by
What was surprising about President Obamaâs denunciation of Donald Trumpâs anti-immigrant terrorism policy Tuesday wasnât the fact that Obama never mentioned Trump by name. He didnât have to. âWe now have proposals from the presumptive Republican nominee for President of the United States to bar all Muslims from emigrating to America,â an angry Obama declared as the nationâs emotions remained raw from Sundayâs slaughter of 49 people in Orlando, by a killer who professed support for radical Islam. âWe hear language that singles out immigrants and suggests that entire religious communities are complicit in violence. Where does this stop?â
What was surprising was that the nationâs top military officer stood by the Presidentâs side as the commander-in-chief issued an extraordinary public rebuke of the man seeking to be that generalâs next boss. Washington corridors were abuzz Wednesday after the ramrod-straight and uniformed presence of Marine General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provided, wittingly or not, a beribboned endorsement of Obamaâs condemnation of Trump.
âIf youâre going to make a political speech, and thatâs what this was, you should not have the chairman, or anybody in uniform, standing next to you as a potted plant,â says Anthony Zinni, a retired four-star Marine. âIt gives the appearance that heâs in agreement with the political statements that were made.â
Zinni and other former senior officers believe Dunford was uncomfortably trapped after Obamaâs ISIS remarks drifted into the political realm. Dunfordâs spokesman wouldnât go that far, simply saying that the chairman âremains apoliticalâ and routinely appears with Obama when the President makes comments following such ISIS sessions. Tuesdayâs appearance, Navy Captain Gregory Hicks said, âwas no different.â
There is private concern inside the U.S. armed forces about Trumpâs fitness for command, but good luck getting anyone to say so on the record. The military is built upon what it calls âgood order and discipline,â a pair of attributes rarely attributed to Trump. While a recent unscientific independent Military Times newspaper survey had Trump out polling all-but-certain Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton by a greater than 2-to-1 margin, many view that as a desire for change rather than support for Trump. âThere is concern in the military about Trump, but they really want a change,â Zinni says. âThereâs a lot of unhappiness about the plight of the military, the funding and the way wars are being prosecuted.â According to this thinking, Clinton is unlikely to make such wholesale changes in the U.S. military.
U.S. voters always want to know that their potential Presidents have the confidence of the 1.4 million Americans in uniform. For the Pentagon, the best way to do that is to say it respects the will of the voters, and will salute smartly no matter who is in the Oval Office. Both those in uniform and their civilian overseers stress their desire to steer clear of politics.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter, for example, stiff-armed a reporter Monday who asked about Trumpâs statement that NATO is âobsoleteâ (like Obama, the reporter didnât name Trump). âIâve got to be very strict in this regard,â Carter said. âYou frame a question in terms of the presidential campaign and Iâm just not going to answer a question thatâs framed in that way.â
General Mark Welsh, who as the Air Force chief of staff is a member of the Joint Chiefs, said Wednesday that he and his fellow chiefs donât fret about politics and campaigns. âI want a commander-in-chief who will listen to us, I want a commander-in-chief who values the opinion of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs,â he tells TIME. âIâd like a commander-in-chief whoâs thoughtful on issues and is willing to engage in discussion, and a commander-in-chief who has a team around him that feels the same way.â
Might that rule out Trump? âIâve never met him; I donât know,â Welsh says. âIâll tell you, if you watch political campaigns over time, thereâs a whole lot of behavior that you would kind of question, I think, not just from any one particular candidate.â The military, he adds, doesnât play favorites. âOur job is to support the commander-in-chief as much as we can, and whoever walks into the White House is going to get that support from all of us.â
But retired officers donât have to watch their words so carefully. âMr. Trump is a potential disaster as commander-in-chiefâuninformed, volatile, poor judgment,â says Barry McCaffrey, a retired four-star Army officer. âHard to believe this is the candidate of a major political party.â
âTrump is unexpectedly increasing my enthusiasm for Hillary,â adds retired general Merrill McPeak, who, like Welsh, served on the Joint Chiefs as the Air Force chief of staff. âWhat he is saying is not based on facts: itâs based on immaturity, bad judgment and ignorance, and I think itâs going to be hard for people in uniform who are thoughtful about this, to vote for him.â
The militaryâs aversion to partisan politics is on display nearly every January, when the President heads to Capitol Hill to tell the Congress, the Supreme Court justices, the Joint Chiefs and the American people about the Administrationâs plans for the coming year. Itâs an intensely political event, with Democrats and Republicans either cheering wildly or sitting stone-faced, depending on whether or not the chief executive belongs to their party. âThe service chiefs and the Supreme Court justices canât applaud any of the lines,â Zinni says. âFortunately, if youâre a combatant commanderââwhich Zinni wasââyou donât have to worry about that Washington bullshit.â
Actually, itâs a little more complicated than that. The kabuki dance begins with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs keeping a close eye on the chief justice, McPeak recalls. âThe chief justice is a separate branch of government, and if he stands and applauds, then the chairman will stand up and applaud, and the chiefs will follow,â he says. âThe chief justice was considered the guy who was neutral, and who knew when to stand up and applaud.â
All content herein is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VNR, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or VT Network. Some content may be satirical in nature.Â
All images within are full responsibility of the author and NOT VNR.
Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy
How is Hillary Clinton, who has bled the USGov system consistently since her fraudulent, legal brief as member of the “impeach Nixon committee” of 1974, better qualified than Trump? Occupying the POTUS slot with her treasonous skills, knowledge of the system and illegal, international connections “might” contribute to a more efficient USMilitary and the security of the US?
The leadership of the USMilitary carried out the treasonous Bush family wishes and continued the treasonous activities under of the current, POTUS occupant. There´s a breakdown of the Pledge of Allegiance and logic at the Chief of Staff level, in addition to the USCongress. Once upon a time there was a jewish rabbi named Dov Zackheim, whose logic continues to pervade the Pentagon and the USCongress.
The only real difference is that a Clinton presidency absolutely means more Middle East wars, and a Trump presidency may not. Which is why the Republican establishment is doing its best to ensure that Trump loses which is what AIPAC wants, sensing that someone with his wealth and ego may not be as malleable as others.
Trump seems like a loose cannon – but he did not become a billionaire several times over by being foolishly incompetent.
Comments are closed.