Secretary of Defense Mattis’s resignation letter to Donald Trump
The Secretary of Defense has resigned and will step down from the role at the end of February.
Dear Mr President:
I have been privileged to serve as our country’s 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.
I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department’s business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong US global influence.
One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.
Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model gaining veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.
My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.
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. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department’s interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability within the Department.
I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.
I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.
Jim N Mattis
There are already hoards of pundits promulgating a plethora of hysterical analysis about this. It does appear that this has something to do with the President announcing that we will withdraw from Syria.
I do not have access to the kind of information that the President does but my objections to withdrawing from Syria will probably die about twenty minutes after I do.
I am sure most Americans on both sides of the aisle are saddened and alarmed by James Mattis leaving. I am.
Source: Jim Mattis’s resignation letter to Donald Trump – in full | US news | The Guardian
Category: Politics
This just straight up sucks. No other way to put it.
Took the words right off of my keyboard…
Totally concur.
Indeed.
I started suspecting something wasn’t right when Trump called him “basically a Democrat”.
I haven’t read and most likely will not read the take of the collective Left on this resignation. I do not have a crystal ball and neither do they, but I can read and understand the written word. Because of that, it is clear to me that the president’s style is anathema to Mattis. I get this message by the repeated references in his letter to respecting allies and alliances. When it comes to international relationships, the president doesn’t seem to appreciate that shooting from the hip isn’t the best approach. Mattis knows that a calm and deliberate well-placed shot is much more effective. Trump, much to the delight of many of us after years of the mushy Red Line, is more than willing to tell the world, friend and foe, to phuk off. Mattis, on the other hand, is quite capable of that but knows that, in the long run, that approach isn’t in the country’s long term interest. So, being the man he is, he is taking his leave. I just hope to God that he doesn’t write a tell-all book now.
Sec Defense is a political position.
Mattis likely knows this and will step aside as he should.
I just hope his sucessor is not a Bill Cohen type.
On the heels of declaring “mission complete” in Syria, President Trump is now exploring the possibility of a total troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. Getting the US out of the “graveyard of empires” will go a long way toward securing his re-election in 2020. And, maybe some financial resources could then be directed toward construction of the southern border wall.
Mad Dog has been a good and faithful servant to our nation for over 40 years. I thank him for his transformative leadership and wish him success in his future endeavors.
Agree with most of this but I feel that any “savings” from leaving Afghanistan will definitely NOT be used to fund a wall. Lack of funding is just an excuse. The deep state is against the wall period….nothing to do with funding.
Mainly because that’s not how the budgeting process works, but also because you are totally misinterpreting what a deep state is and what it does.
First, DoD military and civilians are overwhelmingly conservative and Republican. Fox News is on in every break room and EOC I’ve ever been in. Far from a deep state opposing Trump. It’s would chip in for a wall through allotment or volunteer to help build it.
By law, Military Operations overseas are paid for separately from even Title 10 expenditures (the money that we spend simply to organize, train and equip the military). That ain’t the deep state, it’s Congress.
Just because we save money in one area does not mean we can just spend it in another, and it is definitely not up solely to the president or even the Cabinet Secretaries- thus the whole notion of a shutdown if Congress does not appropriate the money.
That’s the problem with the notion of having the military build the wall. It would essentially fall on the Army, who is the only service with anywhere near the capacity to do it (yes, I know about SeaBees, Prime Beef, and Red Horse- great units, but not enough of them). Building a wall would fall outside their Title 10 mission, although I can see a possibility of doing it as a training exercise- after all, we built lots of T-Wall barriers in Iraq. Where would the materiel, fuel, spare parts, etc., come from? Without a Congressional Appropriation, the Army simply does not have any of that stuff. Sure, they could divert funding from other PEGs, but then those activities would not happen.
Maybe. The other possibility is a Taliban and/orISIS resurgence, or an Iranian/Russian dominated Middle East. I don’t know, I haven’t read the PDB (of course, reports are that Teump hasn’t either)
The news that they are defeated may come as a surprise to ISIS and their leadership, as well as Russia, who now has the latitude to do whatever they want in the region. Of course, they will probably destroy ISIS in detail, which is a good thing, but they will also take out Assad opposition and strengthen that regime, which is not a good thing. Of course, the Kurds are screwed.
Question 1 should be so we have national interests there, and is military force necessary to achieve them? If the answer is yes, then examine whether or not we have achieved our goals. If the answer is no, then we should continue.
Those goals are not reflecting Trump. I thought it was America First, not Trump First.
Now we are buggered. I know why he did it, but I wish had not done it.
He was doing a good job, Bernie and the gang pestered him away. If he would have aloud to unleash his knifehand more things would be different.
He resigned ENTIRELY because of Trump.
At would point is it going to finally be clear to his supporters that Trump is a disaster for this country?
Aren’t you one of the jackasses that said Mattis would be terrible as SECDEF?? make up your freaking mind you canday assed booger eating bed wetting mommas boy!
ooh, and go away would ya?
He tried to psychoanalyze Mattis when he was nominated – and I called his bigoted ass out for it.
What else did you expect of this clap-witted idiot from Berserkely? He changes his mind with whichever way the wind blows, even when it’s right up his skirt.
He, like the rest of the left, hates everything Trump. As soon as someone or something has a disagreement with Trump, they suddenly fall in love with them.
Remember, it doesn’t matter what Commissar said before, because he doesn’t remember saying it, despite the internet being forever and the truth being only a mouse click away. What he said before is irrelevant, because he didn’t say what he said, because he says so.
Wrong again, Lars.
Let us get some perceptions focused.
First, he has been good, not great. His constant drives to save money have produced a start and stop reality for the Army. I’m sure the same is true for the USAF and USN. This means that things are not getting done because we do not know from quarter to quarter whether anything will still be resourced.
Second, our relationships with allies is a farce. We have no allies and never have. We have dependents. Nations who will not provide for their own defense, let alone resource their share of collective defense treaties. The President’s insistence that other nations also honor treaties has been very unpopular among the neocon and neolib crowds (among which Mr. Mattis is an example), but no one seems able to explain why welfare for “allies” is a good idea.
Last, this situation is part of the demilitarization of the entire executive branch that has been going on since last June. I know, you have not seen this going on because you have not seen or heard it on the news, but the former military contingent in executive and appointed jobs has been moving on and looks to be replaced with people from other backgrounds. This is a good thing.
Of course, given the way DC works these days, tomorrow will be a new crisis and you will whinge about that, so here’s to the promise of a new day.
Oh yeah, pulling out of Syria is probably overdue. I know, red scare, amirite?
Nicely done, Ret25X, but you need to slice it a little thinner so that the SuckerfishMcBlobberish can truly understand what you said.
All those big words are beyond him.
Ret25X
Totally concur with your analysis.
Of course we have allies, and we are going to need them someday. I agree that they should be shouldering more of the expenditures for defense, but they are sovereign nations and have their own best interest on top of the list.
Of course, Iraq and Syria along with the Kurds have done more of the actual fighting on the ground than we have, but what about Europe?
Ask yourself this: is it in the best interest of the US to keep the Baltic Nations, Poland, Ukraine, Romania, and even Montenegro aligned with NATO, or is it OK to have them controlled if not occupied by Russia?
If you don’t care, then lets dissolve NATO and bring our troops home.
If you do care, them we need to manage those relationships carefully. We could wake up one morning to see Russian troops or Little Green Men knocking down flagpoles in all of those countries. We have a total of three BCTs in Europe at any given time- one Stryker, one Airborne and a rotational Armored BCT.
Our choice at that point would be to run away or try to deter further aggression. To do either, we are going to need access to ports, airfields, roads, etc.
Our allies would supply those- unless they thought that maybe the US was not committ d to fighting it out. Sure, we could fight our way in, but that would be very costly. Research Russian Ani Access Area Denial systems.
We ain’t alone on this rock, and we’re gonna need some friends
t “they are sovereign nations and have their own best interest on top of the list.”
And we are entitled to do the same.
Of course. The question is, do we have an interest in keeping Europe free? IsnitmOK
To cede it tomRussian influence?
The United States also has an interest in keeping the price of bananas low*. Is it worth a nuclear war to keep those prices low?
* Assuming, of course, that we banana lovers are in the majority.
Completely ridiculous comparison. Be better
Europe is a big damn place with a lot of money flowing through it. If the Europeans wish to remain free, they can start doing it on their own dime and with their own forces. This isn’t like keeping the ChiComs out of South Korea in ’56; Europe defines the First World and has its own industry.
If the EU would rather pay for millions of welfare “refugees’ than a functional military capable of facing down the current Russian Empire, than there’s nothing we can do to defend them long-term anyway.
One has to wonder if your pearls were so fully clutched when obama fired Gen Mattis in 2013 without so much as a phone call.
I kind of doubt it, you seem like the I’m-outraged-because-the-media-told-me-to-be type.
This is not good, to be sure. But to expect people who support Trump to now say, “gosh, we should have gone with Hillary” is INSANE. Talk about a disaster! Thankfully, if nothing else good comes out of Trump, that disaster was avoided.
Your manJiNNa is showing.
At the same point it became clear to Hillary and Obama supporters that their idols were disasters.
Seagull
Very disappointed on Secretary Mattis.
When I disagree with my chain of command I don’t just fuckin quit. I get the job done to the best of my ability.
I expected better from a GEN that dedicated his life to the service of our country.
His decision strengthens the hand of America’s enemies.
If you can do better I’d like to see it.
Aside from the fact that you are drawing a false comparison since Mattis retired from the military years ago.
What? I cannot criticize the dude for dropping the ball at a critical moment, with the wacko left taking over the House?
Anyone who expected that he would stay around forever is just being silly. Sure, I would rather that he did, but that’s a pipe dream.
Never resigned/transferred/retired over ethical or other issues? Well, aren’t you the lucky devil. Some of us have, others have been forced out for the same reasons. It’s really not all that unusual especially among appointed will and pleasure types.
Yes, I know of what I speak personally. I retired a few months earlier than I had originally intended over a management disagreement. The few dollars difference it made in my retirement income was not worth the sleepless nights the ethical dilemma would have caused.
Point taken.
I agree.
However, Mattis quit over disagreements that don’t seem ethical, but rather differences on dealing with our allies.
Consider that -he- May have seen it as an ethical issue, or a “best for thdecision nation” issue. He may also have been thinking, based on my read of his letter, that he had to either fully support Trump’s game plan, or resign, again as an ethical necessity.
If you haven’t yet hit something like this, you will.
I would say abandoning some allies to certain death is an ethical issue.
Following a leader regardless of what he does is not the behavior of an honorable or dutiful person.
It is the behavior of an honorless sycophant.
Sometimes resigning is the honorable course, especially when the leader is doing thing unethical.
Sometime standing against the leader is the honorable course.
Which is precisely what I expect Mattis will do after he steps down in February.
Got all the answers, don’t you? It’s all rank speculation. More Larsfacts. You know nothing about honor. You and your kind are the reason the nation elected Trump, you f’n moron.
Commissar doesn’t know Jack Shit…
Taylor, you’re an asshole. Go start your own blog. Then no one can argue with you.
That Marx website is probably looking for a useless idiot. Go see them.
You still hold a commission, correct? Didn’t resign it?
Article 88 is pretty clear in prohibiting commissioned officers from making disparaging remarks about the President. Any number of your posts here in the past could certainly be construed as such. Many of those predated retirement, correct?
How do you square that with what you just posted?
How many folks here made disparaging remarks about Obama when he was President?
Did you care if any of them were in violation of Article 88?
So now you’re picking on Democrats? Good for you! I applaud your integrity.
Take Obama’s dick out of your mouth before you say that again.
Joey, Mattis isn’t in this position as a General officer. He’s in an appointed, political position. I respect him more for saying his views don’t align with those of POTUS and stepping down than I would if he chucked his values and sold out like so many other Generals have.
Mattis also made it clear that Trump’s authoritarianist views were not something he could support.
You all elected a despot.
Which makes sense because historically conservatism was not about “small” government with respect to government power; it was about concentrating more power in the hands of fewer people.
An authoritarin government.
Trump is just American conservatism returning to its 17th and18th century roots.
And you want a socialist utopia like Venezuela… you worshiped Bernie and Jill in ’16.
Many Americans don’t want your fucked up vision of a country…
Commissar is a shining example of the leftist assbag who condescendingly talks about how those who disagree are supposedly “voting against their own interests,” because he knows better than you what’s good for you.
Yeah that is totally what I got out of that letter.
In fact on line 12 it reads; “You R A despot so I’m going to resign and abandon the country and freedoms that I protected for 40 years to a rank dictatorship. Cuz that is how Mad Dog rolls. Thanks for the lols.”
I dont know how everyone else missed that.
Tell us, McSquishButtinsky, have you joined Ocasio-cortez’s Free Shit Army yet?
She’s right up your alley. Considering everything, you should slide your way right over to her side of the Socialisti fence, just to make sure you get your portion of free shit.
Ex – Larsie has been Commissar of the Free Shit Army for years. He admitted being a supporter of OWS and the FSA over a year ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if he openly supports his bigoted Antifa butt buddies in Bezerkekey.
Hanging out with social degenerates that want anarchy is about the level that Larsie functions at.
I know, Senior Chief, but she’s forming her own version of it, and there is no telling whether or not she’ll start the Gulag Archipelago, too.
As unable as he is to think for himself, he’d be better off sucking up to her. It’s the only way to play.
She might even replace Das Hildabeast in Commissar’s strap-on fantasies!
TOW, that is a GROSS OUT meme.
“You all elected a despot”.
Gosh, next thing you know he’ll be having the IRS investigate his political opponents…oh wait.
Or have his primary advisor let slip the mask and say he’d be, “(R)eady to rule on day one.”
Facts are inconvenient things, Lars.
Do yourself a favor and take a damned remedial grammar and spelling course, that or just demand a tuition refund because IMHO all that crap you regurgitate here truly proves how intellectually and logically inferior you are to everyone else here!
API, are you keeping score on Taylor’s idiot spits?
No Ma’am, I just reply every now and then. If idiocy was money, lars would make Bill Gates look like a pauper!
His tuition money went to pay off the conservative groups in that recent settlement.
He’s have to go kiss some conservative ass to get a dime from them.
Your wife(or husband) must be miserable with you as a partner.
He’s so fucked up that his imaginary friend has a Restraining Order against him!
For a despot, he sure seems to be allowing others to say “oh no you don’t” versus say, defying them or rounding them up. He may work to find ways around courts, but he hasn’t defied them, now has he?
If he were a despot, you would be expiring in a camp somewhere.
Your disparaging remarks about the President appear to conflict with Article 88. Or did you resign that problematic commission?
“You all elected a despot.”
LOL.
It always amuses me when liberals support giving more power to the government whenever they get the chance then scream, whine, and moan when someone not of their tribe gets elected and uses that power.
By definition, a despot holds absolute power. The chief executive of the country controls neither the judicial nor legislative branches of our government. Are you ever correct, Lars? I know that you and your fellow America haters would like us to turn on Trump. It isn’t going to happen, notwithstanding the media’s hopefulness and speculation that that is happening. Enjoy the delusion otherwise.
Wrong definition. The leftist definition of despot is “Someone who holds power I gave them but doesn’t use it as I want them to.”.
“I know that you show up here for validation, in some weird way. You get off on people telling you what your shortcomings are, and really stroke it when the insults fly.”
-UpNorth to Lars 12/20/18
Man, he nailed it.
Patience Bro A/C. Lars will be back shortly with the “empirical evidence that proves UpNorths statement. Not that we need validation of that statement. As nice as it would be if chcuntapatooie would go away, chew toys have been in short supply lately. I try to just ignore the sissy punk bitch. Keeps my blood pressure stable.
“..my objections to withdrawing from Syria will die about thirty minutes after I do.” Hell my objections to withdrawing were never even born. Y’all have seen my opinion on the whole ME quagmire. GTFO! And GTFO of A’stan. We got OBL and busted up the Taliban fairly well. All that means is another “tribal leader” will step up and continue the process of those people killing one another as they have for thousands of years. If we think we need to keep an eye on the place, then keep a re-enforced MAU, strong carrier group, with plenty of air support close by. Or better yet, again, call the boys and girls at Minot or a boomer Gold Crew and nuke hell out them. Let them know that if they phuque with us, they will get phuqued up in return.
We are not privy to what all goes on behind closed doors. I personally think dTrump screwed up by blindsiding(?) Mad Dog, if that is what happened. The first rule of business management is you hire people to head up different departments that have the skill set for that department. Then you leave them alone to do the job. And you don’t make decisions without consulting them.
The “Monday Morning Quarterbacks” will have a field day with this.
“Or better yet, again, call the boys and girls at Minot or a boomer Gold Crew and nuke hell out them”
Spot on.. the world needs a couple night lights… the only reason nukes aren’t a deterrent is because they haven’t been used in 70 yrs… While no one wants an all out nuke war, as has been pointed out here before, the nukes dropped on Japan did less long term damage then democrat rule of similar sized American cities… and in most of the middle east / A-stan, it’d probably be hard to tell the difference, other than a lot fewer rag heads…
It seems Mattis was never a good fit in this position. Not that he wasn’t qualified but that he would never be able to manuever effectively in the political minefield.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/mattis-defense-hill-republicans-obama-236329
I think Lars regards the insults as proof that he really is intellectually superior to everyone here, and every time someone insults him he can tell himself how superior he is to all those knockledraggers who fail to see his brilliance. Validation indeed… imagine the pathetic personality who gets his jollies from having other people tell him to get screwed. Reminds me of a five year old telling a crowded room of adults “But I’m the most importantest in the world!”
I wonder if Lars doesn’t print out the responses he gets here on TAH to show to his “Perfessers” in order to kiss up to them?
It will be interesting to see how this tactical move works out…There are a lot of people that are running around with their hair on fire acting like these 2,000 troops are keeping the world from a total takeover by ISIS…I think it’s a wake up call for some of these countries to start taking care of their own shit for once…Trump has received 0 credit for what he has done so far…Mattis was not the end all be all…
Ask yourself a few questions:, in this order:
1. Was it in the US interest to commit military force in Syria to defeat or contain ISIS AND prevent regional (Iran) and global (Russia) powers from establishing dominance in the region?
2. Has ISIS been defeated or contained? Have we set conditions or denied Iran/Russia the ability to establish dominance?
3. Is a US military presence necessary to prevent a resurgence of ISIS and/or Russian/Iranian dominance?
If any of your answers was yes this was a bad decision.
Regardless if it was a bad decision, you also have to look at how an administration should work in making national security decisions. Of course, we don’t know what intel the president has. That said, there are several reports that say he does not read, and his PDBs have been dumbed down, which is not a good thing.
1. Was the president aware of all of the available intelligence?
2. Did the president consult AND consider the advice and counsel of the Combatant Command (in this case CENTCOM), the National Security Council and Congressional leaders?
3. Did the president communicate his decision to the NSC and military leaders in enough time for them to conduct prudent planning?
If the answer to any of these is no, then the president is undermining a system designed to prevent turmoil and uninformed decisions, which has a negative impact on our Troops and our allies.
Of course, the president can do whatever he wants as CinC
Correction- the answer to 1) should be ‘yes’, the others should be ‘no’
“commit military force in Syria”
Didn’t you mean to say “invade the sovereign country of Syria and support those seeking to overthrow its government”?
“Has ISIS been defeated or contained?” Yes, it has been contained (according to those who wish us to remain), as far as you can “contain” any manifestation of Islamic fundamentalism.
” Is a US military presence necessary to prevent…”
Better to ask will a US presence prevent a resurgence–No. syria has been a Russian/Soviet dependent for decades.
“That said, there are several reports that say he does not read, ”
And there are also reports from an honest-to-goodness intelligence agent that he is into ‘water sports’.
I am beginning to suspect that RedDevil is more red than devil.
Your comment makes no sense. This has nothing to do with communism, and I have repeatedly said that I think Russia is a threat to Us interest.
Please, come up with something thoughtful and maybe original.
i am not really sure what you are trying to say here.
Sure, Syria is a sovereign country. The question remains, is it in our interest to go there to defeat ISIS (because Syria clearly cannot do it)? That’s a yes or no question.
You either believe they are defeated or contained or not. Which is it? If they are done and will never come back, let’s get out. If not, let’s stay there.
I have no ide what you are trying to say about Syria, Russia, and an ISIS resurgence.
The Steele Dossier simply reported what rumors were out there, and it really has nothing to do with the reports from completely different sources on Trump’s lack of interest in in depth analysis.
Again, if you are an isolationist, fine. Nothing I say about US interest overseas will change your mind, and won’t stay up all night worrying about it. The problem here isn’t just the decision to withdraw, which is debatable, but really in how the President made and propagated that decision,
With all the angst you guys have over this resignation, it was not unexpected. Trump is a bombastic sort. I’m sure he and Mattis didn’t see eye-to-eye on a lot of things, but Mattis is a cool head to Trump’s approach.
However, this “announcement”, which is now a feeding frenzy in the media – it’s like watching sharks dismantle a silverfish ball, which is mostly water and a few fish – you forget that Trump always has something up his sleeve. Always. Remember that. This announcement is the surface.
Meantime – oh, and Squigglebratchet is annoying everyone as the bait fish he is.
I don’t know if I can believe that this is part of some grand plan of Trump’s. Seems to me having stability at the head of DoD was good for him and us. Mattis had large bipartisan support, which most of Trump’s nominees don’t. The troops love him too.
We’re already looking at filling Nikki Haley’s seat. The media has already made it clear that Heather Nauert is woefully unqualified, even though they were fine with Redline’s nomination of Samantha Power who had similar qualifications.
Then we have the AG hearings, which will be another three ring circus.
What would Trump’s endgame be here? This revolving door of seemingly loyal high level personnel is ripe fodder for the “Trump White House is in disarray” media.
And let’s not forget what the left is going to do when Trump gets to pick the replacement for Zombie Ginsburg next year (I give her until August.)
I’ll grab the popcorn. Can’t wait to see the mental gymnastics you and other Trump-hards going to pull off to spin this into another Trumpian strategic masterstroke, planned out years in advance. If Mattis resigning won’t at least make you question Trump’s competence and/or integrity, then I don’t know what will.
But you’re right, I’m sure he already has some sycophant boot-licker waiting in the wings for his turn as SecDef. Maybe that chicken hawk John Bolton? Ollie North perhaps? I also agree that there is probably a lot more beneath the surface. Kudos to Mattis for being such a class act and keeping it all to himself on the way out. I’m sure he could air loads of dirty laundry, if he were a lesser man.
Well, Trump having something up his sleeve would be great if I was looking for a magician/clown for my kids birthday party. I don’t want to be manipulated or fooled by my president.
Mislead our enemies? Great. Mislead us? That’s a problem?
This letter creates even more respect for Jim Mattis in my mind, which I hadn’t thought possible.
As OWB stated most of us have had to make some decisions about continuing a work relationship, a personal relationship, or a business arrangement over ethical concerns.
Mattis is a straight to the point kind of guy which I respect tremendously, this belief that we should be unambiguous and resolute in dealing with China and Russia as they look to step forward into ever increasing roles economically and militarily throughout the world is one that makes good sense for long term strategic national security.
Trump’s a different kind of guy, and that works in some areas but not others. Trump’s not a foreign policy expert, nor does he have any on the ground experience dealing with alliance partners and the unique requirements that entails.
As always Mattis says and does what he believes is appropriate for the task at hand. Resignation to make room for a yes man for Trump is probably the right call.
Trump’s foreign policy has worked better than any President’s has in many decades…
Don’t tell Larsie that… he’ll have a conniption over that statement.
It’s probably far too early to tell if that’s a true statement or not. What is true is that it’s different and some concessions have been won from previously poor agreements. Will those new concessions hold if the USA concedes a technology advantage to the thieving bastards in China? Or if Russia becomes a more dominant presence in the ME?
It’s not what works today alone that matters, it’s what works over decades that helps our children and grandchildren.
I don’t disagree that the initial results make me happy, I’ve long been pissed off about NAFTA and China’s favored trading partner status.
I hope you are right and it remains a positive.
If Vlad is -smart- he will bail within 60 days. Stick around just long enough to pretend he somehow won, something, then GTFO. Go back to selling them surplus stuff they will badly misuse. Because otherwise he is stuck in another Afghanistan-lite mess that will suck out the life of his troops and budget.
I suspect pride may prevent that.
I am sad to see Gen. Mattis go. I am even more sad that a man of his character eloquently dissed the President in his resignation letter. He didn’t have to do that. He did not see eye to eye on some military issues and that is okay. A letter saying I’m right and your wrong was not needed.
Trump was elected President, Gen. Mattis was not. It appears he doesn’t remember that Trump ran on a platform stating he was going to bring the troops home from the middle east.
Whether that’s the right decision, I don’t know. What I do know is that he is keeping a campaign promise.
Thank you for your service General, you deserve a long and happy retirement.
I disagree. Mattie was not serving Trump as SecDef, he was serving the Nation.
He saw it as his duty (and I agree) to provide solid military and defense counsel to a president and administration that sorely needed an experienced voice in the room.
He ismilarly saw it as his duty to make it clear that he thinks the president is 1) making a bad decision , and 2) ignoring sound, well established, and previously effective procedures in doing so.
What effective procedures?
We have gone into debt to keep Europe afloat how many times?
They have a wonderful welfare system becuse we footed their defense bill for decades.
The best thing Trump has done is to force them to take responsibility.
President Trump was elected by the people of the United States.
Mattis duty is to serve the President we elected.
Effective decision making procedures at the national level.
Trump made what will probably turn out to be a bad decision, and it appears that he did so without using the system in place to weigh those decisions.
Look, if you are an isolationist, just say so and I will stop trying to convince you (of course, that approach has failed many nations over the centuries)
This has nothing to do with whether or not we went into debt to save other countries. I assume you are referring to the wars of the 20th Century. Was it in our best interest to defeat Germany and the Ottomans in WWI? I think it was. What about WW2? Again, unless we wanted to be the weakest power in a tripolar worldwith the Japanese dominating the Pacific and Germany dominating Europe, I think it was.
Korea? Yeah, I think it was worth it. Cold War? I’m there too.
GWOT? In general, yes. Of course, we blew it and pulled out Iraq too early after dismantling their ability to defeat AQIZ which allowed ISIS to form and grow, so this one is kinda on us.
Mattis took an oath to support and defend the constitution. The president is not even mentioned: https://www.military.com/video/forces/department-of-defense/secdef-takes-the-oath-of-office/5293433322001
Actually, the mistakes in Iraq was further back than the pullout.
One was completely ignoring the potential for insurgency.
Another was th foolish notion that we could somehow impose a US style republic on a tribal mess like Iraq, which only existed as a nation because someone was ruthless enough to terrorize all opponents into submission.
Another was allowing Iran a free pass to participate in Iraq, without nation-ending response.
Victory is when the other side -quits-, or ceases to exist in a meaningful way. We can use military force for a variety of goals, but only Victory has an end state.
What are the victory condition for Syria?
All true, and we spent a lot of blood and treasure during the surge to get to a point where we could see a positive outcome on the horizon. Then we left.
There are only a few successful counter insurgencies in the modern world, and they took decades.
” we could see a positive outcome on the horizon.”
MIRAGE;
“something that appears real or possible but is not in fact so.”
Oh, Iraq was do-able. We just spent a very long time trying to win nicely, and without reguard to reality.
Kratman writes extensively on this topic, and has some interesting commentary on the whole thing. Highly recommend it for consideration.
I think the first mistake was completely disbanding and disarming the Iraqi military.
True. Then, after a lot of costly fighting, we were close to a turning point, and Obama withdrew,
” after dismantling their ability to defeat AQIZ”
You mean there are actually people other than Trump who can make bad decisions, even after going through all those procedures? Like George W’s decision to abolish any and all forces able to maintain peace and order in Iraq after our conquest?
Yes. Terrible mistake. You seem to be laborious g under the misapprehension that I think all republicans are infallible.
That said, Trump makes a LOT of bad decisions…
Task & Purpose dug up an old quote from 2014 that might give some insight into me might have done it:
“Later, during his April 2014 talk in San Francisco, he was asked specifically about whether there was a scenario in which he may have retired in protest. Mattis allowed some unethical orders and other scenarios that would lead him to do so, but he said, “you have to be very careful about doing that. The lance corporals can’t retire. They’re going. That’s all there is to it.”
He added: “You abandon him only under the most dire circumstances, where the message you have to send can be sent no other way. I never confronted that situation.””
Seems to me that a man like Mattis would not make this choice lightly. I hope he made the right choice for our nation.
Mattis is a thoughtful and deeply reflective man driven by duty and ethics.
He is also very well spoken and a gifted writer. He didn’t get the nickname Warrior Monk because of his bo-staff skills
He probably won’t, but it sure would be nice if Mattis ran for president in 2024.
Would he run as a Republican or Democrat?
I this point I am not so sure.
The guy quitted.
Mattis saw that he could no longer well and faithfully execute the duties of his office, so he resigned. He saw that he could not ethically serve the nation by serving the president- his advice and counsel was being ignored, and he wasn’t going to stop providing it. Best to get out of there and let someone else step up. Why don’t you apply?
I have yet to see any critic of Mattis that has put in even a fraction of the meritorious service to the nation in positions of authority and responsibility anywhere close to what he has.
I’d be in favor of “Mad Dog 2020”.
“Mattis is a thoughtful and deeply reflective man driven by duty and ethics.
He is also very well spoken and a gifted writer. He didn’t get the nickname Warrior Monk because of his bo-staff skills”
Well, clearly he doesn’t understand 4D chess. For that matter, neither does McRaven.
//sarc
Oh pleez.
Mattis is a globalist, supports transgenders in the military and believes climate change is the greatest threat the world is facing.
Right now you’re more full of shit than Commissar!
His will be some big shoes to fill.
And free ammo for our enemies.
Tom Kratman to the white courtesy phone please.
In keeping with the proven fact that both Trump and Mattis are capable and willing to play the long game, nothing would surprise me about the eventual outcome. Ambassador to the UN is likely not a possibility unless Nikki agrees to hang around a couple of extra months. However, seeing Mattis as the next Secretary of State would be great. Wouldn’t it also make perfect sense for him to point out to the rest of the world what is obvious to many of us, while so many others continue to ignore the obvious?
Isn’t it common for nearly constant changes among cabinet positions and advisors? Not sure why anyone should expect anything different from this presidency.
“Isn’t it common for nearly constant changes among cabinet positions and advisors? Not sure why anyone should expect anything different from this presidency.”
Not really and especially not to that level. https://www.brookings.edu/research/why-is-trumps-staff-turnover-higher-than-the-5-most-recent-presidents/
On the one hand I suppose it’s good to change staff when they aren’t working out for you. On the other, he claimed he would pick the best people on the campaign trail, so either his picking skills suck or he’s driving them away.
As a former Marine, 1371, and having deployed 3 times to Iraq, and twice to Afghanistan, I have been disappointed in General Mattis and his stay the coarse plan for Assholeastan, POTUS Trump, ran on lets get out of this never ending war, I mean really why are we still there?
Pat: I have asked the same questions re my time Nam. I see the Afghanistan war as driven by three things: the heroin trade, Islamic factions, and our possibly misguided sense that A-stan has strategic importance to our national security. Unless someone MOABs all the poppy fields, the heroin trade will go on forever. We cannot MOAB the poppies so we have no ability to militarily cut off the huge sums of money generated by the heroin trade. The Islamic factions will continue to fight over those monies to promote their religious fanaticism. No side will win as they are relatively matched, so who cares if they fight each other. I am quite baffled why we (and previously the Russians) see this shithole as having strategic value. My guess is that the heroin trade has strategic value for lining the pockets of many a politician and general.
Afghanistan has been called “The Graveyard of Empires”, just ask the British and Russians!
Eradicating the poppy trade from Afghanistan would probably require both a radically destructive biological pest to destroy the crops, and persistent nerve agent to prevent the locals from figuring out how to replant a new or resistant species.
And frequent re-treatment to prevent recurrence.
Essentially, genocide of two species.
That is probably a bit further than the USA should ever go.
Meh, just a good dose of 2,4D on the poppy fields and they could still grow corn or other grain crops afterward.
Mattis’ approach to defeating an asymmetric enemy, using military tactics and hearts and minds techniques, has been genius. Trump’s approach to defeating any enemy is to leverage our economic powerhouse (economic warfare). Both approaches have their pros and cons but will butt heads as all diametrically different approaches to defeating the enemy will always do. They are both strong men, but with different outlooks on how to defeat our enemies and maintain our alliances. Thus I am not surprised at this breakup. Trump is the CiC and gets the final say. Whether Trump’s vision or Mattis’ vision to defeat our enemies is the correct vision will only be resolved with time and events.
In observing Trump, I suspect he is not as willing to accept the sacrifice of soldiers in the pursuit of a perceived threat to national security. However, he did not seem to hesitate to send in more troops when ISIS was resurging which was a real threat – not a perceived threat. Likely he will continue his economic warfare which is having good effect – Iran is struggling economically – and pound the sand chiggers into their own blood soaked sandbox without us spilling our own blood. I have to agree with Trump when I ask the question, “Why spill our blood when we can defeat them economically?” This doesn’t mitigate the muzzies fanaticism and bloodthirstiness, but crushing their financial ability to wage war will go a long way towards keeping them in check.
I have never seen the US employ economic warfare the way Trump is doing it. The results are stunning so far. Even our domestic enemies, the Dems, are in disarray as Trump’s economic policies have boosted our economy. China is the big problem, but Trump is working to exploit their economic weaknesses. It remains to be seen whether his policies will overcome their nefarious schemes.
Good analysis, Grimm.
I return the compliment. The bride and I thoroughly enjoy your articles and laugh heartily with enjoyment at many of your comments. I do an excellent Donald Duck voice (and other voices)to many that I meet just to bring them an enjoyable moment and laughter. You do the same for us in your own inimitable way. Nam had a way of bringing in focus that which is important in life. Bringing laughter and fun to others is relatively high on the list.
Your ISIS update in the upstream blog dovetails nicely with what I am saying.
Thank you. I’ve had many questions about things related to the Middle East for a long time. I may bring up some of that in the future.
Excellent analysis.
I also agree that China is our real problem.
Russia has less than a tenth of our GDP, and will never have the economic means to challenge us openly. Annoying bastards, but nowhere as dangerous as China.
Our foreign policy should be focused on keeping China in check.
Trump is anything g but a strong man, and is nowhere near the strategic thinker Mattis is.
Trump has a lot of childish and simplistic views on how trade works, and it will hurt us in the long run. Remember, we are slowly moving away from a manufacturing economy- other countries will not always need what we have to sell.
‘The Dems’ are not domestic enemies, they are your fellow citizens.you don’t have to like or even agree with your fellow citizens, but you should listen to and respect their right to express their opinions.
That is because as president Trump has to employ all elements of national power for a National Security Trategy, while the Sec Def focuses on a defense strategy which necessarily employs the elements of the department of defense. SecDef cannot direct the activities of the economy.
The most commonly used model for the elements of national power is called Dime: Diplomacy, Information, Military, Economic. It is part of Strategy 101.
Strategies are all different, but they have a few things in common: they first describe the current environment (the situation, to include threats). Then they lay out the desired environment (Ends), the method we are going to use to achieve the ends (Ways), and how we are going to facilitate the method (Means).
The National Security Strategy lays out the plan to leverage all of these elements of national power. Trumps is online here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/new-national-security-strategy-new-era/
Because it is more than a military strategy, the NSS is prepared by the National Security Council at the direction of the National Security Advisor with input from the entire cabinet, to include Sec State, Sec Def, Sec Commerce, etc., to reflect a Whole of Government approach that leverages all four elements of national,power
The National Defense Strategy is drafted by the Secretary of Defense, and leverages all elements of DoD in all domains- land, air, sea, space, and cyber.
The National Military Strategy is drafted by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and concentrates on the military.