The Mattis Dilemma

Strategic Culture Foundation ^ | 27 Dec 2018 | Philip M. GIRALDI

[amorphous]

The resignation letter of Secretary of Defense James Mattis that was published last Thursday revealed much of the Deep State mindset that has produced the foreign policy catastrophes of the past seventeen years. Mattis, an active duty general in the Marine Corps who reportedly occasionally reads books, received a lot of good press during his time at Defense, sometimes being referred to as “the only adult in the room” when President Donald Trump’s national security and foreign policy team was meeting. Conveniently forgotten are Mattis comments relating to how to “Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” His sobriquet in the Corps was “Mad Dog.”

In the media firestorm that has followed upon General Mattis’s resignation, he has been generally lauded as a highly experienced and respected leader who has numerous friends on both sides of the aisle in Congress. Of course, the press coverage should be taken with a grain of salt as it is designed less to praise Mattis and more to get at Trump over the decision to leave Syria, which is being assailed by both neoliberals and neoconservatives who believe that war is the health of the state.

The arguments against the Trump decisions to depart from Syria and downsize in Afghanistan are contrived for the most part and based on the premise that American intervention in places that Washington deems not to be sufficiently promoting democracy, rule of law and free trade is a good thing. Peter Ford, former British Ambassador to Syria, put it nicely when discussing the reaction in the media: “Trump's critics…will have the vapors about 'losing ground to Russia', 'making Iran's day', and 'abdicating influence,' but their criticism is ill-founded. Contrary to their apparent belief, the US does not have a God-given right to send its forces anywhere on the planet it deems fit. Withdrawal will see the US in one respect at least follow the international rules-based system we are so fond of enjoining on others, and will therefore be a victory of sorts for upholders of international law.”

The central argument of the Mattis resignation letter that is being cited by critics relates to Washington’s relationship with the rest of the world and is framed as a failure by President Trump to understand who are friends and who are enemies. Mattis wrote

“One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies.

“Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model – gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions – to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.

“My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.”

General Mattis does indeed hold views that were shaped by four decades of experience, but most of it was bad and produced wrong conclusions about America’s place in the world. The Cold War was essentially a bi-polar conflict pitting two adversaries that had the ability to destroy all life on the planet. It generated a Manichean viewpoint on good vs. evil that did not reflect reality which was succeeded by a global war on terror declared by Washington that also exploited the good and evil paradigm. Mattis was a product of that kind of thinking, which was also fueled by the concept of American exceptionalism, which saw the United States as the proper promoter and enforcer of universal values.

There is, of course, another viewpoint, which is that American blundering and use of force as a first option has, in fact, created the current dystopia. The United States is not currently venerated as a force for good, quite the opposite. Opinion polls suggest that Washington is overwhelmingly viewed negatively worldwide and it is perceived as being the nation most likely to start wars. That is not exactly what the nation’s Founders envisioned back in 1783.

Trump is right about leaving Syria where nothing beyond prolonging the bloody conflict is being accomplished. Mattis is wrong about supporting “friends.” For an educated man, he misreads history. The First World War and Second World War developed as they did because of alliances. Countries that appear friendly can exploit relationships with other more powerful nations that will have devastating results. Alliances should be temporary, coming and going based on the interests of the nations involved. In the Middle East, Israel and Saudi Arabia are not actually friends of the United States, and are engaged instead in manipulating Washington to suit their own purposes. Mattis does not understand that and sees a permanent state of war requiring the continued existence of NATO, for example, as a vehicle for deterrence and peace. It is neither. Its very existence depends on a perception of being threatened even where no threat exists, which has poisoned the relationship with Russia since the fall of communism. Worse still, that false perception of threat can lead to war and a global nuclear holocaust.

[amorphous]

I would hope Mr. Trump considered, retired Lt. General Boykin, for SecDef. I think he would make a much better SecDef than his current candidate, the deputy assistant, a former Boeing executive.

William G. "Jerry" Boykin (born April 19, 1948) was the United States Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence under President George W. Bush from 2002 to 2007 and retired general officer. During his 36-year career in the military he spent 13 years in the Delta Force and was involved in numerous high-profile missions, including the 1980 Iran hostage rescue attempt, the 1992 hunt for Pablo Escobar in Colombia, and the Black Hawk Down incident in Mogadishu, Somalia. He is an author and teaches at Hampden–Sydney College, Virginia. He is currently executive vice president at the Family Research Council.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Boykin

Retired Lt. General on concerns over Syria withdrawal [Fox News]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGJ3Yn2P15g

[DarthVader]

Excellent choice he would be.

[robowombat]

He won’t get the job but he is actually a decent and honest man , unimpressed by K Street.

[CincyRichieRich]

sounds good to me. I would send you your suggestion to contact the White House. Yes President Trump already knows about him I’m sure however sending it to that will let him know that others are like-minded and who knows maybe if he gets enough of those it may sway his decision.

[be-baw]

“... was involved in numerous high-profile missions, including the 1980 Iran hostage rescue attempt, the 1992 hunt for Pablo Escobar in Colombia, and the Black Hawk Down incident in Mogadishu, Somalia. “

I don’t see anything there to brag about.

[familyop]

The Strategic Culture Foundation is a Russian Anti-Israel effort based in Moscow. It appears that the editor is someone by the name of Vladimir Maximenko.

[TADSLOS]

Mattis is gone. The dilemma is on the swamp rats.

[DesertRhino]

So what’s your point? You support Mattis and think we should stay in Syria?

[familyop]

Here's a sample from the Russian Strategic Culture Foundation site. Notice its praise of Giraldi below (the author of the piece posted above this thread). We don't need this trash. It's anti-American.

America’s Allies Against Russia & Iran
Strategic Culture Foundation
EDITOR'S CHOICE | 29.07.2018
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/29/america-allies-against-russia-and-iran.html
"As the anti-Jewish writer Philip Giraldi said accurately (though I think he misunderstands how the Deep State, of which he used to be an operative, actually functions), 'Defense contractors need a foe to justify their existence while congressmen need the contractors to fund their campaigns.'"

[Revolutionary]

Need someone that will uphold all the guilty verdicts from the coming military tribunals.

[DesertRhino]

All of that is interesting, but what in the article did you disagree with? Like Mattis, do you think alliances define America and that America is made safer by our alliances?

I refer you to NATO. They have stuck us with the bill, and we provide almost all the combat power. And the whole thing is designed to protect Europe. How does NATO make America more secure?

I refer you to the five eyes, an illegal alliance created by the Dulles crew to get around the clear intent of US law against domestic spying on US citizens. The five eyes lets Brits and Aussies spy on Americans and then turn over the data to the CIA. The CIA then claims it was goven to them by a foreign source. Recently the 5 eyes heavily intervened in the 2016 election and tried to prevent Trump from being sworn in.
Do the five eyes make America more secure?

Saudi Arabia is an “ally”. They funded and gave us 9/11 and ISIS. KSA has built 900 new wahabbist mosques in America since 9/11 and wanted to build one at ground zero. They have wormed their men into powerful US positions and have bribed half of Congress. With zero legal standing from Congress, we are fighting with them in their sectarian war in Yemen.
Does a Saudi “alliance” make America safer?

Basically, the article makes a good case. I have seen nothing from you to refute the article, except ad hominem towards the writer.

[lewislynn]

I don’t see anything there to brag about.

I don't either including this:

William G. "Jerry" Boykin (born April 19, 1948) was the United States Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence under President George W. Bush

[amorphous]

We don't need this trash. It's anti-American.

Oh brother...like folks on FR aren't unable to dissect opinion pieces for themselves. Guess we should all just depend upon you, or the MSM, to pick and choose what we should read, huh, Mao.

First:

© 2010 - 2018 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture on-line journal www.strategic-culture.org. The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

Second:

Your example in justifying your claim is the work of a different author. And even if it was the "editor's pick", it has nothing to do with the piece I posted.

The author of the piece I posted, is:

Philip M. GIRALDI

Ph.D., Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.

MISSION

CNI seeks to encourage and promote a U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East that is consistent with American values, protects our national interests, and contributes to a just solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is CNI’s goal to restore a political environment in America in which voters and their elected officials are free from the undue influence and pressure of foreign countries and their partisans.

The Council for the National Interest Foundation (CNIF) is an independent 501(c)3 non-profit organization that provides information and analysis on the Middle East, its relationship to the United States, and about policy formation regarding this region. Its primary focus is on Israel-Palestine. All donations to CNIF are fully tax deductible.

The Council for the National Interest (CNI) is a 501 (c) 4 non-profit, non-partisan organization that advocates for Middle East policies that serve the national interest; that represent the highest values of our founders and our citizens; and that work to sustain a nation of honor, decency, security, and prosperity. Donations to CNI are used in political lobbying efforts; they are not tax deductible.

It's baseless comments like yours we could do without, FRiend.

[amorphous]

I don’t see anything there to brag about.

Iran was a Carter operation

Mogadishu was a Clinton operation

You should carefully research each, before placing blame.

Boykin has been on the front lines of the battle against radical Muslims for a quarter of a century, ever since Islamic revolutionaries seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took Americans hostage. He was one of the Delta Force commandos who went in to rescue them. The mission ended in failure on a remote desert airstrip when a helicopter ran into a transport plane full of soldiers.

"It was a huge ball of fire. They could not survive," recalls Boykin.

It was a disaster military, but in Boykin's telling, it was also a miracle: "That aircraft was going to explode any moment. But as I prayed in the name of Jesus, the door of that aircraft opened and through those flames came 45 men running just as hard as they could."

That's not just a war story that gets better with each retelling. It's exactly what happened. Logan Fitch was one of soldiers trapped in the back of the plane.

"I could see the flames and the fire and the sparks advancing from the front to the back of the aircraft, inside the aircraft," says Fitch.

Does Fitch view that as a miracle, that everyone got out of there without any burns?

"These are some amazing guys," says Fitch. "If I had to attribute it to anything, I would attribute it to the self -- the training and the self confidence and the cool actions of all of us."

Boykin says that when he saw the helicopter go into the plane and saw the fire start, he looked up and said, "In the name of Jesus, spare these men." He believes that his prayer was answered.

"Well, it was," says Fitch. "Whether it's directly attributable to that prayer, I don't know."

Boykin's message, repeated again and again, is that prayer saves American lives. For example, some of his men walked away from a horrific helicopter crash that was captured on home video during the invasion of Grenada in 1983.

But then came the 1993 firefight in Mogadishu, made famous by the film "Black Hawk Down." At that time, Boykin was the commander of Delta Force. He lost 16 of his men; many more were wounded.

"We brought a truck outta that city and brought it back home to that air field. A 5-ton truck, and we had it stacked with bodies, dead and wounded," said Boykin in a speech. "My soldiers. And we dropped the tail on that truck and the blood poured out the back of it, like water."

The next day, Boykin survived a mortar round, which killed one of his men and left another bleeding to death. Boykin prayed over the dying soldier. "There was no pulse. There was no pressure. But I prayed to almighty God, spare him," said Boykin in his speech. "Today, he practices medicine in the Shenandoah Valley with four children."

That dying soldier was Rob Marsh, who served as Delta's battle surgeon. "I required 17 units of blood and it's, normally there are 15 units in a body," recalls Marsh. "If things hadn't happened the right way, I shouldn't be here right now. I think the skill of the surgeon, the blood, you know, and God's will, I'm here."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-holy-warrior/

[DesertRhino]

Boykin is a true American hero. And he does not brook this PC pro-islam crap. Nothing at all wrong with him.

[amorphous]

Boykin is a true American hero.

Absolutely. I wish we had more like him.

[amorphous]

P.S.

I'm actually in favor of President Trump's decision to move our troopers out of Syria - contrary to both the article and Boykin's opinion (see linked Fox interview).

If I were POTUS, I'd want someone like Boykin/Mathis to provide me with their opinion, especially if they differed.

I imagine President Trump has taken the necessary steps to remediate the negatives. Time will tell if he made the right call.

Things are going from bad to worse in the Middle East. I'm not too sure northern Syria is the place to be, for our forces, if SHTF, but that's just my opinion based on a gut feeling, and no intelligence, but faith in POTUS to make the right call.

[amorphous]

I'm actually in favor of President Trump's decision to move our troopers out of Syria - contrary to both the article Mathis' and Boykin's opinion (see linked Fox interview).

Grr....late, time for bed.

[be-baw]

I didn’t blame anybody. But I do question what involvement he had in those three operations, two of which were disastrous. What is there to brag about with your involvement in failed operations?

[hopespringseternal]

Lost me when he started the leftist blame America rant. Next!