Flat do not believe this. After Vietnam, the US military made it a core principle to not be mislead by unprincipled civilian leadership. As professionals, to a man and a woman they are horrified by the prospect that a petulant child could risk the lives of service members in one of his tantrums.
That's why General Kelly put in place a number of controls to prevent that chance. These controls certainly survive his tenure, as he intended, and include many of the people who run the executive branch.
I'd be worried about that if I did not know the officer corps of the US military includes a good many patriots with a liberal education, who understand and appreciate the importance of civilian control. In these extraordinary times, I'm sure they see it's their job to hold off the madness until the people can recapture control of the democratic process from a relatively small number of oligarchs and propagandists.
26
@Bob T
The military has a thousand plus bases all over the world, they wouldn't’ be happy until there is a military presence in ever country on earth. Good riddance to Mattis, a war hawk even Obama couldn’t put up with. Remember, all this started with Trump drawing down troops in foreign lands, it’s about time. Some things don’t demand a, "military solution.” This isn’t about patriotism, it’s about getting money to further their careers.
10
@Bob T "Core principle to not be mislead by unprincipled civilian leadership." How do you explain the Cluster-Frack in Iraq devised by Cheney/Bush and their unprincipled minions?
13
I think Trump may be souring on the idea of generals running federal departments. McMaster. Flynn, Kelly, Mattis. His love affair with the military is demonstrated by his desire for a military parade. It's all about a demonstration of force, with him having ultimate control over all of this strength and power. But even those folks who careered in the salute and execute have proven that they actually have independent thought processes about the decisions of their leader. Who really wants to work for this chaotic president now? List of prospects are dwindling. Kanye?
21
Yes, it all comes down to his little Donny.
4
I am so tired of hearing the mourning from the media regarding the loss of the "adult generals" in the White House. In three years, eight months, and 22 days the United States and its allies were victorious in World War II under the leadership of Dwight D. Eisenhower, George S. Patton, Douglas MacArthur, Omar Bradley and Chester William Nimitz et al.
We are now in the 17th year of the Afghanistan war with the Iraq war not far behind. Our military leaders have failed us miserably by going along with these counterproductive political policies of constant occupation. The press reports to us that the generals are experts in their fields, experts on terrorism, experts on foreign policy, experts on counter insurgency etc, yet hardly any of them has chosen to stand up to the disastrous actions the United States has pursued in the Middle East and other parts of the world. Most of the senior military leaders for the last 25 years have been nothing but mouthpieces for the military industrial complex. When they retire they can't get those lucrative defense contractor director seats without talking up future wars. Nobody can figure out why a smart general like Michael Flynn could get himself into such a pickle when it is simple to ascertain. He was going for the golden parachute which is what many of our retired generals do at the expense of the rest of the country.
41
In all of this, Mattis is the patriot , Trump is not....bottom line.
8
I am a retired Air Force colonel, Vietnam vet, father of a son who served 27 months in Iraq as a young Army Officer, and a daughter who is a retired Air Force colonel. From what I have read (not enough) about General Mattis, he is a saint. He is every service person’s person dream commander. I would love to salute him and shake his hand. There is no power on earth that could make me salute his current boss.
53
Agree, as much as I respect the Generals, they're not much help when the Commander in Chief is unwilling to listen, unwilling to research the subject, and unwilling to absorb anything other than that which places him above and beyond all others.
And at this point only Congress can remedy our country's dire situation. Unfortunately they're on holiday.
33
@cherrylog754 No, not Congress with the remedy, only we the voter can fix things, but then only if enough us want change. What scares me the most is the large numbers of people who think Trump is doing just fine. I worry most about the loss of our democracy.
13
The enormous power of the American Presidency which gives the office and only his office complete control of our nuclear arsenal is quite a sobering thought. A thought I never considered until Donald Trump held the office. In fact, I didn't really know a great deal about how our government worked until Trump took office. I didn't feel the need to contemplate nuclear codes in the hands of one man, until the man became an unstable, narcissist that makes things very clear that my well being as an American Citizen is a distant second to his well being. I'm 56 and he is the first president that makes that fact clear. I believe and pray, that if a serious world chrisis occurred that a coup would take place within our government that would lock the president up until the issues were sorted out I believe such a move would be an act of patriotism and seen like that by most citizens.
50
No it would not, prayers or not. You would be called the enemy of America and democracy. And dumpy knows it.
1
A coup? What do you think this is Venezuela? You now join the right-wing nuts who advocate a coup if he is not reelected.@James C
2
@James C
Every dark cloud has s silver lining. I am glad you have improved your civics knowledge. These are things that everyone who votes should understand. Given how many people don’t, I feel that our civic stability depends on low voter turnout.
3
My greatest fear is that Trump will sit up in bed one night and decide to teach the Chinese or Iranians or North Koreans "who's boss" around here, and order a nuclear strike against one of them and the General in the National Command Authority put's his MAGA hat on, smartly salutes the idea and pushes some buttons. I have no doubt Trump would send young Americans, or the rest of us to die for his inflated ego and stupidity.
87
@markd
And with the few minutes of airtime remaining Republicans will still find ways to defend his actions. "Well you know, he tried not to listen to his gut and we have to let Trump be Trump. But the good news is that it will all be over soon."
8
@markd pray henever is told he has a few months go live. there is know doubt in my mind he would try to take the world with him.
4
Yes, and that’s what scares the bejesus out of us all.
4
Deep gratitude to Ms. Schake, an expert who reminds us soberly to get past any kind of Marvel Avengers view of the role of military leaders in an advanced democracy (..especially when it's the strongest military power on earth!).
As she makes clear, Mattis is a brave and thoughtful military leader, a role model, but the real solutions to the crisis in Washington must be brave and sane political heros --- who will bring the best strategies and tactics...and all their humanity ...to the current War on Truth.
51
@John grover. Where are they? They're sure not in the Senate. Roberts gives me a little hope for the judiciary, but it's precarious. Politics overrules humanity these days.
5
Perhaps this is the reason the English royalty no longer has any power except ceremonial pomp. One man, especially one like trump, who has a number of 'head problems' has the right to over-ride the built in, God given morals of another. If this would be the case, we could disband the military and forfeit our "world leadership" to a country of a more tyrannical nature (although we're getting there). This president, whose very right to occupy the White House is under question, should be quietly awaiting his evacuation papers, not stirring up more and more problems. Why are we even listening to him anymore?
41
To think that the English monarchy has no power is akin to believing that our Supreme Court is free and clear of partisanship.
2
@barbara jackson Whose morals are you referring to? Not Mattis's a hawkish war criminal.
6
@barbara jackson
Do you know a more efficient way to fill the pockets of the ‘real’ leaders in the USA nowadays?
This is the first POTUS who is ignorant, unintelligent, without knowledge of the history even of the USA, never mind the world. He is a psychiatrists' dream , with so many mental dysfunctions, psychopathic tendencies , personality disorders that an entire medical school would take twenty years to unravel. He is the Destroyer in Chief, totally out of his depth. It is stunning to the rest of the world that the GOP has backed his poor decisions, crudity, disrespect for all US institutions, unwillingness to consult with experts who know far more than him, on every subject. His elevation, by cheating, has exposed the ugly underbelly of the USA. Unless Trump is indicted and jailed for his many crimes over a lifetime of cruelty to ordinary people , the United States is on a rapid decline towards third world country status. The world is disappointed in the American people .
6
While he is alone, who is watching the nuclear buttons ??
2
Notice that in this puff piece for the military brass, Schake avoids the nuclear elephant in the room. Namely, suppose this malignant man-child orders a nuclear strike on North Korea in the absence of a provocation? What does the military do? Follow a legal order? Subvert the order? Would Schake or the military support a no first strike policy? What we face with Trump as the president finds no analogy or insight, regrettably, from prior military-civilian relations.
5
Uh, are you saying that we are going to have to govern themselves? That I am actually personally going to have to stop whining about “them” and stop waiting and hoping for “them” and get involved? Wouldn’t a King be less work?
We need a military coup. Roll tanks into the White House and arrest Dangerous Donald. Install Mattis as president until the 2020 elections. On the way out of the White House, stop at the Capitol and arrest every Republican enabler of Trump. This is a national emergency. I think the majority of Americans would approve.
2
What Trump really wants and needs is not an Army or Marine former General, but one from the Air Force, a la Curtis LeMay:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay
At the lower officer ranks I would say that the Air Force has the most intelligent, independent thinking, rebellious individuals (i.e. pilots), who mostly get out, and at the higher ranks, self-self-serving robots. Only in the marines and army do you tend to get the more romantic philosopher-warrior types.
Lets be clear- "democracy", "checks and balances", "chain of command", "will of the voters"... none of these are an excuse for allowing a mad idiot to launch a nuclear attack. We as humans have an absolute moral duty to avoid the use of nuclear weapons at all costs.
Forget about democracy- anyone who prevents the president from carrying out such an abhorrent act is doing the right thing. Democracy is not truth or science, and it's laws certainly don't excuse the horrible and immoral acts of its leader. Those who serve under this president have a moral Duty to prevent nuclear war that supersedes any "duties" they have under the constitution.
3
Gen Mattis did well as Defense Secretary. He guided the armed forces excellently and helped steer Mad (no dog) Trump away from disaster on several occasions.
But it is the Senate not the Cabinet that should serve as a check and balance on the President. The weak kneed Republican Senators miss John McCain who alone among them stood up to Mad Trump. The rest of them starting with McConnell should be held to account at the ballot box. Unfortunately we will all suffer from the impulsive destruction engineered by Mad Trump.
1
I think it's telling that in the United States we look to the military and big business rather than, say, our intellectuals or philosophers, for leadership. Of course, we created the profit-obsessed, militarized state (what you extoll as the "liberal world order") in order to run the world on our terms, so I suppose gung-ho generals and corrupt CEOs make the most sense.
3
The author bizarrely postulates that military personnel in the DoD refusing to launch nukes, without provocation, against North Korea would contravene civilian control of the military.
Ponder the outcomes of such logic. We'd pretty much all be dead. Whether the Koreans really have the capability to launch nukes in retaliation against us, the Chinese and Russians certainly do.
What's to be expected from a Republican who advised the McCain/Palin campaign (nothing against the former, but a sane person wouldn't have touched Palin with a ten foot pole that could reach Russia from Alaska), as well as advising Rudy (talk about a mad dog!) Giuliani.
Think about what you just read, folks. I'd take a military coup against an unjustified order to launch nukes eight days a week.
2
The test of any political system is the legal process used to remove a bad ruler. Short cuts that ignore the system signal a fundamental distrust in the system itself. If you look around the world you will see many countries with a long history of using short cuts to out leaders. When you study those countries, they are united in a common way: force and power substitute for law and process. The lesson is clear: short cuts to removal of a leader translates as a lack of faith in a civilian political system and inevitably leads to conflict, hatred and grief.
1
It is a given that if you see a surgeon, he/she will want to operate. If you put a General in charge of the Defense Department, they will want to have a war. General Mattis was an exception, which is why his resignation-retirement-removal is so upsetting. He brought a professionalism to DOD and understood how our presence around the world gave some semblance of stability. Trump continues to have more blood on his hands. He must go.
1
We are a country with civilian government, so saving cannot come from generals. Generals did not save us from Iraq, for instance. I saw no reason to think Mr. Mattis might have saved us from the letter of resignation.
2
The generals were never meant to save us. The beautiful idea behind this country was that the military not only agreed that civilian rule was the bedrock, but they summarily reinforced that premise by recognizing the president as "Commander in Chief." Whether this country can continue for another 242 years with that simple ideal, will depend upon the American people and whether they realize what is at stake here.
It is not up to the generals. It is up to us!
3
I agree with the general (no pun intended) point here. Nevertheless, does a out-of-order president have the right to be horribly, dangerously wrong, not just simply wrong? Is everything from the military automatically left thereby to "just following orders"? I don't think so. Any containment of the danger by the military doesn't have to be through promptly following orders but rather perhaps "assertive delay," which can be used with cruelly wrong things directed (dictated?) by Trump. For example, it has been done already with the transgender issue. The containment and resolution can also not just happen through the military but in similar, silent partnership with the lawfully designated civilian authorities. Accordingly, it would indeed be the responsibility of a responsible legislature and citizenry (with no inappropriate obstruction from a blind, order-following military) to contain and even remove a dangerous person who happened to be elevated to the presidency. It's a tough job, given the irresponsible voter suppression alone, but somebody with some sense of justice as well as law has to do it.
“That Mr. Mattis was equally known for lugging around a footlocker of Western novels and stoic philosophies, testifying in favor of greater spending for diplomacy, standing Christmas watch for enlisted Marines and writing thoughtfully about civil-military challenges 45 years into America’s experiment with an all-volunteer force were, evidently, matters of indifference to the commander in chief.” Wow. All I can say is, “make American thoughtful again.” But would someone who ran under that slogan, and had the brains and know-how and focus to embody it, even crack 1 percent in the polls?
4
Many of the generals want to keep us in these never-ending wars to fund the military industrial complex. How about we get out of these wars, use the funds for a better education system and just maybe our citizenry will have the mental skills to see thru candidates like Trump and the war mongering right-wing.
4
Military leaders offer experience, discipline and knowledge of the world as it is. They serve the nation unflinchingly, most with honor. There is a benefit to have them offer guidance and counsel to our leaders, especially the one called the commander in chief. The problem is not with the military, but with the civilian charged to lead them. This shameful chapter in the presidency is no benchmark, nor a guide as to how to do anything, unless your goal is fraud and self aggrandizement.
3
Next, I’m sure, you’ll be extolling Mattis for President 2020! The obvious thing that is glaringly missing here is that when you have a military that is exponentially more powerful than any other force on Earth the question becomes: who/what really sets policy? The might and will of the military (industrial complex) is the irresistible force. The fact is that America has no enemies that pose a real threat. The philosophy of: stop them ‘over there’ before they come over here is antiquated and fraudulent. Mattis is a war monger. Trump is a power monger. Between those two, the humane will of the People stood no chance. There has been no national referendum on whether Americans want endless war. The rouse of “defending liberty” or “securing borders” is propaganda. War making is, apparently, the best way to trigger an outbreak of “bipartisanship” in Washington. On Main St. we keep burying vets and watching them suicide. Who knows, perhaps it is a coincidence that this article completely misses the real point of the failure of governance in America. Swords to plowshares would seem to be more what the People want and need.
20
For the record, in order to be valid, a military order must be (1) received and understood, (2) clear and unambiguous. (3) pertain to military good order and/or morale, and (4) be legal. I was in charge of an ROTC unit for 3 years, with honorary rank of full professor and department chairman.
4
@JSK Perhaps you were indirectly pointing out the *lack* of such in the Trump presidency, rendering "just following orders" highly questionable at least from a very dangerous person? If so, you would be very correct.
1
This situation is not a poker game. This is not the time to think that we have time. No time for ballot boxes. We need action NOW. A Senate with a spine is all that is necessary. But, if undemocratic action is necessary to save Democracy and maybe the world; so be it. Philosophizing is for Sophomores.
2
@ANUBIS
No. Wrecking the democracy to save it is no better than the Viet Nam era of destroying villages to save them. We have the instruments to change our downward spiral. We need McConnell to live up to his oath of office.
4
McConnell living up to any standard that doesn't serve him is a pipe dream.
2
Nothing new whatsoever here. No insights at all.
Though many if not most thoughtful people agree that the ballot box is the way to go, increasingly there is palpable fear that the country -- indeed, the world -- cannot withstand the uncertainty that this malignant individual spouts like a volcano.
I understand the fear of political upheaval involved in impeachment. I do not want it. But unless the so-called Republicans take action on the so-called president's behavior, we're all in very serious trouble.
6
Sounds vaguely ominous...
In such situations across the globe and history, colonels often step in...
3
Trump is using our own democratic freedoms to destroy Democracy. Dems have to stand up and stop him; or America and Democracy is finished. Ray Sipe
3
Republicans are using the republic (the rule of law) to destroy the democracy.
1
"As Thomas Jefferson said, the people are the only safe repository for the ultimate powers of society."
And the majority of the people wisely rejected Trump (wisdom that becomes even more evident with every passing tweet), who was installed against the will of a clear majority of voters by 306 party-over-country faceless Republican Electors.
4
Mattis’ letter makes me think it was he who sent out that anonymous statement about how people in the White House are making sure Trump doesn’t do anything too stupid. None of these people are still there.
5
Difficult to "wrest those powers from him at the ballot box"
when we have a gop who will do anything to win an election-lying, cheating, and stealing. They pair up well with the idiot they got elected. Pitiful.
14
The generals/admirals that simple people thought would be a meaningful check on †Я☭mp would dangerously look and act like a military coup if they truly asserted themselves beyond the necessary flattering and stroking. Yes, we are seemingly sliding toward a S. American-style plutocracy as the GOP continues to define deviancy downward at an alarming rate, but sensible people are not looking forward to a military junta taking over. Let the general(s) run for office like Ike, after solving a real problem within their bailiwick.
1
one thing for sure, very few americans have any understanding of the military. they dont understand its weapons, its doctrines, or its people. right now the military is woefully underfunded. republicans who pose as supporters of the military have reduced the tax base to the point where entitlement programs absorb 70 percent of the federal budget leaving the military inadequately funded. most americans are okay with this. the wealth of the top 1 percent whose interests are the main concern of the republicans is no longer directly tied to the security of the country. the mobility of their wealth makes it possible for them to prosper no matter who wins in any conflict between America and its totalitarian enemies. when americans whose security and prosperity are tied to the well being of their country wake up to the news of a crushing defeat at the hands of the russians or chinese maybe then they will shoulder a greater burden to protect the country.
1
@allen
Allen,
Beg to differ. The military is grossly OVERfunded.
But under no circumstances may the military be depended on for policy or its enforcement. Matis may be a patriot and a source of advice, but neither he nor any other military figure should be a Cabinet Secretary.
9
@Reality
Trump and his Fox News Cabinet have not only worsened the oncoming recession, they have increase the chance of armed international conflict.
In the Middle Ages King Charles III of France hired the Viking Rollo and his men to protect France from the Viking raids on France. Effective defense is both tactical and strategic. For that Rollo became the Duke of Normandy and the rest is our history.
Mattis was the ideal Cabinet Secretary to parse the Joint Chiefs of Staff and deliver effective defense planning to the president. Unfortunately, the captain of this ship would rather waste his crew and ship on the rocks.
1
I really do hope the majority of citizens understands that the long-term fix for our present crisis of leadership is a commitment on the part of voters to be informed and active at the ballot box in perpetuity. I grudging accept that all hell apparently has to break loose before we realize we've got a serious problem and rethink our commitments to ideologies that are failing us. O.K., but our next opportunity is two years away, which is more than enough time for evil to lay waste to this country, this planet, and perhaps everything on it. On what then should my hope for this country rest? In the integrity and competence of Robert Mueller to make a solid case for presidential indictment? In the heroism of half of the new Congress to take action in ways that will check abuses of power? In some iota of chaotic happenstance that will undermine the best laid plans of corporatocracy? My Christmas prayer is that God take them all, mold them into a huge wrecking ball, and lob it straight at the GOP because op-eds like this one make it clear that this country is a mess that cannot be cleaned up while they hold power.
2
Having worked for more than a few retired senior military officers, my advice is to recognize these men and women were taught to always follow orders; and promoted because of their willingness to follow orders.
Independent critical thinking is not rewarded in the military services; in fact it is a career ending full-stop. Not sure this life-long trait of following orders is the one we want in senior advisors to our Presidents, especially one as unstable as the current one.
8
"Rather, it is to use the legislative and political tools available to us as citizens to hem in the chief executive, and wrest those powers from him at the ballot box."
Let's hope we get that chance. Republicans are itching for an authoritarian plutocracy with a voting charade ala Russia
3
The military might have to save our democracy. The Republicans will do nothing about our corrupt, incompetent, illegitimate president. They do not have the courage or patriotism to act in America's interest instead of their self interest. We have a corrupt congress representing oligarchs instead of the majority of Americans. We have no political solution in sight. Muller will assuredly be fired. The Democratic lead House of Representatives will be thwarted by the Republican Senate. Trump will be unchecked. We need a military coup by some of the true American patriots in our Armed Services who can oust the Trump administration and call for new elections. We need to reverse the stain of the Trump/Putin rigged election of 2016. The coup would not overthrow the Government, it would restore democracy.
2
@DAK
In and of itself. a coup under any terms would be the end of our democracy.
3
I think it’s time people watched Dr. Strangelove again. I did the other day. It still resonates today, louder than ever, eerily so and is a sober reminder of what can happen when leaders have lost their grip on reality! Will we never learn? It may seem farcical - but read/watch the news - and you have to wonder. Put General Mattis’s resignation in the context of this movie, with roles reversed.
1
Those who yearn for generals to save our democracy by destroying it should be careful what what they wish for. Too often elected Presidents are defied by willful officers who forget who the commander-in-chief is. Two recent examples: Colin Powell refusing Clinton's order to accept gays in the military, and Stanley McCrystal's defiance of Obama's attempts to draw down troops in Afghanistan. Trump's troop removal orders may be impulsive and abrupt, but they are steps in the right direction.
This voter, who is appalled by almost everything Trump has done, does not believe that America should try to dominate the world with military power. We have troops stationed in 150 countries, and we're the world's number one weapons exporter. It's the classic case of an over extended empire, while severe domestic need go unmet. Bring home the troops, bring home the money. That will benefit America, and the world as well.
6
@John Grannis
I agree the US should not try and dominate the world militarily. But, with a mere 2,000 troops in Syria, we were there almost exclusively in a technical and training capacity.
I think most Americans believe we should reduce our military presence worldwide.
But it must be done strategically and thoughtfully.
@John Grannis
So soon after 9/11 and you've forgotten the lesson from overlooking global terrorist safe havens.
I'm sure there's a worthy balance to be struck between occupying the world and completely ignoring it. It used to be called "alliances."
@John Grannis
The problem with any Trunp-inspired solution is that it is both knee-jerk and self-serving (serving autocrats he admires and perhaps works for). Your ideas are fundamentally sound, as we should not be a Military Empire, but Trump is NOT the guy to execute them.
Uh, no Kori. The feeling of confidence the public had in these men was not because they were military. It was because they were experienced, tested, resilient and could be trusted to do the right thing. The shocked public figured that the military service had helped create these strong, grounded, ethical individuals. None of them wanted military working, executing in the cabinet. No, that was Don's fondest dream and hope. To have military strongmen who'd do his bidding and could whip soldiers and other generals up to do what El Capo wanted.
5
Kori incorrectly states, "for better or worse, those policies were a major reason why the American people had voted him into office on the basis of those policies". The American people did not vote DT into office, the electoral college did. A majority of Americans hoped for something better.....
65
@Richard
Please stop using this argument. It has zero force. The electoral college is the law of the land, full stop. Complaining about it confuses the real issue at hand.
The truth is that the American people who did vote for him were defrauded. That is just a fact. We don't need to wait for an investigation to know it, since it was very public.
There is a difference between making false public statements and committing fraud. Promising a wall is not fraud, whether or not it gets built. But promising voters that he would release his tax returns once an audit was over, then deciding not to do so after they voted for him, is fraud. Paying a doctor to issue a glowing review of his health, when the doctor had not even examined him, is fraud. In short, he lied on his application.
The only antidote to lies is the truth. We get nowhere when we confuse the issue with a post-mortem indictment of the law.
9
@Richard
While I am no DT fan, the electoral college is embodied in the constitution Article II. The US is a constitutional republic, not a democracy with majority wins on Presidential elections...learn your civics. If you want the electoral college process changed, you need to a constitutional amendment.
3
@Robert
A constitutional amendment to fix the Electoral College is not necessary, if enough states pass the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Many states already have. We should be pushing more states to consider it.
9
"Moreover, the president has the right to be wrong, and the Department of Defense has the obligation to carry out lawful orders rather than set themselves up as uniquely virtuous arbiters of the good of the country. "
The key to your comment is "lawful orders." The President has "the right to be wrong", but given his temperament and mental instability, being wrong could be catastrophic. Secretary Mattis was confirmed by the Senate for his sterling military record and for his judgment. Mattis exercised his judgment, and the President went too far in unilaterally pulling our troops out of Syria...with no consultation with Mattis, military or diplomatic officials, our allies or Congress.
The President set himself up "as (a) uniquely virtuous arbiter of the good of the country." He claims to know more than the Generals. He listens to his gut instincts, instead of sound expert advice. Secretary Mattis was right to resist Trump, and to resign. The Defense Department staff have a duty to resist dangerous and unlawful orders; that hardly makes them arbiters.
12
@Mark
I dont Viet for trump , but please outline what unlawful orders he has given he military ?
@Mark
Couldn't agree more, Mark.
Never mind the fact his gut instincts tell him eating fried chicken from a bucket is a smart move!
The idea that the most authoritarian and violent part of our country - the military-is going to save us from Trump is sheer lunacy.
9
The appalling Donald Trump is not out of control and the nation does not need saving from him or anyone else.
Stop with the hyperbole, already.
5
What do you suggest we do when the political and legislative tools are not working? When the likes of Ryan Costello say he'll do whatever Trump tells him to do when he gets around to tweeting about it? And who is going to grab his hand away from the button when he decides to push it because he's not getting his way in whatever he's not getting his way about this week? Trump is becoming sicker and sicker. We can't wait for Congress to wise up, because the Senate is a tool only for Trump. The courts are more and more stacked by him every day and will outlast him by a long shot. I'm old and used to think I would die before Trump rips apart the fabric of our democracy, but I think he's already ripped it irreparably, and it's only a question of time before he gets nuts enough to feel justified in pushing that button.
10
if all trump wants is butt kissers, he is well on his way to getting them. to have people in place with no experience, no knowledge, no knowhow to do the job, this places trump at an advantage. he can say and do whatever he wants because they don't know the difference either.
5
of course, they can't. I think one doesn't need a PhD to figure it out. one just needs good old fashioned morals, a memory, and common sense. the notion that Mattis or Kelley were "the grown ups" was at best wishful thinking. to me, the first clue was the fact that these generals or even Tillerson, even agreed to serve Trump. i go back to Trump's utterances and promotion of intolerance during the election and after it. if one is willing to let all of that go and serve Trump, to me it already shows a severe lack of judgement. to claim such a person as the "adult" in the room i think is a mistake. some, like Kelley, oversaw the Department of Homeland Security as it harassed immigrants etc.
to expect these individuals to be the "adults" to me is laughable.
and, to expect Trump to be different is self-deception.
of course, this is what Trump is, and these generals have already done his dirty work and lent him their credibility for that dirty work. so, to see even Democrats decry the departure of Mattis, to me, is strange. of course, he was bound to leave, unless he was blind. luckily for him he's somewhat left in protest, and might therefore salvage some of what's left of his credibility.
so, of course, the generals save no body. if they can't stand up for immigrants or against the hate, then why would you expect anything more? i don't think you need to be an expert in politics to know how the Trump movie ends for any of these individuals who are considered "respectable."
8
Mr. Trump, the least stable president in our history, doesn't care about stability. His prime motivator is ego. Thus being told he is wrong, he must lash out, wrecking the country on his way to infamy.
26
Secretary Mathis is a retired military officer, not an active duty one. This undercuts the premise of the author's opinion. George C. Marshall Jr.retired in 1945 and thereafter served with distinction as Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State. (By law, as a five-star General of the Army Marshall remained subject to recall to active duty for his lifetime.)
Many other retired officers have subsequently held civilian government posts. Dwight Eisenhower, also a five-star, was elected president; so were several 19th Century generals (Tyler and Grant, not to mention Washington.)
The proper scope of military resistance to presidential policy is far more nuanced than the author suggests. Regarding refusal to carry out an order to deploy nuclear weapons against North Korea, General Dunford pointed out, rightly, that the military was bound to refuse an unlawful order and that any use of nuclear weapons would implicate the question of use of disproportionate force, a war crime and thus unlawful order, especially in a first-strike scenario.
The Chiefs of Staff in particular have always had a duty to advise (strongly if need be) the President on the often inextricably linked issues of foreign policy and the use of military force. Indeed, the Joint Chiefs under President Johnson have been roundly condemned for failing in this duty out of too-great deference to civilian authority.
6
"...As Thomas Jefferson said, the people are the only safe repository for the ultimate powers of society..."
Quaint. But not if there's a nuclear war.
15
At the ballot box? Ok, Ok, of course we'll vote! We'll line up and do our citizens' duty in a democracy. But who and what will shape the policies/platforms we're offered to vote for? Who and what forces will the candidates be beholden to for financing to mount their campaigns?
We have a dangerous US president, and we applaud those who oppose his overreach. But suppose we elect a president who would see his duty to protect us from rule by huge corporations who have power over both domestic lawmaking, and over global economies? And who profit from wars?
What is the power balance that should operate in a modern democracy for our protections?
With the power of big money legalized in our politics, the people have little influence on policy, and are now hardly the repository of power as Jefferson idealistically claimed.
14
@Meredith
No, We DO have that power. As Bertrand Russell observed, every election is a revolution. Our nation elected Trump. We also elected Teddy Roosevelt. We elected Franklin Roosevelt and a Congress that supported the most radical overhaul in our nation's economy since the end of slavery.
We can elect a buffoon or a revolutionary, an actor or a statesman. We can work for policies or for sound bights. We can have single payer health insurance, or tax health insurance, or have what we have now. We can decide that those policies were a mistake and change them. In the end it comes down to developing a consensus. What do WE want?
@Phaiaikia......So explain why don't we have what we want. Polls show on issues voter majorities disagree with the mega donors funding our elections and setting policy limits.
Princeton's Gilens and Page showed with congressional records, that influence on lawmaking goes to elite donors, not majority citizens.
I use to read Russell once. Can't find such a quote.
We destroyed ourselves when we built an arsenal capable of wiping out life on earth. If not today, then tomorrow or next year or 100 years in the future, everyone will die if we don’t dismantle every nuclear weapon.
5
Generals are trained to follow orders, which isn't very good when their leader is incompetent. Even after military service, a general's judgment may be questioned due to his or her innate obedience.
7
All retired military members are still subject to some provisions of the UCMJ. I retired as an Air Force colonel. I am not a former colonel. I am still an Air Force colonel, on the retired roster.
4
Military and Democracy working together--what a wonderful utopian idea!
I thought D Trump was a genius. .....but then what happened?
Does the Superficial State have an answer?
1
If generals "save" us, it would be a military coup
22
@Armo Unless the Democrats can hold their own over the next two years (and I worry that they might cave on the wall when they return from the holiday break), that coup might not be an idea too far. If a madman hands down an illegal order in a weak democracy/fledgling kleptocratic autocracy what is a sane, patriotic general to do?
14
@DonnaP The paradoxical question would be, who determines which general is sane?
6
@Armo
Not if they are saving us by inaction rather than acting to overthrow the government. If you call just not following orders considered impractical, foolish, immoral or illegal we have been having coup for many generations.
Lincoln had his orders ignored all the time. George Marshall countermanded Roosevelt’s instructions frequently. Even J Edgar Hoover simply ignored his orders to intern many more foreign nationals than were interned. By some accounts Johnson ordered much more aggressive bombing of civilian populations in Vietnam than our military was willing to carry out.
The "mystique and allure" of American Generals- I never understood it.. They are just like any other boss- Some are smart and some aren't-- Some are good leaders some are incompetent. Just because they served in the military doesn't give them carte blanche on genius and common sense.
Mattis was a great man don't get me wrong- but a mediocre Secretary of Defense. Recruitment is down in all the services, vital positions are undermanned. Yes he ran around trying to solidify global alliances when he should have been building a bench.
12
@Aaron: ecruitment is down due to a very strong employment market and 17 years' of war weariness. Mathis could not change that other than by a sharp increase in military pay, an obvious nonstarter.
9
Moving forward, there needs to be some minimal mental health standard for anyone being declared their party’s presumptive nominee for POTUS.
51
@Alan and after someone is in office.
5
Tricky to do. As much as I'd like to say it, he is not psychotic. but he does have a personality disorder. I doubt that would be sufficient to disqualify him. On the other hand plenty of evidence before the election (even before the convention) to those who had eyes to see and ears to hear that he would be lazy and venal
up
As well, it is clear he could be gotten rid of by impeachment and conviction, but again there are the wilfully ignorant.
Gotta lay this one on the electorate and the Republican Congress, or on the Senate, as the case will soon be.
14
@Alan There should also be a required background check, much like for any Federal Government employee.
4
What democracy?
3
“Moreover, the president has the right to be wrong, and the Department of Defense has the obligation to carry out lawful orders rather than set themselves up as uniquely virtuous arbiters of the good of the country.”
Said “lawful orders” include launching nuclear weapons, either in retaliation for an attack or in a first-strike attack. Sobering, isn’t it? One man—THIS man—holds the future of our planet in the balance of his latest twitter storm. That this is even possible is a relic of the Cold War and the fact that, in spite of somewhat flawed presidents, we trusted them to act in good faith on behalf of the country and its citizens.
Can you honestly say that you would put your faith in this man to do the right thing in the midst of crisis?
29
@Terry Malouf ..... "carry out lawful orders.." Let me remind everyone that US military personnel now, as did I when I went in the US Army in 1968, do not take an oath to "carry out" all orders from any one. We take an oath to protect the US Constitution.
22
@Al Cary as does the current occupant of the Oval Office. Is it not at least a misdemeanor to betray that oath?
4
@Al Cary
Thank you. This is my Christmas gift.
2
What I have learned from the experience of living through this administration is that maybe we do not live in a democracy after all. The president has enormous power and not that many checks. For him to have sole decision power over launching a nuclear attack with no restraints or checks from, say a military level or other civilian figure who may better understand or balance off the consequences of such an attack is to have almost absolute power over life and death of American citizens and other inhabitants in the planet. In fact, it is to have planetary wide destructive powers. Period.
32
@tdb
Frankly I lump corporations and the oligarchs into the pot as well. We forgot that they work for us. It's time we remember this.
Thank you for your clarity. Hating Trump and treating him as a psychopathic child ignores the simple fact that we elected him. It also ignores that he is not alone as a president in being seen as unsuitable to be president. Name calling and fear mongering will not get us to a better place even if we elect someone else.
@Robert Levy And you, in turn, ignore the fact that "we" did not elect him. The electoral college, a shameful relic of southern, salve owning, accounting, elected him. Putting that important fact aside, had he been properly elected he's still responsible for all his shameless and hurtful actions. Just because you voted for him doesn't mean you have to follow his lunacy. We all make mistakes.
38
I certainly did NOT vote for the immature sociopath but you’re right in saying the electoral college failed to do their duty and protect America from itself
6
@Robert Levy Would you feel the same way if, for example, he decided to shoot someone on fifth avenue?
4
Trump hied “his generals “ not for their sage advice, but for cover, satisfying skeptics in Congress about his decision making. But his preference for military advisors is rooted in the strategy that he used in his private business . Military careerists believe in adherito the chain of command, and at the top of the chain is the Commander in Chief. He assumed, and frankly was basically correct, that his generals would not question his “policy” decisions. Kelly vigorously defended Trump’ xenophobic immigration policies; Mattis sent groups to defend against a caravan of hapless asylum seekers ( recalling the deployment of Tripp’s to fight Panch Villa).
Trump was pretty much right about general and their loyalty to following orders. They didn’t defy him, or change his path. Eventually both Trump and his general just gave up.
12
@Asher are you really advocating that the military decide on their own what to do- just look around the world to see what would happen
1
@Frank
No Frank, I agree with you. Policy should be established by competent civilian authority. Trump just figures that his general would follow his orders, regardless of how crazy they may be.