I think just deterrent alone of having us troops served a giant purpose. No body is going to risk the wrath of attacking us troops, no matter how small the force.
Mattis Quits
- Thread starter UsualName
- Start date
I think just deterrent alone of having us troops served a giant purpose. No body is going to risk the wrath of attacking us troops, no matter how small the force.
Hell yeah it matters.
I had a friend ask me today "what can 2000 troops do"?
Its not what they can do... but the fact is if anybody messes with them, then they will incur our wrath.
So even though its only 2000 personnel, their presence is extremely important to whats going on over there. Especially for the Kurds.
At least thats what common sense says.
Well wriiten letter. Hate to see this. However, it is hard to know what all the real issues are. Based on the letter itself, it is pretty damning. I would like to see a direct response with specific information addressing the concerns of this letter by Trump.
I really don't think this is fair criticism. By all accounts, Trump likes a lot of back and forth between his advisors. He obviously did listen to Mattis and others when he reversed himself earlier on pulling out of Afghanistan. The generals and the neo-cons were against it and he went along, against his better judgment.
If Trump were truly proposing something crazy, I could see a principled Sec. of Defense resigning rather than implementing it. I think it is hard to say that removing 2000 troops, many of whom were not trigger pullers but engineers,etc, is such a move. Similarly, we have done it their way for 17 freakin' years in Afghanistan. Can anyone say that has been such a great success we should just keep on keeping on?
I don't know what motivated Mattis, who was also fired by Obama. No doubt he will be able to make a lot of money on the NeverTrump circuit, like Comey has.
That is precisely why they should not be there. Syria is a battle over who will have a gas pipeline, the Saudis and Qataris or the Iranians. That's a tough sell for flyover country, which is where most of the troops come from, so we get this bs about defending freedom and stopping terrorists. After 25 years of nonstop war, people are wising up.
The same people who are trembling with rage over this also object to defending our own border. So you know it is not our country they are concerned about.
I didn't know that.
______________________________________________________
Obama Fires Top General Without Even a Phone Call
January 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM
President Barack Obama fired General James Mattis, the head of Central Command, without even calling the general to let him know he was being replaced.
"I am told that General Mattis was travelling and in a meeting when an aide passed him a note telling him that the Pentagon had announced his replacement as head of Central Command. It was news to him -- he hadn't received a phone call or a heads-up from anyone at the Pentagon or the White House," Thomas E. Ricks reports.
In another post, Ricks says Mattis was fired because:
Pentagon insiders say that he rubbed civilian officials the wrong way -- not because he went all "mad dog," which is his public image, and the view at the White House, but rather because he pushed the civilians so hard on considering the second- and third-order consequences of military action against Iran. Some of those questions apparently were uncomfortable. Like, what do you do with Iran once the nuclear issue is resolved and it remains a foe? What do you do if Iran then develops conventional capabilities that could make it hazardous for U.S. Navy ships to operate in the Persian Gulf? He kept saying, "And then what?"
There is also a belief that Mattis and Obama differed on Iran. "A particular point of disagreement was what to do about mischief Iran is exporting to other countries. Mattis is indeed more hawkish on this than the White House was," writes Ricks in yet another post.
"National Security Advisor Tom Donilon in particular was irked by Mattis's insistence on being heard. I cringe when I hear about civilians shutting down strategic discussions. That is exactly what the Bush administration did in late 2002 when generals persisted in questioning whether it was wise to invade Iraq. That led to what some might call a fiasco."
You mean like the Russians did earlier this year?
How did that end up for them? And technically they were mercenaries. My statement could've been worded different. What I'm saying is no nation wants full fledge conflict with the US by committing an act of war.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...attis-after-exit-asking-what-s-he-done-for-me
Trump Trashes Mattis After Exit: ‘What’s He Done for Me?’
Trump Trashes Mattis After Exit: ‘What’s He Done for Me?’