the authorization of the President or Congress.
Colin Powell certainly played his part as Secretary of State for the Bush administration’s gaslighting of the world. His misguided loyalty to support the President’s misguided agenda is a cautionary tale that illustrates the dangers of cronyism over patriotism.
Other than Powell, can you show any evidence any of the others are “responsible for the messes we have been in the last few decades”?
Posts: 5,173
Threads: 62
Reputation:
23304
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 11:53 AM)Dill Wrote: ???
You've watched most those guys straining to hold Trump back for three-and-a-half years,
and then conclude Trump "has actually not started a war yet" but you are unsure about the guys holding him back?
i wouldn't be so sure that hey all held him back. Trump is not the one to be held back, also many republican advisors don't strike me as people that would do so by all means. I honestly don't see Trump as a drudgingly caged war hawk.
Also, on those list are quite some Dabblejuh appointees, and I'd be unsure if they were as restrained if they had the same power as Trump.
Also, only expressing commen opinions is boring.
Posts: 24,596
Threads: 612
Reputation:
225935
Joined: May 2015
Location: Jackson, OH
Mood:
I go with Trump. Despite all the logical fallacies that will be thrown at me for saying that, I stand by it. Trump, despite his his constant braggadocio, has initiated how many military strikes? He is as anti-war as they come. He was reinvested into the military, because he believes in peace through show of strength.
Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations
-Frank Booth 1/9/23
Posts: 11,843
Threads: 131
Reputation:
32591
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 10:33 PM)hollodero Wrote: i wouldn't be so sure that hey all held him back. Trump is not the one to be held back, also many republican advisors don't strike me as people that would do so by all means. I honestly don't see Trump as a drudgingly caged war hawk.
Also, on those list are quite some Dabblejuh appointees, and I'd be unsure if they were as restrained if they had the same power as Trump.
Also, only expressing commen opinions is boring.
Guess I'll follow up Benton's post #5 and Fred's #13.
Who does one "trust" more--competent generals and admirals, or someone who knows little of war, diplomacy and history--but threatens to rain fire down on NK? "But he didn't" is hardly a good response, given the power even of a president's tweets to unsettle existing diplomatic relations and set conflict in motion.
Aside from their own testimony, one reason why I am VERY SURE those who served under Trump held him back is because from the very beginning it was clear that Trump was ignorant, incompetent and erratic. He could not well gauge the consequences of his actions, especially military. Yet he was not at all risk averse. And so he tossed out the Iran Deal, ramped up US presence in the Persian Gulf, and backed himself into a corner, twice bringing us to the brink of war, a point where a singe errant ship, plane or drone could have triggered a bloody regional conflict.
Speaking directly to the president of Taiwan, insulting the president of Mexico, canceling military exercises as a favor to NK, moving the US embassy to Jerusalem--all exciting to his base, breaking rules, not "weak" like Obama, but also all impulsive actions that would channel officers out of whichever corps very quickly, qualities NOT looked for in a C-in-C, not valued by people who DO see the short and long-term consequences of military action. Not in the interest of US national security.
Fred mentioned Trump's needless breaking of the Iran Deal. Benton cited the high risk assassination of Suleiman. I might add the withdrawal from the Turkish border which cost the lives of hundreds of US allies--none of this made the ME safer. So far as I am aware, no one on Fred's list approved of any of these actions, or would have initiated such like if president.
Last point for the moment--recall Trump's public disrespect of his own intel services in favor of Putin--on an international stage no less. Recall also his cavalier handing of classified intel and security clearances, not to mention his dissing of NATO allies, the US' greatest force enhancer. Disconcertment emanates from the Trump oval office, spreading lack of confidence and confusion about the mission through all branches of the military and intelligence. How can that be good for national/international security? Who on Fred's list could/would do that to the extent Trump has?
If we are talking about national security, the issue is not simply whether Trump bought more new guns. That security also depends upon diplomacy and the credibility we have with allies, and it depends on morale in the military and our intel services. Trump has damaged these resources like no other president in history.
Posts: 11,843
Threads: 131
Reputation:
32591
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-11-2020, 10:46 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I go with Trump. Despite all the logical fallacies that will be thrown at me for saying that, I stand by it. Trump, despite his his constant braggadocio, has initiated how many military strikes? He is as anti-war as they come. He was reinvested into the military, because he believes in peace through show of strength.
Just keeping it to Syria, I couldn't give you clear figure on military strikes. At least two with Tomahawks, directly on Syrian Airbases. Many more inside Syria on ISIS targets. At least one strike on Russian position. Move over a country to Iraq and again I could not tell you for sure. We know of one important one--the illegal (by our own rules) assasination of an Iranian general with permission of the Iraqis. 47 Drone strikes in Yemen in 2017 alone. Pakistan is still complaining about our unauthorized drone strikes there (two this year so far, I believe). Somalia would if they had a government.
Question: If you were a Chinese or Russian intel analyst,
would your assessment be that the US national security and military strength are greater after 3 1/2 years of Trump?
Posts: 5,173
Threads: 62
Reputation:
23304
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(06-12-2020, 03:29 AM)Dill Wrote: Guess I'll follow up Benton's post #5 and Fred's #13.
Who does one "trust" more--competent generals and admirals, or someone who knows little of war, diplomacy and history--but threatens to rain fire down on NK? "But he didn't" is hardly a good response, given the power even of a president's tweets to unsettle existing diplomatic relations and set conflict in motion.
Aside from their own testimony, one reason why I am VERY SURE those who served under Trump held him back is because from the very beginning it was clear that Trump was ignorant, incompetent and erratic.
I do not dispute that, or any of the things you say. My assertion is not an expression of trust in Trump. I just quite distrust some folks on this list. Trump is focused on the economy and possibly is easily persuaded to refrain from war by being told about the negative impact on these data. That is his "plus side" in that regard. Others might be more beholden to the war industry, like quite a lot of past presidents were. Say something nice about Pence, at least he isn't Cheney.
I can not quite avoid the observation that besides all his dangerous blunders, Trump made it through 3,5 years without major militaric conflict, and this is quite exceptional for a republican president as of late. Sure he benefits from the fact that no one wants to play war with the US and there was no 9/11-like or even Kuwait-like incident. Still, quite some of the listed guys might already be in Venezuela or Iran. Tell me that certainly ain't so if you dare :).
|
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
