Do you care about our military and national security?

[hollodero]

(06-13-2020, 03:27 AM)Dill Wrote: Just a quick couple of points in response:

The "very first" name on the list is the guy who learned war in Vietnam and developed a very reasonable post-Vietnam policy for use of force--e.g., clear metrics and end goal, fixed termination date--all of which the Bush regime violated. You'll say "What about his UN speech pressing for war in Iraq?"  To which I respond 1) he repeatedly warned Bush against the invasion, and 2) did his "duty" at the UN as a serving secretary when Tenet convinced him that unvetted intel about Iraq was actually vetted.  He considers that speech THE stain on his reputation. 

And rightly so. And yes I was indeed going to mention that.

Trump of course can not be trusted on anything he says. I know that. I know it is a tough sell to say I trust anyone less than him on anything. But when it comes to the Dabblejuh admin, I really have a tough time. This lie about Iraq was the big one, bigger than even the many big Trump ones and the many small ones, or keep your doctor or not having sexual relations or whatever lies there were. None of these folks that were around when this monstrous lie and the following war happened have my trust. I admit Powell isn't Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld, but still, no forgetting on my part here, Dabblejuh and anyone. Doesn't matter how many innocent pictures Bush paints or how sweet he's cuddling with Michelle.
Compared to Trump, they might have my bigger trust on national security in general, Trump lies constantly and lied about Russian interference after all, which is imho borderline treasonous and no general would stand for that probably. It's just when it comes to war, I kinda Trust Trump's impulses not to start one, not to become another Dabblejuh. That's all there is to it.

And sure it's stupid to let fighters start and then call them back last minute, or it was a deliberate threat and Trump lied about that too, but I would not guarantee that every one of these Bush people would have done the same. Calling them back, i mean.

(06-13-2020, 03:27 AM)Dill Wrote: As for Mattis,  He talks like a Marine general at times, but last I heard, had no ambitions to run for president.

Yeah I did assume comparing Trump to these folks implies they have the same kind of power. Of course I trust everyone to not start a war who won't come in a position to decide that in the first place.

Mattis and Kelly were part of the Trump system. And for me that does not come without some lasting scrutiny, especially since they backed his lies and indecencies and have quite some comments on the record doing so, especially Kelly. But ok, I trust them probably more than Trump still, even when it comes to conflict, but only just. Sitting in the Trump admin imho is a character flaw and this whole narrative of "I had to stay to hold him back" seems semi-persuasive at best. They supported his back while doing so, hence being complicit in bad developments.

(06-13-2020, 03:27 AM)Dill Wrote: Carter advocated striking NK's Taepodong ICBM should they put it on a launch pad to test it. Not quite an invasion.

Yes. Wikipedia misled me there. Admittedly, I did really sloppy research to find anything on guys I know little to nothing about. Just to keep my stance going for a little before it breaks down due to it being completely unsustainable.
I know it is unsustainbale, don't get me wrong :)

(06-13-2020, 03:27 AM)Dill Wrote: Finally, your Mullen quote comes from a 2010 JCS speech on the relation of the military to diplomacy and foreign policy which includes this line:

  "U.S. foreign policy is still too dominated by the military, too dependent upon the generals and admirals who lead our major overseas commands.  It’s one thing to be able and willing to serve as emergency responders; quite another to always have to be the fire chief."https://web.archive.org/web/20100310104009/http://www.jcs.mil/speech.aspx?ID=1336

In his advocacy of soft power, criticism of policy "too dependent upon the generals," he seems rather a far cry from Trump.

He did also say that Al Qaeda in Iraq thing though. But nice quotes. I always considered the US tendency of making generals politicians quite strange. Defense secretary, ok, but aside from that, why not keep them in their field of expertise, advising the president or doing their thing when it comes to war (which is not always condemnable, eg. Afghanistan, imho). I do have a hard time trusting their peacekeeping after being concerned with war for so long. I always fear it might dull the sense for the horrors of war.