Posted on 04/09/2017 5:45:55 AM PDT by Enlightened1
Current National Security Adviser Herbert Raymond “H. R.” McMaster is manipulating intelligence reports given to President Donald Trump, Cernovich Media can now report. McMaster is plotting how to sell a massive ground war in Syria to President
Trump with the help of disgraced former CIA director and convicted criminal David Petraeus, who mishandled classified information by sharing documents with his mistress.
As NSA, McMaster’s job is to synthesize intellience reports from all other agencies. President Trump is being given an inaccurate picture of the situation in Syria, as McMaster is seeking to involve the U.S. in a full scale war in Syria.
The McMaster-Petraeus plan calls for 150,000 American ground troops in Syria.
Many special operations veterans including General Joseph Votel have raised serious concerns about McMaster’s plans for Syria. Sources also suggest that McMaster is sharing classified information with Petraeus, whose security clearance was revoked.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
I can't imaginge Mattis stating a number much different from that. That is not a recommendation, but a warning about the seriousness of the undertaking.
A general recommends war? Shocking! And the US would never falsify data to get another war on. The swamp has been drained. /s
Where did this story go?
Excerpt: Obama holdover David Laufman is the source of the national security leaks, Cernovich Media can exclusively report. David Laufman, Chief of Counterintelligence, has all classified information regarding espionage pass by his desk.
No matter what you do for or to a muslim, at the end of the day you are still an infidel and he will still hate you (with a smile on his face).
Well, they didn’t do the “reporting” stage, which was why Cernovich had the opening.
IIRC Drudge followed up on his early success by grabbing stuff in the MSM before they had actually got it out, by similarly having similar contacts/sources in the MSM.
I think Cernovich studied Drudge’s model and is trying to replicate it himself.
Excerpt: Obama holdover David Laufman is the source of the national security leaks, Cernovich Media can exclusively report. David Laufman, Chief of Counterintelligence, has all classified information regarding espionage pass by his desk.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I would certainly have hoped that ‘draining the swamp’-on day one- would have started in ones own back yard, sweep the house, do the front yard THEN go into the bowels of the swamp...
No sense getting rid of ‘heads’ if you don’t replace the guys in the day to day trenches.
Throughout history, no matter how ‘brave’ the General, he still has/had to rely on the grunts to execute, then clean up their(Gens) messes.
I’ve read it several times. It is the best book out there written about the Vietnam war.
If Trump puts troops in Syria we’ll know Cernovich has good sources. I think this will cost Trump a lot of support. I disagree with his missile attack. But troops on the ground .... That’s just plain stupid. The proof is how happy it would make McCain.
And for those of us who say we want to nuke some dictator, I don’t believe the military would obey that order. There would be a coup some of us wanted to see against Obama.
I think the bottom line is none of it ever happened.
What did he say?
Absolutely.
I read other SEA war books with a critical eye. Did it really happen that way? For example, the book on Illingsworth missed the two major incompetences of the II Field Force Arty commander that caused the whole fiasco... and a few dead friends.
On the other hand, when I read McMaster’s book, I was very pizzed. It was obviously very well researched and entirely true. I had believed in the “wisdom” coming from DOD and DA, and operated accordingly. We all did.... and it was CYOA limp-wrist BS from the entire civilian and military (non) leadership.
McMaster’s book clearly illustrates what we all know now. The war was winnable early on, and even into 68-70, but if the fools at the top were too CS to do that, we never should have been there. Had we in the field been told, “Fix bayonets, double arm interval, line of skirmishers, walking fire, march on Hanoi,” we would have, but DC had no balls.... and it was all political BS.
BTW, the book was so spot on it cost McMaster some very well deserved promotions.
Wasn’t that Bill Mitchell?
When did “reporting” come to mean “investigating”?
I first noticed this listening to Bob Woodward, who would talk about his work as a “rappordher,” and kept using the word “rappordhing” when he clearly meant “investigating.”
I always thought a story was “reported” when it was published.
“We are talking about McCaster and not Mattis.”
Except for this “conspiracy” to work would require General Mattis to ignore the intelligence he gets from his boots on the ground & only use what McMaster is pushing.
I just can’t see that happening for one second.
McMaster’s book was a wake up call for me too. I was so angry when I put it down.
Then I read McNamara’s “In retrospect” and became even incensed.
I have collected many books on the subject. That war haunts me to this day, as so many of us were affected by it.
Yeas, it was “around for days”, sitting in Maggie Halberman’s round file, not to be seen by the public.
Cernovich broke the story. Period. The next day, lots of msm outfits suddenly knew about it. Equivalent of Drudge and Lewinsky.
He also was the first to report we were attacking Syria that night.
He’s got sources.
You work for the NY Times? You sound like a msm shill - only they can report the ‘news’
Don’t know if this is true. Pretty thin on evidence.
However, it would be consistent with the theme of his book “Dereliction of Duty” about the failure of the joint chiefs, LBJ and MacNamara to squarely confront the reality that we either had to get out of Vietnam early (1963–64–65) or else ramp up big time early (i.e., on order of 750,000 troops, with operations in Laos/Cambodia/North Vietnam. The same reality facing is needed with regard to Syria as well, starting with a clearly specified political end-state we are after. Simply getting rid of Assad is not a clearly specified political end state.
If this article is true, the implication is that McMasters is working toward some defined political outcome as an objective. We really need to know what that is and who buys into it.
Nothing specific about military plans in dealing with Syria and Assad, as is proper. Loose lips sink ships.
But there was plenty of general blather about eliminating the use of chemical weapons, needing to deal with the atrocities, the civil war & Assad, coalition forming, combating ISIS & terrorists in the region, etc.
I was listening for indications about sending more troops, planes, ships, special ops forces OR PREFERABLY assurances that the president will not allow us to get into regime change & nation building.
There was neither really but but his remarks were consistent with a mindset allowing for military escalation of involvement in the Syrian civil war. Not good.
I know my comment is about last week’s news ... but what’s with helping ISIS? No way that’s a good idea. Assad is awful but no where near as bad as ISIS.
Enough. No more throwing our boys at the evil, unstable ME. With possible exception of Israel - but as small as it is - it would probably be over run before we could get there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.