Trump understands that foreign crises or even war are the way to divert from domestic problems, so will keep war-monger Bolton around so he can egg Trump on. Other than Bolton, who are Trump’s top foreign policy advisors? Kushner, Hannity and Putin? Any others? Stephen Miller?? Does Trump still look to Steve Bannon for guidance?
Kushner is way past his Peter Principle ceiling and, at best, can be trusted to relay the wishes of two MidEast tyrants: Netanyahu and MBS al-Saud. Hannity will say whatever will leave him in Trump’s good graces.
This leaves Putin as the key foreign policy adviser. I expect Trump to pretty much do Putin’s bidding. Putin will deploy his asset carefully: he doesn’t want the asset to become ineffective from excessive ridicule.
Last I checked, the DOW was down almost 700 points today as a result of the trade war with China. What is Trump willing to do to distract the nation if the markets/economy keep going backwards? War with Iran seems pretty high up the list- the GOP ignorami will be easily led, as usual, into accepting the necessity of a million + casualties, all to protect the fragile ego of the Orange Ignoramus.
I infer from the fact that 61% of active military personnel voted for Trump that the “vast majority” of voters in the military are (or were in 2016) Trump supporters, ergo Trump supporters do volunteer for military service. Not sure where you are getting your stats…
I suppose he’s making the point that only a relatively small % of our population serve in the military. but the same sort of accusation could be made against, for example, Democrats:
"Of course, the vast majority of [Obama] supporters haven’t and don’t intend to volunteer for the military, so many of them won’t have any qualms about " fighting in Libya, or Somalia, or Syria, Yemen, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan.
Looked at in that light, it (iiandyiii’s lame chickenhawk-ish argument) loses most of its relevance.
I understand that many Americans really don’t have qualms about sending others to die in wars, even wars with little or no purpose, but a pet peeve of mine is young-ish, hale-bodied Americans advocating, celebrating, and/or justifying wars in which they have no intention to involve themselves and put themselves at risk. It’s quite reasonable to criticize such cowardice, common as it is.
Provoking or even entertaining war with Iran absent some very significant casus bellie would be incredibly foolish and terrible.
That being said, nevermore has your employ of the word “reasonable” been more on display as wholly without meaning. Whether or not a country and its populace is willing to go to war should be based on the underlying risks, rewards, rationales, and causes. Almost no where in the calculus is whether any individual person has enlisted or is planning to enlist. Expressing an opinion on whether any particular military action is justifiable doesn’t suddenly transform from bravery to cowardice hinging on the speaker’s military service.
Sure it’s reasonable. If you (the general “you”) think young people should be put at risk of death for some purpose, but not yourself, when you’re perfectly able to do so, then you’re being cowardly. It’s as simple of that. Sure, it’s quite common, but it’s still cowardly. You are free to have a different definition of cowardice, if you like.
And it doesn’t conflict with the notion (which I agree with) that “Whether or not a country and its populace is willing to go to war should be based on the underlying risks, rewards, rationales, and causes.” Yes, that is the basis on which we should decide to go to war. And if you’re able but not willing to join the war that you are supporting on that basis, then you are a gutless coward, barring a few unusual circumstances (i.e. you’re the sole caregiver for your children, you’re irreplaceable in some sort of critical public service work [and the bar for this would be very high], etc.).
Until I turn 50 or so, or have some medical condition that would render me incapable of serving, or find myself as the sole caregiver for children, I will not support or advocate for any military action that puts young Americans at risk unless I plan to return to service and join them. If we were severely attacked, unprovoked, by one of our adversaries, I would attempt to rejoin the Navy, because I would probably feel that war was appropriate in those circumstances. To do otherwise would be cowardice, in my view.
My view of cowardice and duty may not be terribly common, and of course you are free to disagree with them, but that you disagree doesn’t make them unreasonable.
I was neither consulted nor informed beforehand. Had I been, I would have gladly volunteered, not that the Navy could have used any of my skills in that instance.
What about you? Do you plan to volunteer to serve if Trump gets us into war with Venezuela or Iran?
I infer from the fact that 61% of active military personnel voted for Trump that the “vast majority” of voters in the military are (or were in 2016) Trump supporters, ergo Trump supporters do volunteer for military service. Not sure where you are getting your stats…