Mattis Completely Roasts Trump

So , you are a Mattis fan now ?
You might should have went over your own posting history first .

a reply to: Xcalibur254

My take is we pull all of our military back, close our borders, and take care of our own issues. Let the UN be the world police. Yes I am prior military.

originally posted by: Puppylove
Generals need wars.

Enough said.

No. Generals need armies.

The rest is just gravy.

Mattis Completely Roasts Trump

How is that any different than the bullsnip calling him a rapist,racist,tax cheat,Russian puppet, or Ukranian 'Don' ?

Inquiring minds want to know.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

" I'm not just an overrated general "


That's Highly Debatable .

Do you think the military doesn't know of trumps military history and his bonespurs?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Last night former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was the keynote speaker at the Al Smith Memorial Foundation dinner. This comes shortly after Trump referred to Mattis as "the world's most overrated general."

Mattis' resume ends with the words, "You're fired." He can't get that one back.

a reply to: Deplorable

Maybe he will try to be a Brain Surgeon after losing his Last Job . I doubt being a Fixture in America's Eye as a " Talking Head " on T.V. is Good Enough for that Old Bull Dawg ...........

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: silo13

Trump calls Mattis the most overrated general in the world, it’s fine.

Mattis agrees and he’s a traitor.

Can’t even make this stuff up

Yeah. Trump can say anything he wishes about HIS TROOPS - and they have to take it.

Even a General has to follow protocol - and Woopie-Pie Mattis didn't.

Trump is his Chief Commander.

Suck it up, shut up and close your pie hole!

a reply to: silo13

Not sure if you knew, but Mattis retired. He’s not a troop.

Trump isn’t a king. Civilians don’t have to smile and thank him while he denigrates them. No matter how much you may wish it so and be personally offended by Mattis agreeing with Trump, he’s still not a traitor and under no obligation to “take it.”

And if he is, I’m sure you can cite an actual law that says he does.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Xcalibur254

You

It definitely seems like Trump's move in Syria has started costing him support within the military

Because the enlisted ranks want to go to Syria? And their families see sending them to Syria as a justifiable sacrifice?

the military teaches loyalty above all else. this means not throwing your allies, many of whom fought and died beside you, to the turkeys. when given a choice of leaving an ally, or staying and helping, most will choose to stay and help.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: silo13

Not sure if you knew, but Mattis retired. He’s not a troop.

Trump isn’t a king. Civilians don’t have to smile and thank him while he denigrates them. No matter how much you may wish it so and be personally offended by Mattis agreeing with Trump, he’s still not a traitor and under no obligation to “take it.”

And if he is, I’m sure you can cite an actual law that says he does.

technically, an officer never truly retires. they "resign their commission" and are put on inactive status. they can be called up at any time.

i could be wrong, but thats the scuttlebutt.

a reply to: UKTruth

We also have a retired Admiral writing a co-ed in the NYT.

Co-ed? Do you mean an op-ed?

If it is truly co-ed, I learned something today.

Thanks for that.

a reply to: The GUT

He did that yesterday, right before going to Dallas. No President since JFK has dared to do that. That's not only extremely brave but a true service to our country.

Don't say that please - even in jest.

I'm old enough to remember (barely) 11/22/63.

That was the most awful day in the history of this country - especially because of the Zapruder film catching the kill shot in living color. Although Lincoln's assassination is a very close 2nd.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Oh boy, he threw some ad hominems! What a sign of a great mind!

FWIW, there is no honor in earning spurs on a battlefield, killing foreigners to prop up a corporatocracy. In fact, i'd say it makes him a rather lousy human to take so much pride in earning $$$ for US billionaires while taking the lives of people who'd rather have not had to engage him to begin with.

But please...praise the war machine. Especially when it can lob insults that grab headlines.

It's more the issue that Trumps actions here will lead to more war. The US acts as a stabilizing force around the globe, even when we're not engaging in armed conflict our presence reduces the chance of conflict.

What we did do the Kurds is going to have global consequences as other groups we are allied with can no longer trust us. The Kurds were one of our strongest allies (and in fact our strongest in the Middle East).

Australia is under our nuclear umbrella (as are many other nations) and as such don't go nuclear themselves. They can no longer trust that we will protect them.
Japan is already in the middle of a huge national debate on rebuilding a military and going nuclear. Abe is quite a hawk. This basically guarantees they go down that route.
South Korea can no longer trust us against North Korea.
NATO is in question due to this and prior actions.

Here's a really big one. It seems all of this was instigated by a Trump branded hotel (he doesn't even own it, just licenses his name to it) in Turkey being threatened. For that he betrayed an ally in one of the most unimaginable ways possible.

Our relationship with Pakistan is analogous to our relationship with the Kurds. We ally, they help us, and we in turn serve to moderate their conflicts so that they don't turn into anything bigger than a small skirmish. Most foreign policy experts consider the Pakistan/India situation to be one of the most dangerous in the world if it were to escalate. Trump has business interests in Mumbai, another hotel he licenses his name to. What do you think Pakistan is thinking right now?

Trump has shown himself to be easily compromised, and US influence under him to be weak and directed entirely to serve the Presidents personal interests. Even a new President won't remove those doubts (nothing short of a massive restructure of our government will do it). These actions will drag us into many additional conflicts over time.

America Alone is a horrible policy. America First cannot happen unless we're in a leadership position around the globe.

We have a weak President, who is terrified of people laughing at him. The entire UN laughed at him to his face. Erdogan just laughed in his face, after throwing away that "beautiful" letter threatening him.

originally posted by: silo13

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: silo13

Trump calls Mattis the most overrated general in the world, it’s fine.

Mattis agrees and he’s a traitor.

Can’t even make this stuff up

Yeah. Trump can say anything he wishes about HIS TROOPS - and they have to take it.

Even a General has to follow protocol - and Woopie-Pie Mattis didn't.

Trump is his Chief Commander.

Suck it up, shut up and close your pie hole!

Mattis is a former General, he retired from the military back in 2013. He also is no longer part of the government as he left his Secretary of Defense role.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: carewemust

BTW..Is James Mattis the General who Trump labeled as "overrated" at the Dallas rally this week?

If you actually took the time to read a thread instead of just looking for people that confirm your worldview, you would have the answer to your question in my OP.

saved for Irony , parody, and comedy.

Oh and for mindcrime, I didn't support mathis, but then I knew actual Generals in the Marines too

so no, I was and am not in awe.

a reply to: Aazadan

this is amusing, you for got to say the Palestinians wont be our allies either.

Guess what Kuds in Syria and palestinians have in common

no it's not hate of Jews or zionists

Neither have a country.

who's at fault for that??

Honest question, do you know who did not give either a country??

the people that live around them.

it was not the USA.

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Aazadan

this is amusing, you for got to say the Palestinians wont be our allies either.

Guess what Kuds in Syria and palestinians have in common

no it's not hate of Jews or zionists

Neither have a country.

who's at fault for that??

Honest question, do you know who did not give either a country??

the people that live around them.

it was not the USA.

That's not really relevant to this discussion which is about a military alliance. Whether that alliance is a group of people in a certain country or with the country itself makes no difference.

The US is no longer a reliable military ally. This means that we no longer have any leverage around the globe in attempting to keep the peace. Meaning, that this action has also cost us diplomatically. I said it the other week, and it's even more true now. This act is likely going to be the single most impactful action on the geopolitical stage of the 21st century and it is extremely detrimental to America.

do we have a treaty with the Kurds??

which contry represents the Kurds?

which kurds and what contry?

we have an alliance you say?

who signed this "alliance"

was it a treaty to defend the Kurds?

was it a treaty to give the Kurds land?

How can the USA give land to Kurds when we do not own said lands??

see there are lots of holes in your "alliance" theory.

the USA did a job, the job of the USA is done.

can you link to a treaty with the kurds that says otherwise??