Tag Archives: Mattis

Do no harm?

Former secretary of defense under Donald Trump James Mattis has a book out, so he’s making the rounds of all the talk shows, talking about leadership, acting as though his reluctance to criticize the president is somehow rooted in personal integrity. What he won’t talk about on the book tour is how his “leadership” responded to policies that any person of average integrity would take issue with. Mattis sat still when Trump started banning Muslims from entering the country. He said nothing when Trump began separating children from their parents at our southern border and putting them in cages. He was silent as Trump praised white supremacists as “good people” in the wake of Charlottesville. When did he finally throw in the towel? When Trump decided to remove troops from Syria. That tells you much of what you need to know about Mattis.

Steve Inskeep’s fawning interview on NPR had few high points. Somehow Mattis saw fit to claim:

“From a Roman general, I used no better friend, no worse enemy. We were going in to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam. We were not going in to dominate them. I didn’t want triumphalism. I wanted to go in with a sense of first do no harm.”

First do no harm? Seriously? He has a funny way of showing it. One of Mattis’s bragging points was always his pivotal role in the various battles of Fallujah, a bloody massacre in which the U.S. military’s first act was to commandeer the city hospital. It’s kind of ridiculous to refer to such operations as “battles”, when the enemy they are fighting are so outgunned. In any case, the Iraqi casualties in Fallujah were so high that the city was left out of the Johns Hopkins study of Iraqi deaths caused by the 2003 invasion because they felt it would skew the numbers. That study, first published in 2005 I believe, numbered Iraqi deaths at more than 500,000 as a result of the war. It was revised later to something like 650,000. Do no harm?

Mr. Kindness himself.

The example he gives of a young officer choosing not to shoot up a building in Baghdad in order to spare civilians sounds apocryphal in light of the stories that have come out of that war. Robert Fisk described the U.S. tank shell that destroyed the building that housed Reuters journalists, among others. That was more along the lines of common practice, frankly. The U.S. military doesn’t exactly walk around on tip-toe. How any senior commanding officer attached to this atrocity can have the gall to speak proudly about his humanity in the context of imperial war is beyond me.

Save your leadership lessons, mad dog. You lost all credibility the moment you signed on to the criminal enterprise that was the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

luv u,

jp

Picking your friends.

I suppose I may as well work the same furrow as the mainstream media does and talk about President Elect Trump’s cabinet choices. It’s a bit like drinking urine, but here goes.

One more general and we get a free coup d'etat!The list thus far seems custom designed to irritate centrists and liberals. That’s only to be expected, right? People who didn’t support Trump, people who said bad things about him, people who worked for his opponent – their attitude is, well, fuck those people. And since they have no philosophical commitment to making government work effectively, the vengeance factor is of greater relative importance than it might otherwise be. Still, it is pretty stunning to see them assemble such a wrecking crew. We knew that a Republican win would mean hitting the ground running in January, and it looks like that’s going to be the case.

So what the hell – Trump has hired three generals so far: Flynn, Mattis, and Kelly, in order of crazy (most to least). Mattis seems problematic in that one might prefer overtly civilian control of the Pentagon, but then there’s putting General Kelly in charge of Homeland Security. So military control of the Pentagon and domestic security policy? Sheesh. (Don’t get me started about Flynn …. that man should be in a straitjacket.) There are also several billionaires under consideration, as well as a couple of financial crisis profiteers, most notably Mnuchin, who cleaned up on the purchase and re-sale of IndyMac, playing a prominent role in robo-signing mortgage foreclosures in between.

But I think the overriding theme is “opposite day”: putting people in charge of federal departments towards which they are either actively hostile or blissfully indifferent. Putting Dr. Carson in charge of HUD is just a case of appointing a functional incompetent to run a complex agency. Making Scott Pruitt head of the EPA is just a sick joke – that sounds like a Pence choice to me, but I’m guessing. Same with Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary. It seems like the charge of each of these ass-clowns is to destroy the thing they’ve been hired to run, and I’m certain they will be successful.

Hey, nobody said it was going to be easy. And if anybody thought Trump might be inclined to throw the other side a bone for the sake of national “healing”, they must surely be disabused of that notion by now.

luv u,

jp