Our Undeclared Wars

[runrussellrun]

so what IS the point of alliances then, to serve other people's interests.....?

but perhaps you and I have different definitions of "interests". Not everything is monetary.

Have you seen Beautiful Mind?



Ignore the blonde.


This is Trump in a nutshell, actually. Ever wonder why his businesses fail? Repeatedly? Because he's Adam Smith. Only looks at his interests, and if it burns his partners, he doesn't hesitate, nor care. He's the opposite of Buffett: slash and burn, instead of grow and nurture. Who would you rather do business with? Trump, or Buffett? And who is leading a more fulfilling life?

So to answer your question, the secondary gains frequently far outweigh primary costs of alliances. Trump isn't wise enough to understand this.

Five girls.....five guys.....SOMEONE has to end up with the blonde. Why theory math and economics is mostly useless. How did it work out in REAL life, Adam Smith?

Love the fact that I was in this movie....yup....the kids making fun of Nash. Horrible, horrible person in real life. Literally SPAT on my Jewish friend.

[HooDat]

I meant that he treats foreign relations like a business deal: He expects a tangible, identifiable benefit to flow directly and largely immediately from the thing that he is being asked to do, or asked to carry on, or asked to commit the country to do.

and this is why he is a pariah in the business world and US banks won't touch him.

I personally would hope that good businessmen and good politicians are both looking for win-win agreements that build an environment that is conducive to long-term benefits. Business will focus more on dollars of course, but I believe the business world has done so to the extreme, and to it's own self-detriment, since the 80's and the rise of Wall St. "greed is good" mentality and the "maximization of shareholder value" crap that has been taught in business schools since the 60's/70's.

great discussion....

[Typical Lax Dad]

I meant that he treats foreign relations like a business deal: He expects a tangible, identifiable benefit to flow directly and largely immediately from the thing that he is being asked to do, or asked to carry on, or asked to commit the country to do.

and this is why he is a pariah in the business world and US banks won't touch him.

I personally would hope that good businessmen and good politicians are both looking for win-win agreements that build an environment that is conducive to long-term benefits. Business will focus more on dollars of course, but I believe the business world has done so to the extreme, and to it's own self-detriment, since the 80's and the rise of Wall St. "greed is good" mentality and the "maximization of shareholder value" crap that has been taught in business schools since the 60's/70's.

great discussion....

Yes indeed. Can't borrow a nickel but can be President of the United States. Trump has pretty much failed 2 of the 3 basic "C's" of credit for most of his life as a "businessman"..... Kids were looking for money a few years ago for a project. It was like a scene out of The Godfather.

[old salt]

https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2019/ ... ry/579463/

When Webb dropped out of the Democratic presidential primary in October 2015, he asserted that the Democratic party had moved away from "'millions of dedicated, hard-working Americans,'" and he pointedly refused to say that he was still a Democrat.

In November 2016, Webb denounced affirmative-action policies as an illegitimate expansion into "reverse discrimination" of the slavery-oriented intention of the Thirteenth Amendment. He also suggested that white working-class voters believed that "Democrats don't like them."

In February 2017, he condemned the Democratic party for embracing "identity politics" and moving "very far to the left," and by doing so lost "the key part of their constituency," He also made clear that he did not vote for Hillary Clinton and refused to rule out having voted for Trump.

As a Senator, while Webb supported immigration reform in principle, he also prioritized "securing the border" over all other immigration issues -- something that clearly fits Trump's current agenda.

Webb has been a voice for the group conventionally assumed to have moved from the Democratic base to the Republicans’: mainly white, mainly rural, culturally conservative Americans who feel themselves on the losing end of this era’s economic divides. For more on this, see Webb’s book Born Fighting, and his response on behalf of the Democratic party to George W. Bush’s State of the Union address in 2007. A notable aspect of that speech is that the Democrats chose Webb to deliver their televised message when he was a brand-new senator, only a few weeks into his term.

It is insane for the President to continue with an Acting SecDef that is a direct representative of the military-industrial complex with no substantive military experience.

Webb is confirmable and confirmable quickly.

Because Webb is in harmony with the President's views and capable of drawing down expensive forces, reducing support to dictators, and eliminating some of the 50% waste that characterizes every aspect of DoD, he will free up resources for the President's domestic priorities including the wall and infrastructure.

[a fan]

Love the fact that I was in this movie....yup....the kids making fun of Nash. Horrible, horrible person in real life. Literally SPAT on my Jewish friend.
[/i]

And Russell Crowe? Have beers with him after shooting?

[old salt]

If Trump doesn't consider Webb & sticks with Shanahan, it'll be because Trump thinks he'll be a SecDef who implements his priorities & does not push back.

Trump's emerging foreign policy is muscular mercantilism & isolationism. You want to be our ally -- then buy our US made weapons & learn how to use them. Do that & we'll partner with you in our common defense & maintaining commerce & stability in your part of the world.

He's got a guy from Boeing to sell our stuff & stand up a space force, who has no allegiances to the services who will be giving up that rice bowl.

Expect bargaining threats to bring home our forces from Europe, Japan & S Korea.
It will be even more of a bargaining chip in trade deals & reducing our allies trade surpluses.

[youthathletics]

If Trump doesn't consider Webb & sticks with Shanahan, it'll be because Trump thinks he'll be a SecDef who implements his priorities & does not push back.

Trump on Twitter yesterday...
@realDonaldTrump
The story in the New York Times regarding Jim Webb being considered as the next Secretary of Defense is FAKE NEWS. I’m sure he is a fine man, but I don’t know Jim, and never met him. Patrick Shanahan, who is Acting Secretary of Defense, is doing a great job!

4:45 PM - 4 Jan 2019

[Trinity]

Webb served with honor. He can read and write books. But, like Janet Yellen, Webb is probably too short.

[Trinity]

Rear Admiral Sweeney is out at the Pentagon.

[runrussellrun]

Webb served with honor. He can read and write books. But, like Janet Yellen, Webb is probably too short.

Trump was probably afraid that Webb would punch him......just like Bush was.

At the end of the day, Webb is a marginal dissappointment and has a penchant for quitting.....often.

[Trinity]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

Not so fast on that Syria withdrawal. Somebody let Bolton out of the closet.

[runrussellrun]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

Not so fast on that Syria withdrawal. Somebody let Bolton out of the closet.

daddy.....can we stay here forever? Suddenly, we care about the Kurds? And 2000 "troops" is awesomer. Enuff to deter anyone. Any "blackwater" types in the Middle East?

Ah...paradise in the desert....yes, lets stay. B/c we NEED the fossil fuel to preserve our way. Can't tax the rain, now can we. Oh...wait.. icon_puke

Tell me again, WHAT interests of the citizens of the USA is keeping us in the Middle east? Oil? Pretend anti war liberals, most likely climate believers, want to protect a product they no longer want to use. Brilliant

[youthathletics]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

Not so fast on that Syria withdrawal. Somebody let Bolton out of the closet.

Mattis resigned why?

[old salt]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

Not so fast on that Syria withdrawal. Somebody let Bolton out of the closet.

Mattis resigned why?

Blindsided by Trump's unexpected announcement, triggered by Trump's phone con with Erdogan.

According to the Book of Woodward, there was little to no communication between Mattis & the McMaster NSC.
Apparently that did not improve under Bolton. Kelly wouldn't be around any longer to advocate for Mattis within the WH.
This time, Trump blindsided them all. Mattis quit. Bolton stayed. Kelly on his way out.
Bolton now does the reality based walkback.
Trump put down the marker -- that's all that matters to him.
Mattis didn't need to go. Apparently he felt he'd lost too much credibility with our allies.
He knew his resignation would force a walkback.
This was a long time coming. Too bad Mattis didn't survive another 2 years.
He apparently concluded he'd lost effectiveness in restraining Trump & elected to shoot his last silver bullet on Syrian & Afghan withdrawal.

[youthathletics]

Thanks for the reply. That just seems like a poor excuse for someone of his status and leadership to others. To give up because you didn’t have your way at every turn? Mattis would not tolerate giving up from any of his Marines. This latest Syria news almost makes it appear Mattis was nudged out.

[holmes435]

President Trump on Wednesday ended an Obama-era requirement that the U.S. government publish an annual report on the number of people killed in drone strikes or other counterterrorism operations outside of war zones.

It looks like Trump may be taking over the mantle of "Drone-striker in Chief" from Obama.

[ChairmanOfTheBoard]

https://www.axios.com/senate-vote-yemen ... cb001.html

Senate votes to end U.S. military support for Saudi-led war in Yemen

[ChairmanOfTheBoard]

https://www.axios.com/house-passes-hist ... fd558.html

[MDlaxfan76]

Thanks for the reply. That just seems like a poor excuse for someone of his status and leadership to others. To give up because you didn’t have your way at every turn? Mattis would not tolerate giving up from any of his Marines. This latest Syria news almost makes it appear Mattis was nudged out.

Perhaps he didn't consider Trump one of "his Marines".
Or maybe he thought Trump's quitting on the allies in Syria was time for 'court martial', or at least the closest thing to such he could do.

From what we know of Mattis, he had a very low opinion of Trump.
And this was clearly the last straw, in what was reportedly a string of choices by Trump that bothered him greatly.

Sometimes leaders need to resign or else they are complicit in actions that they find reprehensible.

As Salty is describing, I think in line with the various reporting, Mattis was one of those who hung in through lots of decisions with which they disagreed, under the logic that they could at least influence or moderate decisions. They could prevent the worst implications of those bad decisions. But he'd lost confidence that he could even have that positive effect.

So, the best he could do was a very striking resignation. His resignation indeed woke many up to how bad the decision would have been to leave Syria, especially as precipitously as was originally communicated by Trump, without consultation with his key advisors.

[ChairmanOfTheBoard]

The authors write that "Washington initially overestimated its ability to shape coalition conduct and underestimated the devastation of the conflict it was helping enable." They also note that both Barack Obama and Donald Trump elected "to continue this assistance even after the miscalculations had been exposed."

https://www.axios.com/why-is-the-us-inv ... 17f64.html