Trump and Those Nasty Terrorists

I admit, I’m not all that familiar with the “military operations” conducted by the U.S. and/or other countries. But from what I’ve read and heard, I do have grave misgivings about our (I’m Like A Smart Person) Orange Leader and his declarations about how HE is going to rid the world of “Radical Islamic Terrorists.”

An example (to me) of his inexperienced and reckless actions was his recent decision to deploy hundreds of U.S. marines in Northern Syria. According to this article in The Guardian,  his decision is “high risk foolishness.” It points out that tRump is putting …

relatively inexperienced American soldiers into the middle of a highly toxic, multi-fronted battlefield that includes combat-tested Kurdish militias, Syrian army troops, anti-regime fighters and Russian, Iranian and Turkish forces.

It further points out that this …

simplistic idea, promulgated by Trump, that Isis and its warped jihadi ideology can be annihilated by force is foolish and naive.

The article concludes:

Trump’s Syrian intervention is “fraught with risk”, Robert Ford, former US ambassador to Damascus, told the Washington Post. “It is a huge policy change.” The potential for military escalation or “mission creep”, if and when US ground troops get into trouble, is obvious, vast and worrying. Northern Syria is a quagmire. Trump just jumped straight in.

Quite frankly, any decisions this man makes related to military actions worries me greatly. His stance related to No. Korea and its nuclear aspirations is another example. And his “friendliness” with Russia is disconcerting as well.

Unfortunately, it is what it is (at least for the time being). I guess all we can hope for is no foreign power ever questions his education, how strong he is, what a winner he is, how tough he is, his tremendous successes, how amazing he is, what a terrific job he’s doing, his leadership abilities, or his ability to build classy buildings … (taken from “Donald Trump’s 20 Most Frequently Used Words“). Otherwise, we’d better duck and cover and hope we live to see another day.


12 thoughts on “Trump and Those Nasty Terrorists

  1. On this particular idiocy by tRump, I usually let the military experts WITH combat experience and extensive knowledge of the Pentagon, Congress, military ops, and foreign nations (particularly those who pose threats to our interests & security) speak about the current administration’s ability to be a superb Commander-in-Chief in correlation with the Defense Secretary, Secretary of State, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    Colin Powell has been two of those three heads and widely considered one of the nation’s most prolific expert on military affairs while in combat as well as in Washington D.C. I do not need to list all of Powell’s military badges and accolades of military success — anyone can find them online. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Colin Powell and how he handled himself in federal office, but more so in his military service. Here’s what Powell has said about the current Commander-in-Chief.

    “[Trump is] a national disgrace and an international pariah” and the fact that he chose “a right-wing nutty jerk“, General Michael Flynn — former Director of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) — as National Security Advisor, only further illustrates Trump’s military idiocy. Powell continues about Flynn’s tenure there…

    Flynn got fired as head of DIA. His replacement is a black Marine 3-star. I asked why Flynn got fired. Abusive with staff, didn’t listen, worked against policy, bad management, etc. He has been and was right-wing nutty every [sic] since. I watched about five minutes on line of his talked [sic] and switched off.

    By comparison, Flynn’s dossier is not even in the same ballpark as Powell’s or many other more exceptional Generals Trump could have appointed. So WHY did he choose Flynn? Hah! Why is retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Keith Kellogg Jr. now interim National Security Advisor? Here is an excellent date-by-date rundown of what took place by…

    Liked by 2 people

    • There’s no doubt his appointments leave a LOT to be desired … but IMO this military action and the one that got the Navy Seal killed are much more serious. He’s using his position as “Commander in Chief” as though he actually knows what’s going on in the Middle East.

      Dollars to donuts, he’s reading the same news reports that we are and using them as his rationale for action.

      It’s already been reported that he didn’t actually consult with the appropriate parties before the Yemen raid. And while there are conflicting reports on whether the raid accomplished its purpose, his lack of military experience leads me to believe his claims of “success” were primarily because his ego wouldn’t let him say otherwise.

      This man is NEVER going to admit he is/was wrong. Even if/when the nuclear warhead is on its way to the U.S., he’ll probably figure he can run out and stop it with his little hands.

      Liked by 4 people

      • P.S. Philip Carter (VOX) said this about the Yemen raid:

        Still, Trump’s blunt refusal to accept personal responsibility for the Yemen raid burns because it marks such an incredible betrayal of his office and the awesome responsibility that our president must shoulder, especially in the national security sphere. A president who passes the buck is not one we can trust to lead our military or keep us safe.

        Emphasis mine.

        Liked by 3 people

        • It’s already been reported that he didn’t actually consult with the appropriate parties before the Yemen raid.

          Being a fanatical WW2 history buff, not listening to or ignoring expert advice from your military chief-of-staffs reminds me of a particular Chancellor/Feuer between May 1941 to April 1945. The similarities are very uncanny. 😮

          Liked by 2 people

      • The Yemen raid was actually an Obama era plan, so I would not be so focussed on that. The Syrian deployment is a different matter altogether, it places US troops there as an obvious target in a region where there are at least four groups fighting, Kurds, Turks, ISIS and Syria, plus who knows what other rebel groups.

        Placing troops in a hostile area on an extended basis is (militarily) highly dangerous.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes … but, Peter.

          My understanding is Obama and his group didn’t think the Yemen raid was a good idea, so they held off. tRump came along and went forward with it anyway. Now what do you think changed … other than the administration and our uninformed, ego-driven leader?

          Liked by 4 people

          • Exactly. It was planned under the Obama regime, but when Obama looked it over, he felt the risk outweighed the benefit, so it was not carried out. Trump, while at dinner, gave the OK. Then, he blamed his generals for the f**k up like the cowardly child he is.

            Liked by 3 people

Take Some Time To Share Your Thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.