The supposedly pro-Trump anti-Ukraine shills are starting to throw Trump's appointees under the bus. Which means, they are setting it up so they can intellectually (pardon the use of the world "intellectually" here) abandon Trump. They are so invested in MAGA-means-hating-Ukraine as a symbol and substitute for all the political problems here, treating a Russian win as a Democrat defeat, they have talked themselves into a bottomless pit they can't get out.
Trump's military picks have shown they are not pro/anti either Russia or Ukraine. They are for US interests, want the war to stop. They see Russia as the aggressor and want European nations to pay to defend their own interests instead of relying on the US to pay the bills for the wars they want fought.
Eventually the MAGA-means-Trump-loves-Russia crowd will have three choices when Trump follows through on his actual policies, not the one they want him to have. Pretend what is happening isn't happening. This is what they are trying to hold onto for now. It will not work for long after Trump is sworn into office. Settle down, admit they were wrong, and get behind Trump. Abandon Trump and say he sold out his own vision.
They will have no other options.
You’re 100% right.
We might as well throw Trump under the Bus on this one. His oppositon to the war is rooted in two Impeachments and Obama led USG that screwed him out of his first term. Project Ukraine has made many rich.
This is a bunch of projection on your part. It’s obvious that some here really, really hate Russians. That hardly means all of those disappointed in some of Trump’s cabinet picks “hate Ukraine”. In fact, I’m on record here as caring very much about Ukraine and mourning its destruction.
Why I object to Hegseth. He’ll be in way, way over his head. He does not have the background, experience or education required to be effective in that position. I watched his long interview and was appalled at his lack of knowledge and vision. We need a SecDef who understands the inner workings of the Pentagon and can be an effective administrator, one wise to the tricks and traps of the entrenched “deep staters” there.
We need a SecDef who has an overarching vision of how we need to shape our military for the future instead of spending trillions to attempt to fight the last war. One who has a broad and deep understanding of the roots of the current and emergent conflicts and how these conflicts affect each other, as well as history, including military history. One who understands the politics and problems of weapons development and procurement.
Hegseth has none of those qualities and in my opinion is not qualified for that position, and will be unable to advise Trump wisely. Trump can be a little starstruck by conservative media talking heads, and here we seem to have a case of that. Worst of all, Hegseth doesn’t seem to even appreciate how much he has to learn and appears to have a rather incurious mind. Yes, he wants to clean up the woke nonsense in our military and that’s all to the good, but there are others far better qualified for that job who would do the same. Hegseth has demonstrated that he has a heart for veterans and better understanding of Veteran’s Affairs, and I think would better serve Trump and our country there.
Gorka: He’s a Brit of Hungarian extraction with close ties to MI6. I’m sick and tired of foreigners with other allegiances and axes to grind walking our halls of power and influencing our policies at the highest levels. Brzinski, Wolfowitz, Nuland, the Kagans, etc. It all started with the Captive Nations Committee during the Cold War. Okay, but what we need now are Americans who have American interests at heart first and foremost. He’s also a blowhard and a jerk with a swelled head whose sky-high estimation of himself does not correspond with reality. Again, Trump starstruck by a talking head. Trump has many strengths, but like any mortal man, he has a few weaknesses and this is one of them.
Kellogg: He is not a statesman, not a diplomat, and appears to be out of touch with the realities on the ground in Ukraine. I think he is unsuited for this post. Given that such a position will likely require lots of energetic shuttle diplomacy, his age is also a concern. If he were a wise elder statesman with deep understanding of this conflict and familiarity with the various players, then age might be overlooked in exchange for excellent qualifications — but he lacks those qualifications. Kellogg could better serve Trump in an administrative post, an area where he shines, rather than this diplomatic one.
Rubio: Do I really need to explain? Plenty of other Freepers have already written paragraphs on their objections to Rubio.
Walz: He made somewhere around $25 million off his contracting firm with a dubious record of training Afghan government troops (we saw how that turned out) and wanted us to remain in Afghanistan indefinitely. Hmm. I wonder on which side his bread is buttered. Not happy with this pick, either.
General Kellogg begins his overseas peace mission the first week of January.