Trump's frontrunners for Pentagon job likely to share Mattis' views on Syria, Afghanistan

Fox News ^ | December 21, 2018 | Lukas Mikelionis

[familyop]

...Gen. Jack Keane and Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., are considered the frontrunners to replace Mattis...For Trump to nominate Keane, however, he would have to swallow Keane’s hawkish stance...and his recent criticism of the move to pull out of Syria, which the retired general called a “huge strategic mistake." “Clearly, we're repeating the Obama mistake of premature withdrawal, which got us ISIS,” Keane said on Fox News’ “America's Newsroom” on Thursday. “In my judgment, we need to stick to it and finish the job,” Keane added, noting that the withdrawal of American troops will give “a victory of strategic proportions” to the Iranian regime.

[familyop]

"Look, generals are soldiers. Ultimately, to a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. This is not bad, just reality. That’s why you have a department of STATE too. Even the pacifistic Jefferson had to send our ENTIRE armed forces to Tripoli to beat the crap out of the pirates.

But they don’t have to stay there. I’m even in favor of greatly reducing—though not removing-—the number of bases in Germany."

Well said. If what you say about Germany were our policy, though, I would rather bring them all home. There's no reason to leave such a small number in those sweet Germany tours without having all assets in all needed places. A lesser number of those vacationing golfers in Germany without men and materiel in quite a few other places would be run over like a rug.

And those of us in favor of containing expansionism can't change the minds of those who want to believe that no nations are building up to attack us first. It's obvious, that our nation doesn't have a will to fight. It was that way before both world wars, and it's much more like that now.

There eventually comes a time, when men like myself should take a break from political discussions about foreign relations, take care of ourselves and our families, and let consequences develop and happen. Will I do that now? I don't know. We'll see.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Israel has been blowing up every Iranian base, depot, observation station, barracks, and anti-aircraft installion in Syria that they could find. I'm more that happy to leave the Iran/Syria problem to them."

You're just plain wrong. There is a pipeline of rockets going to Hezbollah from Iran through Syria now. They are now shipping them higher precision guidance systems as well. If we leave you are right though, I fear that if Iran continues to stay in Syria that Israel would have no other choice than a full scale invasion similar to ones conducted in 1982 and 2006 into Lebanon. That would throw more chaos into the Middle East, not less.

[Alberta's Child]

Can you please tell me exactly what compelling national interest the U.S. has in occupying part of Syria?

And please don't get me started in "national defense experts." Are these the same experts who predicted that the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms? Are these the same experts who keep a straight face when they talk about a "War on Terror" even while the U.S. is supporting factions in the Middle East that topple governments and then establish new ones where Islam is enshrined as the official state religion?

If Trump is going to listen to these so-called "experts" after they've botched these things for years, then he may as well nominate Bill Kristol to be his Secretary of State.

Any "national defense expert" who doesn't believe that securing our border is the single most important national defense priority of our government is a fraud.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Who they are not going to be ruled by is Americans."

Please share my post that I said I want America to rule anyone? However, if we want to continue to have allies in the region and influence in the region we will keep a presence there. Remember, power abhors a vacuum. If we left, guaranteed someone else would step in and you would not like the consequences.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Can you please tell me exactly what compelling national interest the U.S. has in occupying part of Syria?"

Sure, I'll give you three objectives that need to be accomplished. I've said them before, but it bears repeating.

1. Complete the destruction of ISIS by supporting our Kurdish allies in wiping out their last small stronghold around the Euphrates River.

2. Ensure that Iranian troops leave Syria.

3. Support our Kurdish allies by ensuring that Turkey pulls out of Northern Syria and leaves the Kurds alone.

Now, I get to ask you a question. Why does it bother you and others that we keep 2000 American troops in Syria to secure our National Interests? They are not in any immediate danger, they are not getting killed and they will only be pulling back to Kuwait or Iraq, not coming home. They are on deployment.

"Any "national defense expert" who doesn't believe that securing our border is the single most important national defense priority of our government is a fraud."

You can hold both beliefs you know. Secure our border and not pull out of Syria.

[Alberta's Child]

All of these are worthy of discussion. I’m heading out to a meeting but I promise I’ll respond at length when I am back at my desk later today.

[Trumpisourlastchance]

Pick me, I’m available. I totally support President Trump’s decisions & I will be happy to implement them.

My dad served in Korea :-)

[Old Teufel Hunden]

" I’m heading out to a meeting but I promise I’ll respond at length when I am back at my desk later today."

I look forward to it. I like a vigorous, honest debate. What I can't stand are some of the idiots on here that just want to call people names and make ignorant statements.

[familyop]

"preach on brother....

People on this site were rah, rah, rah when we tore up the Iranian nuke deal. Most were willing to give Trump space with the Khashoggi murder because Saudi is important for our Middle East plans against Iran, yet they can’t see how us pulling out of Syria takes away our leverage from constraining Iran in Syria."

Thanks. That's pretty much what I've noticed. It's like a plague of short attention spans.

[kabar]

My point was that we could still maintain a regional presence without having personnel in Syria. They could respond if we has a reconstitution of ISIS in Syria.

When I was in Vietnam, we had a presence of over 500,000. We had a similar number of personnel in Europe when I was assigned to NATO. Totally irrelevant to our discussion as is the Civil War.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"My point was that we could still maintain a regional presence without having personnel in Syria. They could respond if we has a reconstitution of ISIS in Syria."

Most of the troops in Syria are artillery and their support. The rest as I understand are grunts and their support. The artillery personnel are there for direct support in our efforts with the Kurdish allies in their assaults on ISIS. The grunts are there for security and to also train them. Yes, the Kurds know how to fight really well, but they are being trained in how to fight in a join integrated military coalition with U.S. forces. This is so if we do have to come back, we can work together with them just as if we were working with NATO partners.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"That's pretty much what I've noticed. It's like a plague of short attention spans."

Honestly, I think there are some on here that would defend President Trump no matter what he did. I love and support President Trump but he can be wrong as well. I loved President Reagan and voted for him twice. He is still the best President of my lifetime, however there were things he did I didn't agree with.

[familyop]

"Pick me, I’m available. I totally support President Trump’s decisions & I will be happy to implement them.

My dad served in Korea :-)"

Let me be your shadow advisor. If you don't like containing expansionist nations, we can make a deal. Together, we could direct him towards "whirled peas"--that is, to advise him to be touch-feely and really squooshy with those foreign leaders who have been threatening to nuke us every so often.

Meanwhile, we could advise him to indulge in the mother of all nuclear forces buildups soon followed by reacting to waves of hundreds of really awesome incoming missiles. ;-)

Oh...that's already happening, isn't it, except for the last part. [Stay tuned.]

[DesertRhino]

There is no completing the job there.

[sarge83]

You listen to the generals to a point. The joint chiefs in the Vietnam era and those of today have effed up the wars they were in and didn’t take stands they needed to take. A land war of attrition in Asia was insanity and nation building and spreading democracy in the middle east without trying to reform or eliminate islam is like pissing in the wind. If what they are saying is not in the strategic interest of the USA but in the interest of the globalist/NATO Trump needs to consider other options.

The current crop of military leaders and politicians have had us in perpetual war since 1991 in the middle east. With Reagan his use of the military was very limited, and in America’s interest.

Trump needs to go down the food chain and bring up some Ike’s, Nimitz, and Marshall’s. Rand Paul is a kook on foreign policy he swings too far too total isolationism, but mostly what is out there in the military brass go the other direction. The Post-WWII world order is dying. Trump needs someone in DOD thinking and looking forward but but not forgetting the mistakes of the past. Gingrich has possibilities, he presents big and drastic ideals but at times reverts to the status-quo.

[DesertRhino]

Listen yes. Follow their advice on tactics, yes. But generals get no seat at the table when it is time to decide IF we should be at war.
That is overstepping their bounds

[familyop]

"Well, I, for one, am not anti-defense and would never call you a chickenhawk."

Thank you.

"I hope your feelings are not hurt if that was even implied."

I don't even subscribe to the concept of self-esteem. That was drilled out of me a long time ago.

He has been our best president so far. We don't know what he'll do next but will see what happens. Maybe he's really like President Wilson on defense. Wilson "kept us out of war" (see World War 1, campaign slogan). ;-)

[faucetman]

” (most of whom have probably never stepped foot in the Middle East)”

John McCain did many times! Did that make him an “expert” we should have listened to?

My wife has been there (Middle East) Egypt, Turkey, Cyprus. Should I accept her “expert” opinion.

She did say that Egypt was a $hithole country.

[GreyFriar]

Having seen General Keane while he was the Army’s vice-chief of staff and heard him speak several times, I do trust him.

[faucetman]

“I would say Keane would be the front runner since he’s the Fox News analyst.”

He turned it down last time.