Mattis Leaving in February

#102
#102
Weezy said:
Obama did so with Iraq. And Iraq was more important, with a higher likelihood of success.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. The departure from Iraq was negotiated by Bush. It just happened under Obama.

And now dems don't want Trump to leave Afghanistan because it makes Barry look bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#103
#103
carlos86 said:
This is literally what Trump thought we could do. Just pack up all our gear. Ship home all the connex's and have every serviceman back in Kuwait in a day. Thats now how it works. It takes months of planning. And doing so without a plan creates chaos strategy and geopolitically.
Click to expand...

Everyone screws the Kurds.....they're as hated as the Jews in the Middle East
 
#105
#105
n_huffhines said:
Not true at all. The departure from Iraq was negotiated by Bush. It just happened under Obama.

And now dems don't want Trump to leave Afghanistan because it makes Barry look bad.
Click to expand...

Can we please stop worrying about that kinda **** and just bring the troops home?

I know you’re just explaining and not offering an opinion on what should happen but still.
 
#106
#106
Orangeslice13 said:
Can we please stop worrying about that kinda **** and just bring the troops home?

I know you’re just explaining and not offering an opinion on what should happen but still.
Click to expand...
Do you realize how inconsistent this sentiment is with past things that Trump has criticized Obama for? Trump once called Barack Obama "The Founder of ISIS" for the premature pullout in Iraq.
 
#107
#107
Velo Vol said:
Mattis wrote, "Because you have the right to have a secretary of defense whose views better align with yours on these and other subjects".

This is about more than 2,000 troops in Syria and 7,000 in Afghanistan. He wouldn't have quit over a disagreement on that.
Click to expand...

And? SecDefs disagree with their Presidents all the time. If they reach irreconcilable differences, Mattis is a good man for stepping aside if he cannot support what the POTUS wants. It appears to be an amicable split.

What I want to know is why all the sudden you and others give a flying rats backside about Syria.
 
#109
#109
Grand Vol said:
And? SecDefs disagree with their Presidents all the time. If they reach irreconcilable differences, Mattis is a good man for stepping aside if he cannot support what the POTUS wants. It appears to be an amicable split.

What I want to know is why all the sudden you and others give a flying rats backside about Syria.
Click to expand...
Did you read the Mattis letter? It was professional but I wouldn't describe it as "amicable". There seems to have been much rancor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samanderson and volfanhill
#110
#110
carlos86 said:
We screw them a lot yet they don’t burn American flags or wish death on us. They probably will now.
Click to expand...
What should the US do? Everyone hates them and always will .... it's the middle eastern way. There are no solutions in that Precambrian wasteland
 
#111
#111
Grand Vol said:
And? SecDefs disagree with their Presidents all the time. If they reach irreconcilable differences, Mattis is a good man for stepping aside if he cannot support what the POTUS wants. It appears to be an amicable split.

What I want to know is why all the sudden you and others give a flying rats backside about Syria.
Click to expand...

Wow. You believe this is amicable?
 
#112
#112
Grand Vol said:
What I want to know is why all the sudden you and others give a flying rats backside about Syria.
Click to expand...

I won't be loosing sleep over the fact American troops are leaving Syria, but I think it will probably make the situation worse.

And I won't be surprised at all if Trump trashes Mattis in upcoming tweets. He does it to almost everyone, eventually.
 
#114
#114
Velo Vol said:
I won't be loosing sleep over the fact American troops are leaving Syria, but I think it will probably make the situation worse.

And I won't be surprised at all if Trump trashes Mattis in upcoming tweets. He does it to almost everyone, eventually.
Click to expand...
losing, one "o"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obsessed
#115
#115
1972 Grad said:
losing, one "o"
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
#117
#117
Dear Mr. President:


I have been privileged to serve as our country's 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.
I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department's business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong U.S. global influence.
One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. (This is exactly what the founders warned us against doing."It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world"- George Washington) Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. ( Below Mattis makes the case how we should in fact be the policeman of the world) Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO's 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.
Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model - gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions - to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.
My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances. ( Doubling down on the case that we should be the policeman of th world)
Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. (Good riddance - neocons must be sobbing at this point)The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department's interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability Within the Department.
I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.
I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#119
#119
This is a position Trump has been clear on for a long time. He campaigned on it. Why is this a surprise?

Besides, if people want troops in Syria then congress should vote on it. This isn’t very hard...
 
#120
#120
midnight orange said:
Dear Mr. President:


I have been privileged to serve as our country's 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.
I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department's business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong U.S. global influence.
One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. (This is exactly what the founders warned us against doing."It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world"- George Washington) Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. ( Below Mattis makes the case how we should in fact be the policeman of the world) Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO's 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.
Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model - gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions - to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.
My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances. ( Doubling down on the case that we should be the policeman of th world)
Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. (Good riddance - neocons must be sobbing at this point)The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department's interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability Within the Department.
I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.
I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.
Click to expand...

You people who are living in a pre 1939 world view will never ever get it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SURFSIDEBEACHVOL, samanderson and Coug
#121
#121
golfballs said:
This is a position Trump has been clear on for a long time. He campaigned on it. Why is this a surprise?

Besides, if people want troops in Syria then congress should vote on it. This isn’t very hard...
Click to expand...
Then why did mad dog get appointed?
 
#122
#122
midnight orange said:
Dear Mr. President:


I have been privileged to serve as our country's 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.
I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department's business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong U.S. global influence.
One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. (This is exactly what the founders warned us against doing."It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world"- George Washington) Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. ( Below Mattis makes the case how we should in fact be the policeman of the world) Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO's 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.
Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model - gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions - to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.
My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances. ( Doubling down on the case that we should be the policeman of th world)
Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. (Good riddance - neocons must be sobbing at this point)The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department's interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability Within the Department.
I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.
I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.
Click to expand...
Your annotations are gross mischaracterizations. Mattis doesn't mention a permanent alliance with the Kurds and fulfilling our obligation as a member of NATO is obviously not being "a policeman of the world". Neither is protecting our interests abroad. That is just dumb. We should all be lamenting the loss of service of a man like James Mattis.

Only the most tribal of unconditional Trump apologists would try to portray this development as something positive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samanderson
#123
#123
volfanhill said:
Then why did mad dog get appointed?
Click to expand...
To bring the fight to Syria so that we could eventually leave. We’re leaving. Besides, it’s congress who should vote on it, so If people want to stay in Syria, then they should contact their congressmen
 
#124
#124
carlos86 said:
You people who are living in a pre 1939 world view will never ever get it.
Click to expand...
On how you been sold a bill of goods that allows us to have 800 military bases in foreign countries, undeclared wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya Yemen, etc. all for the “national interest”. Yep, I don’t get it.
 
#125
#125
golfballs said:
This is a position Trump has been clear on for a long time. He campaigned on it. Why is this a surprise?

Besides, if people want troops in Syria then congress should vote on it. This isn’t very hard...
Click to expand...
Say what you want about what he campaigned on... he did call Barack Obama "The Founder of ISIS" for the perception that he had prematurely pulled forces out of Iraq. (Even though, this was obviously ridiculous. ISIS predates the Obama Presidency by 5 years). The fact is, Trump's rhetoric has been inconsistent.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top