Gen. Jim Mattis has turned in his letter of resignation as Secretary of Defense, and like everything Mattis did for the last two years, it was tinged with Trump hatred and lack of understanding of Trump’s America First policies.
Mattis, in particular, talked about how he thinks you need to treat allies with respect, then added:
“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.”
Um, yeah. Actually it would have been better if you had never taken the position in the first place. Trump is letting our allies know they had better start treating us with respect, not the other way around.
But the good news is that Mattis joins Gen. Kelly and Gen. McMaster on the outside looking in. These globalists have been doing the bidding of the Deep State, not President Trump, and with them going overboard there is a chance Trump can now right the ship of state.
No doubt Mattis is against the US getting out of Syria, and that precipitated his resignation, but for those of us who don’t want to see the US playing the world’s policeman, Trump’s change of policy is the right thing to do.
Between the apparently sincere threat today to shut down the government over border security and the news of Mattis’s departure, it’s need a good day and more proof of “Why We Needed Trump.”
So here’s my theory: You are so right. Mattis resigning is upsetting the swamp because they want Trump to look bad and liked having one of their own “keeping Trump under control.” Mattis has years of experience. Is the world in any better shape because of his or Jack Kelly’s vast military experience? Is Afghanistan closer to being civilized because of Mad Dog’s amaaaaaaaaazing experience? So don’t stop Trump from acting like the Commander in Chief because he doesn’t have 40 years of military experience . Eisenhower – as he was LEAVING the White House – warned of the “Military Industrial Complex.” So Mattis’ very livelihood depends on conflicts and wars. Obama pulled U.S. troops out of Iraq by broadcasting for 3 years that troops would be withdrawn in December 2011. This gave alqaida so much time to morph into isis and other terrorist groups.
So maybe my theory is possible: Trump removes OUR troops from Syria. Everyone and their brother has said: if Trump removes the U.S. troops, terrorist groups will pop up in that area. Well that’s a good thing because maybe Trump wants our troops and our allies, the Kurds, removed so that frees the U. S. to blow up the bad guys who remain. Good strategy, right? But Lindsey and Mattis never helped Trump with the Wall but want to get all prissy about Syria and are unable to see that this is a good way to have a clear threat to Syria from U.S. Air strikes which gives Trump room for negotiation. This is a lot better than what’s been going on for years and years . This can be a precise plan to blow up all the bad guys and should scare Syria. Good idea, right? Why didn’t Lindsey or Mattis come up with an alternative to sending our American troops to no man’s land? I know what Marco Rubio said but that is good. All the bad guys take over the place where our troops left. Good. Now we can see our Target very clearly. Mattis and Lindsey are very hard workers, but remember, surgeons want to cut and generals want war. Let’s use “negotiating from strength.”
Joe Morrisco
Bedminster, NJ 07931
I’m pretty much on board with your analysis. In particular, use of deadly force when necessary but no futile nation building.