WaPo’s latest hit piece based on an anti-Trump book coming out seems to have forgotten how the LAST administration handled the military.
A ‘spicy’ Trump quote from events spelling the beginning of the end of Rex Tillerson’s time in the White House have the Media(Democrat) abuzz.
Other attendees such as Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, quickly realized the speakers had no idea how to address the president when their talk’s title page made reference to “the post-war international rules-based order.”
It soon became a chance for the President to rail against his favorite targets, questioning why the U.S. was paying for a missile defense system to protect South Korea, complaining about the terms of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and taking aim at NATO for being bankrolled by Washington.
As the briefing continued, he accused his top brass of incompetence. He turned to the conflict in Afghanistan, America’s longest war, which he described as a “loser war.”
“You’re all losers,” Trump said. “You don’t know how to win anymore.”
“I wouldn’t go to war with you people [by my side],” he bellowed to a disbelieving room. “You’re a bunch of dopes and babies.”
While Vice President Mike Pence stayed silent and other senior figures tried to stare straight ahead, the authors describe how Secretary of State Rex Tillerson tried to defend the military leadership.
“No, that’s just wrong,” the secretary of state said. “Mr. President, you’re totally wrong. None of that is true.”
Tillerson let down his guard in the immediate aftermath of the confrontation. Standing in the hall outside with several confidants, as they realized their effort to persuade the president of the importance of the internationalist view had backfired, he said: “He’s a f—ing moron.”
Really? ‘Post-War International Rules-Based Order’?
They brought a report couched in Globalist language to a president who explicitly ran on REVERSING his predecessor’s globalist tendencies, and expected it to be well-received?
It wasn’t, obviously. And Obama’s track record in the time he was in office didn’t exactly make the case that his strategy was the right one. Crimea fell to Russia. The Middle East and North Africa were on fire. Europe was swamped by people trying to get the hell out of Dodge, not to mention Iran geting a free pass for inciting (funding!) civil war among their neighbors, because nobody wanted to endanger that precious unenforceable JCPOA.
Trump was elected for exactly one reason. He is a results-based guy. The old way was NOT getting the right kind of results, and he was in a meeting where people pitched ‘more of the same’.
More of the same has led to a whole lot of Americans coming home in bodybags with no foreseeable end in sight, for reasons and objectives that were ‘iffy’ at best.
Contrast their objection to Trump saying mean things to his generals to how Obama gutted his own military leadership often for the most questionable of reasons. And then ask yourself, if these are the leaders that survived Obama’s ‘cull’ should it really surprise anyone that Trump wasn’t on the same page as them.
From a 2013 Investor’s Business Daily piece:
Defense: What the president calls “my military” is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving the compliant and fearful.
We recognize President Obama is the commander-in-chief and that throughout history presidents from Lincoln to Truman have seen fit to remove military commanders they view as inadequate or insubordinate. Turnover in the military ranks is normal, and in these times of sequestration and budget cuts the numbers are expected to tick up as force levels shrink and missions change.
Yet what has happened to our officer corps since President Obama took office is viewed in many quarters as unprecedented, baffling and even harmful to our national security posture. We have commented on some of the higher profile cases, such as Gen. Carter Ham. He was relieved as head of U.S. Africa Command after only a year and a half because he disagreed with orders not to mount a rescue mission in response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.
…From Breitbart.com’s Facebook page comes a list of at least 197 officers that have been relieved of duty by President Obama for a laundry list of reasons and sometimes with no reason given. Stated grounds range from “leaving blast doors on nukes open” to “loss of confidence in command ability” to “mishandling of funds” to “inappropriate relationships” to “gambling with counterfeit chips” to “inappropriate behavior” to “low morale in troops commanded.”
Nine senior commanding generals have been fired by the Obama administration this year, leading to speculation by active and retired members of the military that a purge of its commanders is under way.
Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, an outspoken critic of the Obama administration, notes how the White House fails to take action or investigate its own officials but finds it easy to fire military commanders “who have given their lives for their country.” Vallely thinks he knows why this purge is happening.
“Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama’s ideology,” Vallely said. “The White House protects their own. That’s why they stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and ObamaCare. He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”
Another senior retired general told TheBlaze on the condition of anonymity, because he still provide services to the government and fears possible retribution, that “they’re using the opportunity of the shrinkage of the military to get rid of people that don’t agree with them or do not toe the party line. Remember, as (former White House chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel said, never waste a crisis.”
Source: Investor’s Business Daily