In a recent conversation I had with Pepp on various topics, I came to a conclusion. I won’t speak for Pepp, she is very capable. It was surrounding Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran (and little Israel thrown in) and Obama’s foreign policy. All that matters is the conclusion which even stunned myself. I’m no fan of Obama or his foreign or domestic policies.
I suddenly realized that, in this volatile world with all that is going on, from Russia to the Middle East, I cannot foresee even the worst things happening in the world, where Obama could take any kind of action, that I could ever support anything big or small that he does using our military. That is a heck of a revelation.
The rule is usually in times of crisis you support the commander-in-chief. But I can’t think of a situation bad enough or simple enough that I could fully support. I am dead serious, though it was a matter of reasoning that out. Sometimes things come out in discussion with someone you wouldn’t realize outside of having that conversation.
There are a number of reasons. I’ll try to outline some of the majors:
A) He would not be trusted and would either throw our efforts or soldiers to the wolves, or under the bus in the situation.(for whatever motives)
B) He cleansed the ranks of many good career generals with experience, knowledge and backbone loyal to their oath.
C) He would not rely on best advice of the Pentagon or those in authority to know.
D) He would change the mission once engaged to some other purpose.
E) He would intentionally change the rules of engagement to suit his ideology.
F) His loyalty to the US cannot be counted on in any situation.
G) He is influenced or led by other interests outside USA’s interest.
H) He’s sided with others, opponents or enemies, while in direct military action.
I) He’s made deals with enemies to the US against our interests and security.
J) He would not be in it to win on behalf of US; other interests take priority.
K) He won’t stand up in the end for US interests or our security.
L) He would overrule or change the plans on a dime himself, for subverted reasons. Everything is fluid, he’s flexible to himself and his political interests.
M) He could and no doubt would undermine our military’s objectives for his own personal reasons, or others. (or his ideology)
O) He does not honor his oath or uphold the Constitution in the US as it is.
P) His words are meaningless anyway, and his credibility is O.
There are probably more. That’s the point. I don’t know of a situation where he or his motives could be trusted to do the right thing if required, and if people depended on it.
So, there is my basic conclusion, tough as it is to think about. Maybe others have already gone through that process. At least some in our military should have walked through the possibilities already. Thus, it is not a matter of trusting our military to do the right thing or be successful. He intervenes in that process into the mission. Intentional failure?
When a lot of people see it the same way, that’s a problem. And when our allies and enemies read it the same way, it’s definitely a real problem
Now I can’t say it would be completely intentional, who can read the diseased mind, but I can say he just cannot be trusted. This, of course, means from the simplest of presidential actions of diplomacy, to treaties, to full-blown military action — anything. That’s mine.