“Trump reportedly believes that Mattis looks down on him”
I have to blame Trump for this. He hired someone whom one could argue has qualifications for his position. I feel pretty certain Trump will never make that mistake again.
Trump reportedly believes that Mattis looks down on him[.]
Why would Mattis do that?
Mattis is competent and sane. It was only a matter of time before Trump turned on him.
That’s scary enough, but wait till he replaces Mattis with Ann Coulter as SecDef.
Keeps Mattis Out Of Loop, Doesn’t Listen To Him
I remember that Melania had the same observation, that Trump did not listen to her either.
Seems you have to be the most evil person in the room to make the cut.
I think Ollie North would gladly resign his NRA position for the opportunity to make warz again.
We all know Mattis only got the job because trump thought his nickname was cool. So it’s just a matter of time until we have secretary of defense Michael ‘Slasher’ Wilson or David ‘Rambo’ Thompson or most likely James ‘Yippie Ki Yay’ Jones.
Of all the good things I’ve read about Mattis, this is the best. It’s bad because his judgment seems sound, and it would be better for the world if Trump listened to him. But Trump listens to no one, not for long, and not if they’re sensible. What’s good is as far as I know Mattis is highly regarded in the rank and file, and Trump is probably alienating the non-crazy members of the military here. You don’t want a would-be authoritarian who’s popular with the military. This “Space Force” crap doesn’t help either, or the weakening us precipitously in the world.
there’s a guy in the WH who said he knew more about ISIS than the generals, so maybe he could take on collateral duties of running das war machine in lieu of maybe, you know, a round of golf/week.
Another instance of Trump “very strongly” notifying someone to his face.
[quote=“atldrew, post:10, topic:73960, full:true”]
there’s a guy in the WH who said he knew more about ISIS than the generals, so maybe he could take on collateral duties of running das war machine in lieu of maybe, you know, a round of golf/week.
[/quote]It would have to be someone with a very good brain, maybe even a stable genius.
he alone could do the job.
Trump reportedly believes that Mattis looks down on him…
Everyone does Donald, the ones that act like they agree with you are just using you and blowing hot air to fill your inflated, but pin holed ego.
Mattis was given more money that he can expend to share with his buddies in the military-industrial complex. Does he care that medical coverage is being taken away from other people to pay for his toys? Does he care about runaway deficits? He did a deal with the devil.
If Mattis leaves, this might be the first case something Trump touches does not quite die. Of course the fact he has ever worked for this admin would be a line he might want to cross out in his resume, but the consensus still seems to be he decided to take the job to serve for the country (i.e., to keep the moron in check). And unlike “Wholly Appropriate” McM, he hasn’t yet done something specific in public that forever tarnishes his reputation. So yes,
This still remains intact. And yes, that’s a good thing.
I don’t want to see him leave because I have a comforting vision of his doing something extralegal about it if Trump were ever to order a nuclear strike. (There’s nothing legal he can do about it, but SecDef has to approve that it’s a real order from the president.)
Exactly. That’s what I feel about torture. I was an interrogator in the Army for 7 years and taught interrogation for 3 years. It’s possible to conceive of a ticking time bomb scenario where torture could be useful. Granted one in 100,000 scenario. In that case, the interrogator should do what needs to be done and ask for forgiveness later.
You don’t change the policy for a one time, freak occurrence that will never happen again.
Ask whom?
Trump reportedly believes that Mattis looks down on him
Mattis and Trump reportedly “don’t really see eye-to-eye,” one former White House official told NBC, and Trump has started to rely more on his secretary of state and national security adviser — whose appointment Mattis opposed — for guidance.
But it’s not: Bolton was advocating a far more expansive intervention, one designed to do “ruinous” damage to the Assad regime’s military capabilities
That isn’t what happened; the strikes reportedly didn’t even destroy Assad’s chemical weapons stockpile, let alone do major damage to the conventional arsenal he’s been using to slowly grind down anti-government rebels.
The principal administration advocate for a more limited option was Defense Secretary James Mattis, with support from Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Joseph Dunford. Mattis has long been seen as one of the most cautious and sober of Trump’s military advisers; experts on US foreign policy see the eventual outcome as a testament to his influence over the president.
U.S. strikes against Syrian chemical-weapons sites this spring were “sufficiently limited” that the Trump administration didn’t need Congress’s approval to launch them, according to a Justice Department memo released Friday.
“The president had the constitutional authority to carry out the proposed airstrikes on three Syrian chemical-weapons facilities,” wrote Assistant Attorney General Steven Engel in the first public description of the administration’s views on its authority to wage armed conflict.
The White House didn’t seek prior authorization from Congress, nor were the strikes authorized by the United Nations under international law.
that of course is a lie