NEWS Is the pivot to China a bunch of bullshit?

[JTS11]

Just spent the last few nights reading an awesome book written by a B-17G radio operator, of his time during the war (and in training). 8h AF, lots of really mundane details, that matter only to those of us who ever strapped on a grey airplane (or in their time, green). Really good read, but he keeps talking about how his old man was an "isolationist" even after Pearl Harbor. Sounds a lot like the idiots from the tea party or MAGA. Dim wits who run their mouths when adults are talking.

The whole concept of isolationism in these modern days is weird. It was a thing in the 1930's. But after WW2, we were kind of all in.

It is pretty striking that more and more traditional Reagan-style conservatives are coming out against the current GOP nominee. IMO Gen Mattis needs to speak up with his experience as SecDef. More than a few quotes in a print interview.

 

[Swanee]

IMO Gen Mattis needs to speak up with his experience as SecDef. More than a few quotes in a print interview.

I completely agree. It surprises me how such a learned scholar has been silent over the last couple years.

 

[Swanee]

Just spent the last few nights reading an awesome book written by a B-17G radio operator, of his time during the war (and in training). 8h AF, lots of really mundane details, that matter only to those of us who ever strapped on a grey airplane (or in their time, green). Really good read, but he keeps talking about how his old man was an "isolationist" even after Pearl Harbor. Sounds a lot like the idiots from the tea party or MAGA. Dim wits who run their mouths when adults are talking.

What book? Perhaps share in the book thread for those of us who love the nitty gritty details?!

 

[JTS11]

I completely agree. It surprises me how such a learned scholar has been silent over the last couple years.

I'd say the same thing WRT Gen Kelly. But, I will say, I obviously don't where they're at in life health wise, so not going to hate. However, if they're able and fit to speak up more, I wish they would.

 

[Spekkio]

IMO Gen Mattis needs to speak up with his experience as SecDef. More than a few quotes in a print interview.

There's the whole UCMJ Article 88 thing that I'm sure a certain spiteful former President would try to pursue if reelected.

 

[Spekkio]

Stable-ish. Trump had really thrown our ASEAN allies for a loop. NATO isn't far behind them if the "screw Ukraine" movement takes hold. Principled realism isn't legitimate, it's a buzzword to mask isolationism. We're not an isolationist country, and we never have been. We've been a liberalist foreign policy country since the Tripolitan Wars and the original six frigates of the US Navy and their ability to project power. Our brief periods of isolationism found ourselves caught with our pants down on the world stage.

The principle that the US shouldn't enter into treaties that obligates itself to use force as a third party in a conflict between two other nations, and the criticism that the US tends to bear the majority of the military burden and cost in these agreements, is neither new nor isolationist.

Bush 42 ran on this principle in his first election, then completely changed his policy after 9/11.

I wouldn't describe the Trump administration's policies as isolationist.

But, luckily for everyone, it's really hard to change a treaty.

 

[JTS11]

There's the whole UCMJ Article 88 thing that I'm sure a certain spiteful former President would try to pursue if reelected.

Let's not start this discussion again. He served as a political appointee in the dude's cabinet.

I guess he'd hypothetically have to order his new SecDef to recall the former general to active duty for a court-martial. It's an absurd proposition, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

 

[Spekkio]

Let's not start this discussion again. He served as a political appointee in the dude's cabinet.

I guess he'd hypothetically have to order his new SecDef to recall the former general to active duty for a court-martial. It's an absurd proposition, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

I think that Mattis' sense of duty and obligation toward military / civil relations as a retired 4-star general trumps (pun intended) an emotional desire to get 15 minutes of fame out of his resignation as Secretary of Defense.

Yeah, I also think that he could beat the charges... but why invite the trouble?

 

[sevenhelmet]

I think that Mattis' sense of duty and obligation toward military / civil relations as a retired 4-star general trumps (pun intended) an emotional desire to get 15 minutes of fame out of his resignation as Secretary of Defense.

Yeah, I also think that he could beat the charges... but why invite the trouble?

I don’t think Mattis would hesitate to “invite the trouble” if he thought it would do some good. I don’t think he is afraid of Trump. But look at the opposition. He would basically be throwing his hat in the ring for Harris. I doubt he thinks very highly of her either.

He also may simply be enjoying a retirement from the craziness of public life. There have been multiple books published about his tumultuous time as Secdef, so it’s not as though his opinion is secret.

 

[Random8145]

Stable-ish. Trump had really thrown our ASEAN allies for a loop. NATO isn't far behind them if the "screw Ukraine" movement takes hold. Principled realism isn't legitimate, it's a buzzword to mask isolationism. We're not an isolationist country, and we never have been. We've been a liberalist foreign policy country since the Tripolitan Wars and the original six frigates of the US Navy and their ability to project power. Our brief periods of isolationism found ourselves caught with our pants down on the world stage.

The MAGA movement I do not believe is against countering China. They argue China is the threat we need to be addressing. They are against Ukraine however. Also prevalent is the (IMO wrong) view that Russia is not really a threat and that if anything, it was the "expansion" of NATO that caused the conflict. A major beef many have as well is the government leaving the southern border wide open while spending money to aid Ukraine.

As an example, Laura Ingraham is a pretty solid Trump supporter/MAGA. She continually harps that the administration needs to push Ukraine to negotiate with the Russians. However, on China, she is very hawkish, arguing China has a larger army than we do and is playing the current administration like fools (I know their having a larger army by itself means nothing, but just using that as an example of how people like her take China much more seriously).

 

[DanMa1156]

The MAGA movement I do not believe is against countering China. They argue China is the threat we need to be addressing. They are against Ukraine however.

Eh. Do you think most of the MAGA movement would support defense of Taiwan? Philippines? Oppose expansion into South China Sea at large? I think most would say "no."

 

[Random8145]

Eh. Do you think most of the MAGA movement would support defense of Taiwan? Philippines? Oppose expansion into South China Sea at large? I think most would say "no."

I don't know. MAGAs don't per se have a beef with Taiwan, whereas they have had a beef about Ukraine going back to Trump's administration as they view the Ukrainians as having gotten Trump into trouble and as being corrupt.

 

[DanMa1156]

I don't know. MAGAs don't per se have a beef with Taiwan, whereas they have had a beef about Ukraine going back to Trump's administration as they view the Ukrainians as having gotten Trump into trouble and as being corrupt.

I suspect that while they may be anti-China ("bring back our jobs!" - which isn't going to happen en masse), they generally also could not care less about Taiwan.

 

[Spekkio]

Eh. Do you think most of the MAGA movement would support defense of Taiwan? Philippines? Oppose expansion into South China Sea at large? I think most would say "no."

I don't like attributing viewpoints to an amalgamous group.

I think that the question isn't whether we support defense of Taiwan at all, but what that defense looks like with a Trump vs Harris presidency.

Diplomatically and economically, I think that a Trump administration would be more hawkish to China than a Harris administration. Which might have the unintended side effect of pushing China towards conflict.

As for militarily, they're both likely to endorse military initiatives that keep the US outpacing China to deter aggression.

Quite frankly, most of the Taiwanese population has no interest in fighting a bloody war with the PRC for independence, anyway. Their military and political leaders also don't believe that they can win unless the US commits a lot of soldiers to the island, and I think that COA would cost a prohibitive amount of political capital with American voters from both parties.

I recognize that the rhetoric among leaders in the Navy would have you think otherwise, but there's a potential that this looks much more like Crimea in 2014 than Ukraine in 2022-2024, if it happens at all.

 

[Spekkio]

The MAGA movement I do not believe is against countering China. They argue China is the threat we need to be addressing. They are against Ukraine however. Also prevalent is the (IMO wrong) view that Russia is not really a threat and that if anything, it was the "expansion" of NATO that caused the conflict. A major beef many have as well is the government leaving the southern border wide open while spending money to aid Ukraine.

As an example, Laura Ingraham is a pretty solid Trump supporter/MAGA. She continually harps that the administration needs to push Ukraine to negotiate with the Russians. However, on China, she is very hawkish, arguing China has a larger army than we do and is playing the current administration like fools (I know their having a larger army by itself means nothing, but just using that as an example of how people like her take China much more seriously).

The GOP has held onto the Nixonian belief that there needs to be some semblance of a functioning relationship between post Soviet Russia and the US to ensure global security. They also believe it's possible to bargain and negotiate with Putin to achieve this goal.

Zelenskyy also isn't the great guy he's been made out to be after the conflict started.