Author Topic: The US Presidency 2019  (Read 83373 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 517,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,680
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #775 on: October 04, 2019, 21:26:04 »
"Favorite quote: “If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”"

Yes. What made it funny, to me at least, was who posted it: Kellyanne Conway's husband.  :)

I'm enjoying this whole shitshow, especially the lamentations of the (ex-?)neocons. 

Saw these two suggestions on Twitter ( intended as gentle good humour only ),

Would have been even more hilarious to see President Obama stand on the White House lawn before the 2012 election and say, "China should start an investigation into the Romneys."

Or the future Democratic nominee say, "China, if you're listening, find us his tax returns!"  :)
« Last Edit: October 04, 2019, 23:20:46 by mariomike »

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,479
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #776 on: October 07, 2019, 13:43:03 »
Quote
What Top Military Officers Really Think About Trump
It’s even worse than you think.
Mark Bowden The Atlantic

For most of the past two decades, American troops have been deployed all over the world—to about 150 countries. During that time, hundreds of thousands of young men and women have experienced combat, and a generation of officers have come of age dealing with the practical realities of war. They possess a deep well of knowledge and experience. For the past three years, these highly trained professionals have been commanded by Donald Trump.

To get a sense of what serving Trump has been like, I interviewed officers up and down the ranks, as well as several present and former civilian Pentagon employees. Among the officers I spoke with were four of the highest ranks—three or four stars—all recently retired. All but one served Trump directly; the other left the service shortly before Trump was inaugurated. They come from different branches of the military, but I’ll simply refer to them as “the generals.” Some spoke only off the record, some allowed what they said to be quoted without attribution, and some talked on the record.

Military officers are sworn to serve whomever voters send to the White House. Cognizant of the special authority they hold, high-level officers epitomize respect for the chain of command, and are extremely reticent about criticizing their civilian overseers. That those I spoke with made an exception in Trump’s case is telling, and much of what they told me is deeply disturbing. In 20 years of writing about the military, I have never heard officers in high positions express such alarm about a president. Trump’s pronouncements and orders have already risked catastrophic and unnecessary wars in the Middle East and Asia, and have created severe problems for field commanders engaged in combat operations. Frequently caught unawares by Trump’s statements, senior military officers have scrambled, in their aftermath, to steer the country away from tragedy. How many times can they successfully do that before faltering?

Amid threats spanning the globe, from nuclear proliferation to mined tankers in the Persian Gulf to terrorist attacks and cyberwarfare, those in command positions monitor the president’s Twitter feed like field officers scanning the horizon for enemy troop movements. A new front line in national defense has become the White House Situation Room, where the military struggles to accommodate a commander in chief who is both ignorant and capricious. In May, after months of threatening Iran, Trump ordered the carrier group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln to shift from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf. On June 20, after an American drone was downed there, he ordered a retaliatory attack—and then called it off minutes before it was to be launched. The next day he said he was “not looking for war” and wanted to talk with Iran’s leaders, while also promising them “obliteration like you’ve never seen before” if they crossed him. He threatened North Korea with “fire and fury” and dispatched a three-aircraft-carrier flotilla to waters off the Korean peninsula—then he pivoted to friendly summits with Kim Jong Un, with whom he announced he was “in love”; canceled long-standing U.S. military exercises with South Korea; and dangled the possibility of withdrawing American forces from the country altogether. While the lovefest continues for the cameras, the U.S. has quietly uncanceled the canceled military exercises, and dropped any mention of a troop withdrawal.

Such rudderless captaincy creates the headlines Trump craves. He revels when his tweets take off. (“Boom!” he says. “Like a rocket!”) Out in the field, where combat is more than wordplay, his tweets have consequences. He is not a president who thinks through consequences—and this, the generals stressed, is not the way serious nations behave.

The generals I spoke with didn’t agree on everything, but they shared the following five characterizations of Trump’s military leadership.

I. HE DISDAINS EXPERTISE
Trump has little interest in the details of policy. He makes up his mind about a thing, and those who disagree with him—even those with manifestly more knowledge and experience—are stupid, or slow, or crazy.

As a personal quality, this can be trying; in a president, it is dangerous. Trump rejects the careful process of decision making that has long guided commanders in chief. Disdain for process might be the defining trait of his leadership. Of course, no process can guarantee good decisions—history makes that clear—but eschewing the tools available to a president is choosing ignorance. What Trump’s supporters call “the deep state” is, in the world of national security—hardly a bastion of progressive politics—a vast reservoir of knowledge and global experience that presidents ignore at their peril. The generals spoke nostalgically of the process followed by previous presidents, who solicited advice from field commanders, foreign-service and intelligence officers, and in some cases key allies before reaching decisions about military action. As different as George W. Bush and Barack Obama were in temperament and policy preferences, one general told me, they were remarkably alike in the Situation Room: Both presidents asked hard questions, wanted prevailing views challenged, insisted on a variety of options to consider, and weighed potential outcomes against broader goals. Trump doesn’t do any of that. Despite commanding the most sophisticated intelligence-gathering apparatus in the world, this president prefers to be briefed by Fox News, and then arrives at decisions without input from others.

...

See rest of article here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/11/military-officers-trump/598360/

 :cheers:
+300
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,948
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #777 on: October 07, 2019, 14:24:54 »
The Atlantic is hardly a bastion of conservative thought more like fake news. The money Trump has poured into the military puts the lie to the article.
-600

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 120,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,592
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #778 on: October 07, 2019, 14:46:34 »
The Atlantic is hardly a bastion of conservative thought more like fake news. The money Trump has poured into the military puts the lie to the article.

Here we go... ::)

Your first part is correct about it being left of center.  Fake news though?  Come on.  Just because something don't jive with one's own beliefs or isn't a bastion of conservative thought does not make it fake news.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/

They note that the Atlantic has never failed a fact check.
+300
Optio

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 517,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,680
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #779 on: October 07, 2019, 14:57:10 »
The money Trump has poured into the military puts the lie to the article.

Trump Administration Diverts $3.6 Billion From Military Projects To Border Wall
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757262799/trump-administration-diverts-3-6-billion-from-military-projects-to-border-wall


Willing to cannibalize already allocated military funding for a wall he promised Mexico would pay to build.

Edit spelling.
+100 « Last Edit: October 07, 2019, 16:33:36 by mariomike »

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 73,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,922
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #780 on: October 07, 2019, 16:36:09 »
>The Atlantic is hardly a bastion of conservative thought more like fake news.

It doesn't pretend or aspire to be conservative.  Very little of what shows up there is "fake" (Atlantic writers, like writers everywhere else have been caught climbing too soon on the outrage bandwagon of the day); it's just long-winded (it's a magazine, not a newspaper).
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 240,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,841
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #781 on: October 07, 2019, 17:17:16 »
The author of that particular piece, Mark Bowden, has been writing credible, well informed, and well sourced stuff about the military at least since he published Black Hawk Down many years ago now. I have no difficulty believing that he would be seen as enough of a straight shooter for some senior general officers to be candid with him.
+600
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,354
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #782 on: October 07, 2019, 17:25:14 »
Actually, there is a conservative streak in The Atlantic, in the sense that the Never-Trump segment has gravitated there.  I don't mind the magazine as some of the authors are quite good, but ever since they put a pay wall up a month ago, I quit reading.  There is enough free news out there that I don't need to pay for it.

As for the article - I suspect a lot of senior military personnel weren't fond of Obama as President either....
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 564,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,265
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #783 on: October 07, 2019, 17:39:31 »
..."I, in my great and unmatched wisdom"....    :pop:
+100

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 240,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,841
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #784 on: October 07, 2019, 17:45:08 »
Actually, there is a conservative streak in The Atlantic, in the sense that the Never-Trump segment has gravitated there.  I don't mind the magazine as some of the authors are quite good, but ever since they put a pay wall up a month ago, I quit reading.  There is enough free news out there that I don't need to pay for it.

As for the article - I suspect a lot of senior military personnel weren't fond of Obama as President either....

Likely not. But why matters. The reasons given for the distrust senior military leaders have for their president is concerning, to say the least. It gives the impression of a man who wields a very powerful tool that he is utterly unqualified by training, education, experience, or temperament to use. It’s akin to letting an angry seven year old go from playing with his Tonka toys to having unrestricted access to a real excavator in the middle of a subdivision.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,948
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #785 on: October 07, 2019, 18:19:01 »
In the US the military dont make policy they carry it out or they resign.

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 240,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,841
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #786 on: October 07, 2019, 18:47:47 »
In the US the military dont make policy they carry it out or they resign.

A crafter of public policy who does not heed the expertise of those who will have to refine and execute it risks failing to achieve the intent of the policy in the first place.

A president who wishes his military to be properly influential in the national interest needs to listen to those who built from the “what” to the “how”. But he does not, because in many ways he is a fool.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline QV

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 10,285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 366
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #787 on: October 08, 2019, 00:59:31 »
A fool maybe in some ways, but he did win the presidency against all odds, and one promise was to get out of endless wars. 

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 240,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,841
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #788 on: October 08, 2019, 05:51:30 »
A fool maybe in some ways, but he did win the presidency against all odds, and one promise was to get out of endless wars.

And yet he impulsively threatens other nations with destruction in casually stark terms when they don’t see things his way.

Granted, he promised to get America out of ‘endless wars’. I’ll set aside whether this was ever defined enough to be realistic. Wanting to remove his military from certain quagmires is all well and good, but it still ought to be done in such a manner as to not compromise your national and strategic interests. Abruptly pulling out and leaving carefully cultivated and built allies in the lurch is generally not a well thought out strategy. In the eyes of erstwhile or potential allies, America abandons her credibility on the battlefield. That’s not a disengagement, it’s a retreat.

Were he to be going through another divorce, he would likely pay at least some mind to lawyers. If he needed surgery, he would hopefully listen to the medical specialists. If removing and replacing a highway overpass, you listen to engineers. Just maybe, in the complex world of geopolitics and war, you hear the counsel of those experienced as wise in the field.

The president is fond of his version of carrot and stick diplomacy. Unfortunately he wields to stick with the deft precision of a blindfolded child searching for a piñata. And Russia and China are loving every second of it.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 240,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,841
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #789 on: October 08, 2019, 06:04:27 »
You can’t make this stuff up...


Trump threatens to 'obliterate' Turkish economy after criticism over his green light to invade Syria


For those playing at home, that’s POTUS threatening yesterday to “totally destroy and obliterate” the economy of a NATO member and ally. He credits his, and I quote, “great and unmatched wisdom” for this strategic approach.

How can this be seen as anything but cartoonishly bad and absurd?
+100
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,479
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #790 on: October 08, 2019, 06:42:34 »
Maybe a few more stupid moves like that and even the Republicans will vote for his impeachment. It's almost like he's trying to force their hand:

Quote
Trump defends Syria decision amid Republican backlash

By Jennifer Hansler and Alex Rogers, CNN
Updated 10:13 PM ET, Mon October 7, 2019

(CNN)President Donald Trump on Monday defended his decision to pull US troops from northern Syria ahead of an impending Turkish invasion despite criticism from top Republicans including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The abrupt move, announced in a Sunday night statement from the White House press secretary following a call between Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has prompted a rare show of bipartisan opposition to the Republican President. It has also left national security officials to try to explain another foreign policy about-face -- one that threatens the US-backed Kurdish forces in the region.
...

See rest here: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/07/politics/mitch-mcconnell-republican-response-syria-kurds/index.html

 :cheers:
+400
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline QV

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 10,285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 366
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #791 on: October 08, 2019, 11:03:35 »
The democrats don't opposed Trump on legitimate grounds.  VDH summarizes the war on Trump and all the fraudulent attempts to depose him.  It is this kind of discourse in America that Russia, Iran, and China are loving right now.     


Quote
Anti-Trump Psychodrama 10.0?

By Victor Davis Hanson

   October 8, 2019 6:30 AM   

‘Groundbreaking’ disclosures fall apart, hoaxes are exposed, the media are discredited, over and over and over again.
 
What do the Kavanaugh hearings, Jussie Smollett, the Covington kids, the Mueller investigation, and now the Trump phone call all have in common?

Staged melodrama, media collusion hysteria, progressive demands that justice be served immediately, promises of walls-are-closing-in blockbuster revelations from new witnesses, supposed surprise revelatory documents, fusions between Democratic politicians and Washington bureaucrats — and then bust, nada, and teeth-gnashing as the truth catches up to various rumor-mongers.

The disgraced purveyors of lies — a Susan Blasey Ford, Michael Avenatti, Nathan Phillips, Jussie Smollet, Adam Schiff — for a time go mute, content with progressives’ praise that they lied for a moral cause and almost pulled it off.

The particular narrative is not all that important, at least compared with a general overriding theme: We are in a virtual civil war, and the Left believes that it can win over the hearts and minds of 20 to 30 percent of the swing voters in the United States with therapeutic tales of racism, sexism, unearned white privilege, and right-wing greed and selfishness, and also by destroying the elected president. Particular events in the news are warped and twisted, to the degree that they can be, to serve that narrative — on the principle that the superior moral end of ensuring a radical equality of result more than justifies the often tawdry and dishonest means to achieve it.

...snip...

So here we are, on the eve of impeaching a president on the basis of disgruntled White House staffers, whose rumors in secondhand and thirdhand fashion were passed on to a “whistleblower” who worked hand in hand with partisan lawyers and Adam Schiff to circumvent the normal whistleblower protocols and smear a president.

And we will all shrug and grow quiet — at least until the next Susan Blasey Ford, Michael Avenatti, Jussie Smollett, Nathan Philipps, dream-team, all-star star chamber, James Comey, or “anonymous” crusading “whistleblower” comes forth to seek notoriety and do his yeoman’s work to rid the country of Trump and all his odious henchmen.

Meanwhile, they have no idea of the wreckage they have inflicted on the intelligence agencies, the media, the Democratic party, themselves, and the country — or much less why a growing number of Americans are sick of them all.


Full article at link: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/trump-impeachment-inquiry-anti-trump-psychodrama/

If Trump can survive all of this going in to 2020, he will win by a landslide.  The Dems should try something new, like beating him in policy and at the ballot box, but I think they've destroyed their credibility now.             


+300 / -100

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 302,401
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,120
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #792 on: October 08, 2019, 12:45:41 »
On the up side the US will be able to sell the defeated Kurdish people new weapons and equipment to help them defeat their oppressors.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 431,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,350
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #793 on: October 08, 2019, 13:46:39 »
On the up side the US will be able to sell the defeated Kurdish people new weapons and equipment to help them defeat their oppressors.
Again.
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 184,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,506
  • It's all good
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #794 on: October 08, 2019, 21:03:03 »
On the up side the US will be able to sell the defeated Kurdish people new weapons and equipment to help them defeat their oppressors.

I know a little bit about how that all unfolded.  I am pretty sure that the SDF did not repeat not buy those weapons or that equipment.
+300
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 240,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,841
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #795 on: October 08, 2019, 21:56:42 »
The democrats don't opposed Trump on legitimate grounds.  VDH summarizes the war on Trump and all the fraudulent attempts to depose him.  It is this kind of discourse in America that Russia, Iran, and China are loving right now.     



Full article at link: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/trump-impeachment-inquiry-anti-trump-psychodrama/

If Trump can survive all of this going in to 2020, he will win by a landslide.  The Dems should try something new, like beating him in policy and at the ballot box, but I think they've destroyed their credibility now.             

Uh huh.  ::) With everything he has said, done, promised, pledged, failed at, reneged on, and followed through with- the only possibility is that opposing the Trump presidency must be ‘psychodrama’. It recalls similar past conversations on this page about ‘Trump derangement’ etc etc.

Maybe you’re right. Maybe you have to be crazy to oppose Trump. Maybe he is a ‘stable genius’ blessed with immense wisdom. Maybe he truly is a savant, able to step into any field and know intuitively what to do better than those who have spent their entire adult lives in professional practice. It could be.

Or maybe he has earned scorn, derision, and opposition in all of the conventional ways that a country’s leader can. Maybe he’s just really excellent at doing *that*.

I dunno. I do think that history will find him to be greatly wanting on many of the big things that have seized his attention and his thumbs, however briefly.
+300 « Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 22:05:51 by Brihard »
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 517,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,680
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #796 on: October 08, 2019, 22:20:09 »
It recalls similar past conversations on this page about ‘Trump derangement’ etc etc.

Regarding TDS, I thought this was a pretty good explanation,

I suspect that when he didn't blow up the world or grope the Queen many people settled down and said, "Oh, well, he's not deranged, after all."


Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 254,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,102
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #797 on: October 13, 2019, 12:00:58 »
Welcome to Phase 4:

Trump’s Syria Blunder Could Bring Order to Chaos

The U.S. needs a cost-benefit analysis to decide whether the Middle East is still a priority.

The deal with Turkey to pull U.S. troops out of Syria is a typical Trumpian mess, with rash, poorly planned presidential action leading to pernicious — and downright bloody — consequences. Yet that initiative also represents an effort, badly executed and communicated, to bring about a paradigm shift in America's war on terror.

President Donald Trump is trying to usher in a fourth phase of that post-9/11 conflict, in which the U.S. would accept greater security risk as the price of reducing the ongoing costs of involvement in the greater Middle East. He is running head-on into opposition from many in his own party, who are still more inclined to pay higher costs to buy down the threat of terrorist attacks. Trump is so far getting the worst of the debate. But the underlying issue he has raised is not going away anytime soon.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. struggle against terrorism has gone through three phases. The first phase was the "anywhere, anytime" approach taken by the George W. Bush administration in the years following 9/11. The U.S. mounted large-scale invasions and long-term nation-building projects in Iraq and Afghanistan. The possibility of devastating follow-on attacks seemed unacceptably high, so U.S. officials were willing to pay quite a price to suppress terrorist groups, defeat state sponsors, and attempt to transform the conditions that produced violent extremism.

The frustrations of this approach – particularly the horrifically botched and costly occupation of Iraq – eventually led to a second phase of the war on terrorism. The Barack Obama administration emphasized lighter-footprint operations using drones and special operations forces, and it withdrew U.S. troops from Iraq, the war the president had made his reputation opposing. After initially — and reluctantly — surging more U.S. troops into Afghanistan, the Obama administration also began to wind down the American presence there after 2011. This strategy seemed effective for a time, but allowed the threat to come back with a vengeance, with rise of the Islamic State across Syria and Iraq in 2013-2014.

This setback led to a third phase of the fight against global terrorism, which began in the final innings of the Obama presidency and continued, for a time, under Trump. Having seen that relaxing the pressure on the enemy could backfire — and with ISIS and its sympathizers having perpetrated major attacks in Europe and the U.S. — American officials sought a middle ground between the two earlier approaches. This became a medium-footprint approach that employed modest numbers of ground troops, while also using airpower, logistics, intelligence and other enablers to support local partners in the fight against ISIS.

Trump is now seeking to shift U.S. strategy once again. The president has no objection to smashing terrorist organizations that are suspected of plotting attacks against the U.S. Yet he seems desperate to end the post-conflict stability operations that tend to follow even medium-footprint operations like the one in Syria. The U.S. should “ONLY FIGHT TO WIN,” he tweeted on Oct. 7, after American forces began to pull back from the Syria-Turkey border. If the threat returns, the U.S. can again apply overwhelming force: “We are 7000 miles away and will crush ISIS again if they come anywhere near us!”

There are a number of obvious problems with what the president is proposing. By paving the way for a Turkish invasion of northern Syria, the U.S. pullback is likely to distract and weaken the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces — America’s principal ally there — and thereby make easier an ISIS resurgence. Trump’s policy has the smell of abandoning the Kurds to the tender mercies an autocratic Turkish regime that is frequently hostile to American policy objectives. U.S. retrenchment may also set off a scramble for influence in northern Syria, empowering Russia, Iran and other bad actors.

For all these reasons, the president’s decision earned harsh rebukes in Washington: Senator Lindsey Graham, who had backed Trump strongly since the 2016 election, called the pullback “the biggest mistake of his presidency.” Yet when one cuts through the specific critiques of Trump’s policy, the basic dispute comes back to a familiar issue: competing assessments of cost and risk.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-10-13/trump-s-syria-mistake-has-a-silver-lining?srnd=premium-canada

"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,752
  • Freespeecher
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #798 on: October 18, 2019, 01:39:21 »
Meanwhile, the hunt for the origins of the "Russian Collusion" narrative continues, and new evidence seems to have surfaced. Getting the real story will be a long and complex enterprise, gathering apiecce of evidence here and a piece of evidence there:

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/mifsuds-cellphones-mean-barr-investigation-heating-up/

Quote
Mifsud's Cellphones Mean Barr Investigation Heating Up
BY ROGER L. SIMON OCTOBER 17, 2019

While Democrats and their media friends natter on about impeachment and quid pro quos, trying to deflect from the the obvious corruption of Biden & Son and the imminent — at some point anyway — appearance of the IG report on FISA and the Steele Dossier — the real action, as it often is, is elsewhere.

In this case, it is the surprising news that two cellphones belonging to Joseph Mifsud — the mysterious Maltese professor at the heart of  the Russia probe (aka Spygate) — have suddenly materialized. The Epoch Times reports:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has obtained two phones of Joseph Mifsud, one of the central figures of the 2016 Russia investigation, and the lawyer of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has requested them, saying they likely contain exculpatory evidence.
The phones, two BlackBerry models, “only recently” came into the government’s possession, said Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, a former prosecutor, in an Oct. 15 court filing (pdf).

Data and metadata on the phones “is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn,” she said.

(snip)

Finally, an interesting conundrum for the Graham Greene/John LeCarré wannabes out there (including me): Who gave Joseph Mifsud his marching orders and just how much did he or she tell the Maltese? And who gave the marching orders to that person, Stefan Halper or whoever it was? And so on up the line...? Perhaps, some day, Messrs. Durham and Barr will tell us. I want the movie rights.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,479
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2019
« Reply #799 on: Yesterday at 09:45:45 »
An interesting article in the Atlantic today about the history and the meaning of the phrase :high crimes and misdemeanors". Actual criminality is not essential for impeachment.

Quote
Rather, as the committee staff observed in its careful study of the question, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a phrase that reaches far beyond crimes to embrace “exceeding the powers of the office in derogation of those of another branch of government,” “behaving in a manner grossly incompatible with the proper function of the office,” and “employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or personal gain.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/what-does-high-crimes-and-misdemeanors-actually-mean/600343/

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/