Trump goes after retired Admiral McRaven again

[Sir Mohamed]

The narcissist-in-chief strikes again.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

USA Today

[Intell]

So he gets a 1% approval rise because of this?

[Sir Mohamed]

And 46 minus 1 continues his rant on Twitter, again spinning the ridiculous myth that it was on Bill Clinton why OBL hasn't been taken out before 9/11. This claim has been debunked for a while, most natably by Richard Clarke (intersting material from a 2006 Fox News interview: Part 1, Part 2).

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1064540462848098304

[Santander]

I approve this message.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I approve this message.

[UncleSam]

We should’ve gotten him during the Clinton years and it’s insane that we have paid any money to Pakistan ever, but that has nothing to do with Admiral McRaven. McRaven was given a task and took down OBL when told to, full stop. It’s wrong of Trump to pretend that that wasn’t a great achievement simply because OBL should’ve been captured earlier and McRaven isn’t a big fan of his.

[Badger]

I approve this message.

Santander's trolling. You truly don't know better.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Trump should be charged for spreading conspiracies like this.

[ProudModerate2]

And yet many in the military will still treat him like a God.
(Though his approval in the military is slowly slipping, and hopefully this will add to greater disapproval among our Armed Forces.)

[KingSweden]

We should’ve gotten him during the Clinton years and it’s insane that we have paid any money to Pakistan ever, but that has nothing to do with Admiral McRaven. McRaven was given a task and took down OBL when told to, full stop. It’s wrong of Trump to pretend that that wasn’t a great achievement simply because OBL should’ve been captured earlier and McRaven isn’t a big fan of his.

^^^

[President Johnson]

Little Donny goes after anyone who criticizes him because of very thin skin. Admiral McRaven would make a fine National Security Advisor for any future president who is somewhat sane.

[Badger]

Little Donny goes after anyone who criticizes him because of very thin skin. Admiral McRaven would make a fine National Security Advisor for any future president who is somewhat sane.

[Progressive Pessimist]

But when four-star General John Kelly gets criticized it's disrespectful. Yet more hypocrisy from the Trump administration, and yet more disrespect for members of the military that he claims to love so much.

[Tartarus Sauce]

The more noble your actions, the more likely Trump is to search for incredibly petty reasons to dismiss you if you don't worship the ground he walks on. He's jealous when people that command respect don't kiss his ring.

It's moments like this where his supporters come across as just as petty as him through their unwavering commitment to him, if not outright approval for these types of outbursts. If you can't bring yourself to disown narcissistic temper tantrums, I don't know why one would expect to be taken seriously by non-narcissistic individuals.

[Joe Republic]

McRaven’s not a war hero.  He’s a war hero because he was a capturer.  I like people who weren’t capturers.

[pbrower2a]

We should’ve gotten him during the Clinton years and it’s insane that we have paid any money to Pakistan ever, but that has nothing to do with Admiral McRaven. McRaven was given a task and took down OBL when told to, full stop. It’s wrong of Trump to pretend that that wasn’t a great achievement simply because OBL should’ve been captured earlier and McRaven isn’t a big fan of his.

We got into war in Afghanistan against the Taliban because the Taliban was harboring him. bin Laden slipped out.

There are two possible ways to 'get' him, at least in theory. One was to capture him and bring him to the United States for prosecution. The other was to kill him.  The first was going to be far more difficult even if it had more satisfaction to offer: trial for genocide, a nearly-sure conviction (probably with Rudy Giuliani coming out of retirement to prosecute him), and execution. Satisfying as it might have been, it would have put American soldiers at far greater risk than what Admiral McRaven did: simply kill him.

Obama would do what he did best: a diplomatic effort to get Pakistan to turn him over or to facilitate his arrest. The Pakistani government claimed that the terrorist mastermind was not in Pakistan, so Obama used the pretext that if Osama bin Laden allegedly was not in Pakistan he could be killed there. Obama had left the rest to the CIA and the military -- for the CIA to track him down and find a good time for killing him, and the military would do the kill. We know the rest. Seal Team Six did an underworld-style hit on Osama bin Laden, the only way to dispatch him that involved too many risks. Terrorist activity worldwide slowed greatly.

The President did his job (diplomacy, which he does well), the CIA did its job, and Seal Team Six did its job. The President saw the plan, recognized risks and consequences of both success and failure, saw the plan as the best one available, and signed off. He gave credit where it was due (CIA and military) and gave it the best optics possible.

Once one is a retired senior officer one is free to judge the competency of civilian leadership. Obama may not have been excellent at military procurement as the typical right-wing President, but he did well with what was available. I can excoriate Donald Trump from the Right (character flaws and pointless violations of American tradition) as well as from the Left. I concur with the retired Admiral.

Trump has Obama derangement syndrome nearly two years into his Presidency. Guess who looks better now? The Trump obsession with Obama is simply sick. 

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

What exactly is so outrageous about the president criticizing openly political retired generals?

That his "criticism" is a slew of lies with a helping of conspiracy theory.

Please do not normalize Little Donny's democracy-destroying tantrums.

[The Dowager Mod]

He's a bully and a coward, so he attacks those who are real heroes unless they kiss his ass.

[Tartarus Sauce]

What exactly is so outrageous about the president criticizing openly political retired generals?

It is ridiculous to insist that the only acceptable response to a former four-star officer is to nod sagely while thanking them for however many years of service.

And that's not even getting into McRaven's hypocrisy. How can anyone credibly claim to be disturbed by Trump while professing himself "a big fan" of George W. Bush, a president whose hostility toward the media was at least as intense, if not as theatrical, as Trump's?

Moreover, the entire response moves the conversation away from McRaven's substantive concerns and back toward the court drama with which Trump and the political media alike are more comfortable.

Because his criticisms were flat out retarded. They were barely relevant and were the types of dismissals only a narcissist would find satisfactory.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Because his criticisms were flat out retarded. They were barely relevant and were the types of dismissals only a narcissist would find satisfactory.

Not true at all. Whatever your personal take on this is, most of the discussion in this thread and most media coverage focuses on the fact of his criticism, not its content. It doesn't amount to much more than "disrespectful imo."

Similarly, you seem to be letting your personal takes on the media coverage and public discussion override the actual substance of what he said. It was narcissism 101.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

On the level of rhetoric, few notions are so antithetical to democracy as the idea that no ill must be spoken of retired military officers who wade into politics.

It's amazing. We're told that liberal democracy is under threat because of Trump's buffoonery by the same very serious people who, in their next breath, imply that certain figures are "heroes" with judgment beyond reproach.

These people don't care about democracy or human rights. What did McRaven do when the Bush administration of which he is "a big fan" was not just "normalizing" torture, but actually torturing people? Their problem with Trump is that he's a fat, illiterate, obnoxious lower-class slob. It's not about what he does, it's that he makes them feel bad.

On the contrary, it is very much about what he does. Within the last month wanna-be Dictator Don has:

deployed the military donestically as a political stunt

attempted to dictate election results in defiance of the law

illegally appointed an Acting Attorney General for the implied purpose of obstructing an investigation into his crimes

tried to override existing asylum law via executive order


There are more examples than I can readily list.

I am no fan of the lightly amoral technocracy that the pre-Mango Moron status quo represented, but I am appalled that anyone could think the destructive petty fascism of the modern GOP is in any way preferable. Trump threatens democracy not because he is a clown, but because he is also an arsonist.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

He's just boosting Pence's successor as VP.

[ProudModerate2]

... It's amazing. We're told that liberal democracy is under threat because of Trump's buffoonery by the same very serious people who, in their next breath, imply that certain figures are "heroes" with judgment beyond reproach. ...

It was trump that tried to define the word "hero" with his attachment of this word to those soldiers who "were not captured." So if you want to blame someone for this entire "hero" or not hero nonsense (in the media, here on Atlas, etc), then go to the Buffoon-In-Chief with his great "judgment" on the matter.

[Badger]

What exactly is so outrageous about the president criticizing openly political retired generals?

That his "criticism" is a slew of lies with a helping of conspiracy theory.

Please do not normalize Little Donny's democracy-destroying tantrums.

This x 100.

[I Can Now Die Happy]

The Don adhered to a simple but practical rule. Talk **** get hit. Good for him.

McRaven is a cool name though.