Hard Power and Soft Power

[Griz882]

Is it too much that the SECDEF asks POTUS "Hey Sir, I'm going to Ukraine to talk about the future of NATO, what are my left and right limits on our discussion points re: the biggest NATO issue in the last several decades?"

Perhaps the answer is yes, and I'm just overreacting.

Perhaps it isn’t too much for the SecDef to tell the POTUS, “ Hey sir, I’m going to hospital for four days so have someone else watch the shop.”

Perhaps the answer is indeed yes and you are, in fact, overreaching because you are driven by party politics, not logic.

 

[Griz882]

The SECDEF basically just got spanked and gave a very public apology to his boss for presuming to be able to speak on behalf of the administration.

Yes he did (and should have), as have others, and life goes on.

 

[number9]

Perhaps it isn’t too much for the SecDef to tell the POTUS, “ Hey sir, I’m going to hospital for four days so have someone else watch the shop.”

Yes, that was also indefensible!

 

[croakerfish]

Perhaps it isn’t too much for the SecDef to tell the POTUS, “ Hey sir, I’m going to hospital for four days so have someone else watch the shop.”

Perhaps the answer is indeed yes and you are, in fact, overreaching because you are driven by party politics, not logic.

You’re the one throwing out irrelevant gotchas about people who aren’t in charge of shit anymore but he’s the one stuck on party politics?

 

[Griz882]

You’re the one throwing out irrelevant gotchas about people who aren’t in charge of shit anymore but he’s the one stuck on party politics?

I am countering his comment that this is not a serious country. It is idiotic no matter how you measure it.

But that brings up…how do we “measure” an idiotic comment? With facts from past administration actions. Let me make it as clear as possible - administrations make mistakes at the highest levels. I could go on all night ripping both parties apart over such mistakes - does ALL of that negative experience make the U.S. a less serious country? No, it makes us a normal nation conducting international relations at a speed that often outstrips knowledge.

As to your sad little note, I said early in that Trump’s comments will be a scar on his administration - first one to say so I think. He spoke poorly, as he often does, and I made note of that. None of it, however, makes him better or worse than massive gaffes by past administrations - it ithe nature of doing business.

 

[Griz882]

Yes, that was also indefensible!

Yet we somehow managed to survive…despite our lack of seriousness.

 

[taxi1]

But that brings up…how do we “measure” an idiotic comment? With facts from past administration actions.

No, that’s just whataboutism.

 

[Griz882]

No, that’s just whataboutism.

Well, you can’t argue against that.

 

[Random8145]

You’re the one throwing out irrelevant gotchas about people who aren’t in charge of shit anymore but he’s the one stuck on party politics?

But they aren't irrelevant if people on this board didn't complain about them when they were done. Maybe they did, I don't know. But if they didn't, then it seems wrong to nitpick the one side.

 

[taxi1]

But they aren't irrelevant if people on this board didn't complain about them when they were done. Maybe they did, I don't know. But if they didn't, then it seems wrong to nitpick the one side.

I have this argument with folks all the time.

Whichever side you are one, where is your moral compass? Your standard for behavior? If your standard is whatever the other guy did, is that really a standard?

Whataboutism is not a standard, it is a cop-out. An evasion. It excuses all manners of behavior, because you can always find someone doing the worst things.

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

What has, does, and will always prove the strength of this nation is our ability to err, often unapologetically. And when we err we hash it out publicly and privately, then boldly err again. Governments are made of humans, and to err is human. The key though is never to forget the immutable truth that we are a free people (humans), with freely elected representatives (humans), who interact with representatives from throughout the globe (humans), and there are those who will act surprised should err. And those crying foul often are and will never be in a position where they have to make such decisions. History has proven that although we err, we will also be right for the vast preponderance of occurrences.

 

[Yardstick]

Looks like we're already walking some of the UKR stuff back: https://x.com/nickschifrin/status/1890069901794255261

We are not a serious country.

Serious question. Were you this upset when previous secdef went MIA for weeks without telling anyone? That seems to be a more serious issue. If you weren’t concerned about that but this is the hill you’re willing to die on then you’re so far down the rabbit hole

 

[Swanee]

As ground troops they would have been extensively briefed by the JA on the left and right limits of their mission and self-defense priorities. I don’t know for certain, but I doubt the guard guys who later worked the capitol building were given ammunition (the rifles were for show). I do know that when they are called out for riot duty they know exactly when they can crack a head or deploy a little weepy spray.

I get the questions, and it is always good to war game such things (even more so in your job) but I used to tell my soldiers - If you weren’t briefed on it, don’t even think about doing it.

We're on the same page. There are things we can't do on a training flight in CONUS that I think we should be able to, but the SJA says they can't support.

Intel oversight is a big thing. When you have a hammer everyone wants their nail hit. "Sorry guys, we can only hit special nails."

 

[FLGUY]

I have this argument with folks all the time.

Whichever side you are one, where is your moral compass? Your standard for behavior? If your standard is whatever the other guy did, is that really a standard?

Whataboutism is not a standard, it is a cop-out. An evasion. It excuses all manners of behavior, because you can always find someone doing the worst things.

A “whataboutisim” isn’t an inherently negative concept. Throwing the whataboutisim flag up is also an evasion per se, if the other instance of said action goes without scrutiny. People have a right to say “Hey man, this isn’t the first time this has happened. Why is it a big deal now, and why wasn’t it a big deal then?” If the answer is “I didn’t care back then”, that’s a problem.

I think we can all agree that we don’t like hypocrisy. And an attempt to highlight past instances of an act happening is nothing more than ensuring hypocrisy is called out, as it should be.

 

[taxi1]

hypocrisy

Sure, but the hypocrisy callout just becomes a diversion from the main point, which is the SECDEF looked like a dumbass when he tried to reel in his comment, no matter if any and all other SECDEFs have done similar.