Secretary of Defense Mark Esper bucked President Donald Trump’s threats to destroy Iran’s cultural sites on Monday.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1283048
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1283048
1 Like
“We will follow the laws of armed conflict,” Esper told reporters in response to questions about Trump’s aggressive remarks…"
Whose laws? Trump’s? I don’t think he said what you think he said.
4 Likes
No, being ultra-online and more cynical than everybody else doesn’t make a viewpoint meritorious. Esper very clearly said that the US military would follow the law. It’s right what it says on the tin. “Trump’s laws” is a fundamentally incoherent concept.
The internet is exasperating.
8 Likes
Trump should be removed from office. He is totally nuts.
13 Likes
Read the whole quote.
1 Like
Rules? No one dares read him the rules.
The Orange (Drama) Queen: Off with his head!
3 Likes
Okay, so was the assassination of Qasem Soleimani an act that clearly followed the law?
21 Likes
Or even protocol?
2 Likes
So, what was that about Trump claiming that the armed forces wouldn’t ignore his orders?
2 Likes
All cogent analysis I’ve seen (as distinct from shit-flinging monkeys) indicates it wasn’t obviously and flagrantly illegal (which is a separate question from “was it a good idea”). Much as “we will kill a military leader of a nation who has directed attacks on our forces” is distinct from, I don’t know, “we will kill civilians from Genericcountry”.
We’re all still able to process these shades of gray, right?
1 Like
When asked if “U.S. forces would not attack the sites because doing so constitutes a war crime,” he didn’t say “No, they certainly wouldn’t do such a thing.” Instead he opted for the vague response of ‘We’ll follow the law.’ To me that sounds a bit like a non-denial denial.
10 Likes
Well if you want to debate what might happen as opposed to what he said, the answer is that there was wiggle room for them to claim it was in a way there is less likely to be if they bombed a cultural site.
Welp, I guess Esper is on his way out. Public disagreement with the orange shit-gibbon will get you a knife securely planted in your back.
22 Likes
Trump clearly stated that he intends to bomb cultural sites. If Esper truly wishes to stand by the law he should say “no we won’t” when asked if the military would cary out such an order. Vague responses to direct questions like that should always be suspected.
16 Likes
So are members of an administration who clearly state one thing publicly–
then do an about-face walk-back when Trump gives them the hair-dryer treatment.
4 Likes
We can slice and dice what he said here, but does that mean rules will be followed? Come on, it’s the tRump admin here, rules and laws are for the Dems.
12 Likes
You’re parsing his language in a way that I think is incorrect so it doesn’t matter how many times you repeat the same thing it won’t convince me.
Particularly since I do copy editing for a living and have to re-write stuff all the time to make the author’s intent clear.
In this case I think it’s clear what he meant as stated in the way he stated it and I don’t find it vague.
4 Likes
The President of the United States wasn’t being grey at all in his statement. Trump is Esper’s boss.
1 Like
Trump maybe serious about destroying cultural sites now that Iran may attack his properties.
Since Trump properties are the center of the cultural world. Nothing but class?
7 Likes
Unlikely
Assassinations are now the accepted solution to international diplomacy issues
This has effectively put targets on every American overseas
It will only get worse
7 Likes