I see the ladies in pink are in attendance.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?42134...es-mattis-testifies-confirmation-hearing&live
https://www.c-span.org/video/?42134...es-mattis-testifies-confirmation-hearing&live
General James Mattis Confirmation Hearing on Now
- Thread starter Mixin
- Start date
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
Mattis is the most intelligent person within a 100 mile radius.
night driver
ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
"The Conflicts of Interest of James Mattis"
No general gets four stars without at least a few of them
by KEVIN KNODELL
(From War Is Boring staff: https://warisboring.com/the-conflic...c_cid=6461ade9ff&mc_eid=6a5037de07#.srdaienwg )
(visit the link. Pics and links internal)
ames “Chaos” Mattis is on his way to becoming the Trump Administration’s new Secretary of Defense. He’s widely celebrated as a man of humble roots with a reputation as a Marine’s Marine who puts troops over politics.
However, he is a retired four star general. Being a general is an inherently political job that requires regular interaction with people with political and business interests.
These connections sometimes follow people.
Mattis was a larger than life figure during his military service. He’s widely celebrated for his sometimes blunt manner of speaking about combat and war.
“Be polite, be professional and have a plan to kill everyone you meet,” is perhaps one of his best known “Mattisisms.”
He comes from the small town of Richland in eastern Washington state, which he officially lists as his residence since retiring from the Marine Corps. Though he’s lately spent much of his time at the Hoover Institute at Stanford, he still makes his rounds at Richland’s local VFW when he visits and sits on the board of the local food bank.
He even flew out for jury duty in November 2016. He’s said that if not called to government service, he’d rather be fishing in the Columbia River.
Then U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Amos greets retired Gen. James Mattis during a reception. Marine Corps photo
But Mattis is in many ways an odd fit for the Trump administration. During the election, he criticized the president-elect’s campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the county, arguing it made it appear as though America had “lost faith in reason.”
The retired Marine is a strong advocate of NATO and waged a long campaign to halt torture. He’s also reportedly clashed with Trump transition officials over his prospective Pentagon staff.
He is celebrated for his independence. But Mattis spent a long time working with and around politically connected people. It’s nearly impossible to come out of that without a potential conflict of interest or two. For instance, Mattis technically hasn’t been out of uniform long enough to take the secretary of defense job.
For Congress to even officially consider him, Mattis needs to get around post-World War II laws aimed at ensuring civilian control of the military. On Jan. 11, 2017, the Trump transition team apparently made the sudden decision not to let Mattis take part in one of two Congressional hearings to discuss this waiver and his nomination — which lawmakers had scheduled for Jan. 12, 2017.
On top of that, it’s not uncommon for retiring military brass to use the so called “revolving door” when exiting the service to gain lucrative positions in the private sector. These job offers often come from companies the officers were once supposed to scrutinize and oversee while in uniform.
For instance, former Marine Corps Commandant James Amos joined the board of the LORD Corporation shortly after retirement. This company makes parts for the controversial Osprey aicraft, which the retired general long championed while on active duty.
Mattis has a reputation for disdaining political hacks and lobbyists. Nevertheless, he’s well connected — and that benefited him well in his post-military career.
Just five months after retiring from the Marine Corps, Mattis joined the board of General Dynamics and received about $1 million in compensation by 2017. Under ethics laws, the retired officer would not only have to personally divest from General Dynamics, he could have to recuse himself from all deals involving the company for a year or more.
That could pose a challenge. General Dynamics is the fifth largest defense supplier. In 2015 alone, the Pentagon gave the firm roughly $10 billion in contracts.
The Virginia-headquartered company brought us the M-1 Abrams tank, Stryker fighting vehicle and countless other major weapons. Its dealings with the Pentagon are frequent and significant.
And after Trump’s election victory, the contractor seemed poised to try to capitalize on the president-elect’s pledge to expand the U.S. Navy. The conglomerate’s shipbuilding arm builds Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Virginia-class nuclear submarines.
Mattis jokes with retired Sgt. Maj. of the Marine Corps Carlton Kent during an award ceremony in 2014. U.S. Marine Corps photo
However, even if Mattis divests his holdings and agrees to recuse himself from dealings for a time, there might still be ethics problems. According to General Dynamics’ most recent proxy statement, Mattis’ brother is an employee of one of the company’s subsidiaries, a potentially persistent conflict of interest throughout his prospective tenure at the Pentagon.
In addition, there is Mattis’ decision to join the board of the controversial blood-testing company Theranos. While on active duty, Mattis worked closely with the company.
At the time, Theranos was a Silicon Valley phenomenon that promised to revolutionize blood-testing, making it faster and more reliable. The company’s quick rise — aided by its politically connected executives — has since been the subject of scandal for a series of botched test results and a litany of concerns about poor standards and non-compliance with regulations.
Mattis first met Theranos head Elizabeth Holmes in 2011 at a Marine Memorial. While chief of U.S. Central Command, he made a personal point of pressing the U.S. Army to procure the company’s equipment for use in Afghanistan.
An Army health unit eventually halted the deal when Theranos did not meet the service’s specifications. Due to Mattis’ involvement, medical staff felt “caught in the middle of something that feels quite political” and there seemed to be “an intentional effort to short-cut a variety of processes necessary prior to fielding,” U.S. Army Col. Kent Kester wrote in an e-mail at the time.
As Mattis prepared to leave the Marine Corps, he sought an ethics opinion concerning potential future employment with Theranos. His counsel cautioned him against it.
“We are concerned that Mattis chose to join the company’s board anyway,” the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington, D.C. non-profit that monitors defense spending, noted in a letter to Sens. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, and Jack Reed, a Democrat representing Rhode Island.
“While not an explicit violation of the legal opinion, it certainly appears to violate the spirit of the ethical advice he received,” the note continued. “Although Mattis has already stepped down from Theranos’s board, we hope the [Senate Armed Services] Committee’s confirmation hearing will evaluate his thinking on his involvement in this matter.”
Beyond potential conflicts of interest and business deals, Mattis could also face questions during any confirmation process about his role in an incident that involved the death of an American soldier and Afghan allies during the early days of the war in Afghanistan.
Shortly after the Trump transition team announced Mattis as their pick for the top defense job, retired Army Green Beret Jason Amerine wrote a visceral Facebook post. Amerine — a widely respected special ops veteran — asserted that the general’s decision to delay rescue aircraft might have led to the deaths of Army Staff Sgt. Brian Cody Prosser and at least two Afghans after they were wounded in an explosion outside of Kandahar.
“He was indecisive and betrayed his duty to us, leaving my men to die during the golden hour when he could have reached us,” Amerine alleged.
Mattis may be a celebrated warrior scholar, but as he moves toward taking his new civilian job, there’s bound to be more scrutiny and questions. Only time will tell whether the retired officer’s responses are as blunt, yet eloquent as his famous maxims.
No general gets four stars without at least a few of them
by KEVIN KNODELL
(From War Is Boring staff: https://warisboring.com/the-conflic...c_cid=6461ade9ff&mc_eid=6a5037de07#.srdaienwg )
(visit the link. Pics and links internal)
ames “Chaos” Mattis is on his way to becoming the Trump Administration’s new Secretary of Defense. He’s widely celebrated as a man of humble roots with a reputation as a Marine’s Marine who puts troops over politics.
However, he is a retired four star general. Being a general is an inherently political job that requires regular interaction with people with political and business interests.
These connections sometimes follow people.
Mattis was a larger than life figure during his military service. He’s widely celebrated for his sometimes blunt manner of speaking about combat and war.
“Be polite, be professional and have a plan to kill everyone you meet,” is perhaps one of his best known “Mattisisms.”
He comes from the small town of Richland in eastern Washington state, which he officially lists as his residence since retiring from the Marine Corps. Though he’s lately spent much of his time at the Hoover Institute at Stanford, he still makes his rounds at Richland’s local VFW when he visits and sits on the board of the local food bank.
He even flew out for jury duty in November 2016. He’s said that if not called to government service, he’d rather be fishing in the Columbia River.
Then U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Amos greets retired Gen. James Mattis during a reception. Marine Corps photo
But Mattis is in many ways an odd fit for the Trump administration. During the election, he criticized the president-elect’s campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the county, arguing it made it appear as though America had “lost faith in reason.”
The retired Marine is a strong advocate of NATO and waged a long campaign to halt torture. He’s also reportedly clashed with Trump transition officials over his prospective Pentagon staff.
He is celebrated for his independence. But Mattis spent a long time working with and around politically connected people. It’s nearly impossible to come out of that without a potential conflict of interest or two. For instance, Mattis technically hasn’t been out of uniform long enough to take the secretary of defense job.
For Congress to even officially consider him, Mattis needs to get around post-World War II laws aimed at ensuring civilian control of the military. On Jan. 11, 2017, the Trump transition team apparently made the sudden decision not to let Mattis take part in one of two Congressional hearings to discuss this waiver and his nomination — which lawmakers had scheduled for Jan. 12, 2017.
On top of that, it’s not uncommon for retiring military brass to use the so called “revolving door” when exiting the service to gain lucrative positions in the private sector. These job offers often come from companies the officers were once supposed to scrutinize and oversee while in uniform.
For instance, former Marine Corps Commandant James Amos joined the board of the LORD Corporation shortly after retirement. This company makes parts for the controversial Osprey aicraft, which the retired general long championed while on active duty.
Mattis has a reputation for disdaining political hacks and lobbyists. Nevertheless, he’s well connected — and that benefited him well in his post-military career.
Just five months after retiring from the Marine Corps, Mattis joined the board of General Dynamics and received about $1 million in compensation by 2017. Under ethics laws, the retired officer would not only have to personally divest from General Dynamics, he could have to recuse himself from all deals involving the company for a year or more.
That could pose a challenge. General Dynamics is the fifth largest defense supplier. In 2015 alone, the Pentagon gave the firm roughly $10 billion in contracts.
The Virginia-headquartered company brought us the M-1 Abrams tank, Stryker fighting vehicle and countless other major weapons. Its dealings with the Pentagon are frequent and significant.
And after Trump’s election victory, the contractor seemed poised to try to capitalize on the president-elect’s pledge to expand the U.S. Navy. The conglomerate’s shipbuilding arm builds Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Virginia-class nuclear submarines.
Mattis jokes with retired Sgt. Maj. of the Marine Corps Carlton Kent during an award ceremony in 2014. U.S. Marine Corps photo
However, even if Mattis divests his holdings and agrees to recuse himself from dealings for a time, there might still be ethics problems. According to General Dynamics’ most recent proxy statement, Mattis’ brother is an employee of one of the company’s subsidiaries, a potentially persistent conflict of interest throughout his prospective tenure at the Pentagon.
In addition, there is Mattis’ decision to join the board of the controversial blood-testing company Theranos. While on active duty, Mattis worked closely with the company.
At the time, Theranos was a Silicon Valley phenomenon that promised to revolutionize blood-testing, making it faster and more reliable. The company’s quick rise — aided by its politically connected executives — has since been the subject of scandal for a series of botched test results and a litany of concerns about poor standards and non-compliance with regulations.
Mattis first met Theranos head Elizabeth Holmes in 2011 at a Marine Memorial. While chief of U.S. Central Command, he made a personal point of pressing the U.S. Army to procure the company’s equipment for use in Afghanistan.
An Army health unit eventually halted the deal when Theranos did not meet the service’s specifications. Due to Mattis’ involvement, medical staff felt “caught in the middle of something that feels quite political” and there seemed to be “an intentional effort to short-cut a variety of processes necessary prior to fielding,” U.S. Army Col. Kent Kester wrote in an e-mail at the time.
As Mattis prepared to leave the Marine Corps, he sought an ethics opinion concerning potential future employment with Theranos. His counsel cautioned him against it.
“We are concerned that Mattis chose to join the company’s board anyway,” the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington, D.C. non-profit that monitors defense spending, noted in a letter to Sens. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, and Jack Reed, a Democrat representing Rhode Island.
“While not an explicit violation of the legal opinion, it certainly appears to violate the spirit of the ethical advice he received,” the note continued. “Although Mattis has already stepped down from Theranos’s board, we hope the [Senate Armed Services] Committee’s confirmation hearing will evaluate his thinking on his involvement in this matter.”
Beyond potential conflicts of interest and business deals, Mattis could also face questions during any confirmation process about his role in an incident that involved the death of an American soldier and Afghan allies during the early days of the war in Afghanistan.
Shortly after the Trump transition team announced Mattis as their pick for the top defense job, retired Army Green Beret Jason Amerine wrote a visceral Facebook post. Amerine — a widely respected special ops veteran — asserted that the general’s decision to delay rescue aircraft might have led to the deaths of Army Staff Sgt. Brian Cody Prosser and at least two Afghans after they were wounded in an explosion outside of Kandahar.
“He was indecisive and betrayed his duty to us, leaving my men to die during the golden hour when he could have reached us,” Amerine alleged.
Mattis may be a celebrated warrior scholar, but as he moves toward taking his new civilian job, there’s bound to be more scrutiny and questions. Only time will tell whether the retired officer’s responses are as blunt, yet eloquent as his famous maxims.
Sacajawea
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Well, from a functional perspective, I'd expect Trump to surround himself with experienced, intelligent people - and agreeing with Trump's viewpoint 100% of the time wouldn't be a pre-requisite. These kinds of choices shows Trump doesn't want "yes men" and sycophants around him - they can argue their positions intelligently and Trump NEEDS that input to make the best decisions possible -- if he is, as I suspect, someone who chews over the pros & cons thoroughly and tries to look into the future about consequences of various decisions.
Now, DC hasn't worked that way for at LEAST 8 years. And politics - not qualifications for a job - matters way more to Congress; party "loyalty" BS. Not right & wrong; not "what's best for the country as a whole"... only what will be POPULAR with the public and help their chances for re-election. It's apparent from these kinds of articles that people still believe that the "political" perspective of things is STILL more important in DC than a person's qualifications and experience and judgement.
Once again, us peons caught on to the changing "reality on the ground" faster than those swaddled princes & princesses living in their Ivory Tower. If we ever have any hope of recreating a functional government again - to say nothing of facing the changes in the economic and geo-political realms of life - we MUST HAVE the most competent people in those cabinet positions as possible. And to hell with "political realities".
The opposition to Trump - of both parties - is trying to damn Trump & his nominees with "political" crap that they hope will stick and taint their "foes" in the public's eye, and they are helped by monkeys in the media... and so we have all this crap that really isn't "news" -- as in important information to daily life decisions. And as long as everyone "buys" that news - by paying attention to it and sharing it - the media monkeys are quite pleased. Ratings, you know - hit counts on their articles. And they make the erroneous conclusion, that because we have eyes on those topics, that this kind of political crap matters to us. And so the cycle goes full circle... and starts over & over & over.
And they're forming exactly the wrong picture of public opinion repeatedly and consistently. The media, I conclude, therefore is totally broken. And I'm gradually withdrawing my eyes and time from anything that is purely political BS masquerading as "news".
Don't feed the beast.
This is how Obama can feel people support him enough, that if he was able he could run for a third term and win. This is how Hillary was convinced she would win. The media exaggerated the facts of reality - based on the political BS of their own little clique of people. NEVER with any convincing objectivity, considering both sides.
Now, DC hasn't worked that way for at LEAST 8 years. And politics - not qualifications for a job - matters way more to Congress; party "loyalty" BS. Not right & wrong; not "what's best for the country as a whole"... only what will be POPULAR with the public and help their chances for re-election. It's apparent from these kinds of articles that people still believe that the "political" perspective of things is STILL more important in DC than a person's qualifications and experience and judgement.
Once again, us peons caught on to the changing "reality on the ground" faster than those swaddled princes & princesses living in their Ivory Tower. If we ever have any hope of recreating a functional government again - to say nothing of facing the changes in the economic and geo-political realms of life - we MUST HAVE the most competent people in those cabinet positions as possible. And to hell with "political realities".
The opposition to Trump - of both parties - is trying to damn Trump & his nominees with "political" crap that they hope will stick and taint their "foes" in the public's eye, and they are helped by monkeys in the media... and so we have all this crap that really isn't "news" -- as in important information to daily life decisions. And as long as everyone "buys" that news - by paying attention to it and sharing it - the media monkeys are quite pleased. Ratings, you know - hit counts on their articles. And they make the erroneous conclusion, that because we have eyes on those topics, that this kind of political crap matters to us. And so the cycle goes full circle... and starts over & over & over.
And they're forming exactly the wrong picture of public opinion repeatedly and consistently. The media, I conclude, therefore is totally broken. And I'm gradually withdrawing my eyes and time from anything that is purely political BS masquerading as "news".
Don't feed the beast.
This is how Obama can feel people support him enough, that if he was able he could run for a third term and win. This is how Hillary was convinced she would win. The media exaggerated the facts of reality - based on the political BS of their own little clique of people. NEVER with any convincing objectivity, considering both sides.
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
The 24 to 3 vote on the waiver is a pretty clear indication Mattis is going to be confirmed as Secretary of Defense.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?421749-1/senate-armed-services-committee-votes-243-favor-mattis-waiver
JANUARY 12, 2017
Civilian Control of the Military The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 24-3 on a waiver to exempt Defense Secretary nominee General James Mattis (Retired) from the requirement that he be retired from active military duty for at least seven years prior to his appointment.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?421749-1/senate-armed-services-committee-votes-243-favor-mattis-waiver
JANUARY 12, 2017
Civilian Control of the Military The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 24-3 on a waiver to exempt Defense Secretary nominee General James Mattis (Retired) from the requirement that he be retired from active military duty for at least seven years prior to his appointment.
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
I have been looking for AG Session and the third day of hearings. I can't find them so maybe he has today off. They grilled him for ten hours the first day, January 10th, and many hours on the 11th. F$%%%% Liberal liars and fraud. Watching Booker and Lewis spew their lies is too much, so I just stopped listening to their venom and hate.
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
It looks like there is a real disconnect between what Trump's nominees think and are saying and what Trump thinks.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/splitting-trump-defense-pick-mattis-203139834.html
Splitting From Trump, Defense Pick Mattis Slams Russia, Supports Iran Deal
Foreign Policy Magazine
Paul McLeary
Foreign Policy MagazineJanuary 12, 2017
Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to become the next secretary of defense, staked out sharply divergent views from those of his potential boss on Thursday, strongly backing NATO, lambasting Russia, and accepting the Iran nuclear deal. He also showed little appetite for rolling back a slate of Defense Department social reforms hated by the Republican Party.
Most pointedly, Mattis offered lawmakers in Congress a full-throated endorsement of the NATO alliance, countering months of campaign-trail rhetoric from Trump, who suggested the United States gains little from the alliance and carries too much of the burden.
“If we did not have NATO today, we would need to create it. It is vital to the United States,” Mattis told a Senate panel, adding that Russian President Vladimir Putin — long an object of Trump’s praise and his hopeful dance partner on the global stage — is “trying to break the North Atlantic alliance.”
“I think right now the most important thing is that we recognize the reality of what we deal with” in regard to Putin, Mattis continued. He said the United States must work with its European allies on diplomatic, economic, and military steps to counter Russia and “defend ourselves where we must.”
The highly respected former head of U.S. Central Command and wartime leader in Iraq and Afghanistan appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee at a time when Trump is battling a new round of questions over his alleged ties to the Russian government, questions that have dogged Trump and several of his advisors for much of the presidential campaign.
Asked directly about Trump’s calls for a closer relationship with Russia, the general insisted that he agrees with the president-elect that there should be some engagement but that he has “very modest expectations about areas of cooperation with Mr. Putin.”
Although Trump has long said he would renegotiate or pull out of the Iran deal completely, Mattis said it’s important for the United States to live up to its agreement. “When America gives [its] word, we have to live up to it and work with our allies,” he told the panel, admitting that the current deal isn’t one he would have signed off on.
A longtime Iran hawk who was asked to step down from his job as head of Central Command by President Barack Obama in 2013 over his proposals to strike targets inside Iran, Mattis insisted that he would have the Pentagon ready to respond to Iranian military aggression.
He said he has spoken with Trump about NATO and Iran and found him “open” to his views. “He understands where I stand,” Mattis explained. That contrasted with Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson, who on Wednesday told gobsmacked lawmakers that he had not discussed Russia with the president-elect.
But that quest to demonstrate independence was quickly squelched by Trump spokesman Sean Spicer. He told reporters Thursday that “at the end of the day, each one of them is going to pursue a Trump agenda,” adding, “They’re being asked their personal views here and there. They’re giving them.”
Spicer’s comments point to a larger issue that hangs over the hearings: the role that incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, also a former general, will play in managing Mattis and Tillerson and the access they will have to the Oval Office.
One former Pentagon official who asked to speak anonymously said Flynn, a retired three-star Army general who was sacked by Obama as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2014, is driven by that ouster and the lost chance for a fourth star.
“There’s a pre-DIA Flynn and a post-DIA Flynn,” the official said. “If there are instances where Mattis and Flynn disagree, I can see Flynn becoming very defensive,” in part because Mattis outranked him in the military.
“You can imagine Mattis being a very effective buffer for the Pentagon. But I’m concerned how many times he can speak out before he suffers consequences” of disagreeing with Flynn.
Mattis told lawmakers Thursday that he would not have taken the job if he didn’t believe the president-elect would also be open to his input on this or any other matter.
Mattis also called for a permanent U.S. military presence in NATO’s Baltic allies, which are most vulnerable to Russian aggression. But that doesn’t play well in Moscow.
Just before the hearing, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia sees U.S. troop deployments to the Baltics as a direct threat. “Any country can regard a buildup of foreign military presence near its borders negatively, and it will do so,” he said. “We interpret this as a threat to us and as actions that endanger our interests and our security.”
Mattis also weighed in on controversial rules put in place last year by Defense Secretary Ash Carter allowing women to serve in combat roles — changes Mattis and the GOP establishment in Congress have publicly opposed. But he told senators that changing personnel policies isn’t high on his to-do list.
“I have no plans to oppose women in any aspect of our military,” he insisted.
He also declined to commit to rolling back Carter’s policy changes allowing gay and transgender people to serve openly but stopped short of offering the same commitment to leave the changes in place.
“I’m looking for military readiness,” he said and suggested better training to implement the new policies. “I’ve never cared very much about two consenting adults and who they go to bed with.”
After the hearing, both the Senate and House took up the issue of the change in law that will be required for Mattis to serve in the Defense Department. Under current law, an officer must be retired seven years before taking the Pentagon’s top job, but Mattis only retired in 2013.
The Senate Armed Services Committee passed the waiver in a 24-3 vote Thursday, while Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee are expected to put up a fight after the Trump transition team cancelled Mattis’s scheduled testimony.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/splitting-trump-defense-pick-mattis-203139834.html
Splitting From Trump, Defense Pick Mattis Slams Russia, Supports Iran Deal
Foreign Policy Magazine
Paul McLeary
Foreign Policy MagazineJanuary 12, 2017
Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to become the next secretary of defense, staked out sharply divergent views from those of his potential boss on Thursday, strongly backing NATO, lambasting Russia, and accepting the Iran nuclear deal. He also showed little appetite for rolling back a slate of Defense Department social reforms hated by the Republican Party.
Most pointedly, Mattis offered lawmakers in Congress a full-throated endorsement of the NATO alliance, countering months of campaign-trail rhetoric from Trump, who suggested the United States gains little from the alliance and carries too much of the burden.
“If we did not have NATO today, we would need to create it. It is vital to the United States,” Mattis told a Senate panel, adding that Russian President Vladimir Putin — long an object of Trump’s praise and his hopeful dance partner on the global stage — is “trying to break the North Atlantic alliance.”
“I think right now the most important thing is that we recognize the reality of what we deal with” in regard to Putin, Mattis continued. He said the United States must work with its European allies on diplomatic, economic, and military steps to counter Russia and “defend ourselves where we must.”
The highly respected former head of U.S. Central Command and wartime leader in Iraq and Afghanistan appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee at a time when Trump is battling a new round of questions over his alleged ties to the Russian government, questions that have dogged Trump and several of his advisors for much of the presidential campaign.
Asked directly about Trump’s calls for a closer relationship with Russia, the general insisted that he agrees with the president-elect that there should be some engagement but that he has “very modest expectations about areas of cooperation with Mr. Putin.”
Although Trump has long said he would renegotiate or pull out of the Iran deal completely, Mattis said it’s important for the United States to live up to its agreement. “When America gives [its] word, we have to live up to it and work with our allies,” he told the panel, admitting that the current deal isn’t one he would have signed off on.
A longtime Iran hawk who was asked to step down from his job as head of Central Command by President Barack Obama in 2013 over his proposals to strike targets inside Iran, Mattis insisted that he would have the Pentagon ready to respond to Iranian military aggression.
He said he has spoken with Trump about NATO and Iran and found him “open” to his views. “He understands where I stand,” Mattis explained. That contrasted with Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson, who on Wednesday told gobsmacked lawmakers that he had not discussed Russia with the president-elect.
But that quest to demonstrate independence was quickly squelched by Trump spokesman Sean Spicer. He told reporters Thursday that “at the end of the day, each one of them is going to pursue a Trump agenda,” adding, “They’re being asked their personal views here and there. They’re giving them.”
Spicer’s comments point to a larger issue that hangs over the hearings: the role that incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, also a former general, will play in managing Mattis and Tillerson and the access they will have to the Oval Office.
One former Pentagon official who asked to speak anonymously said Flynn, a retired three-star Army general who was sacked by Obama as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2014, is driven by that ouster and the lost chance for a fourth star.
“There’s a pre-DIA Flynn and a post-DIA Flynn,” the official said. “If there are instances where Mattis and Flynn disagree, I can see Flynn becoming very defensive,” in part because Mattis outranked him in the military.
“You can imagine Mattis being a very effective buffer for the Pentagon. But I’m concerned how many times he can speak out before he suffers consequences” of disagreeing with Flynn.
Mattis told lawmakers Thursday that he would not have taken the job if he didn’t believe the president-elect would also be open to his input on this or any other matter.
Mattis also called for a permanent U.S. military presence in NATO’s Baltic allies, which are most vulnerable to Russian aggression. But that doesn’t play well in Moscow.
Just before the hearing, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia sees U.S. troop deployments to the Baltics as a direct threat. “Any country can regard a buildup of foreign military presence near its borders negatively, and it will do so,” he said. “We interpret this as a threat to us and as actions that endanger our interests and our security.”
Mattis also weighed in on controversial rules put in place last year by Defense Secretary Ash Carter allowing women to serve in combat roles — changes Mattis and the GOP establishment in Congress have publicly opposed. But he told senators that changing personnel policies isn’t high on his to-do list.
“I have no plans to oppose women in any aspect of our military,” he insisted.
He also declined to commit to rolling back Carter’s policy changes allowing gay and transgender people to serve openly but stopped short of offering the same commitment to leave the changes in place.
“I’m looking for military readiness,” he said and suggested better training to implement the new policies. “I’ve never cared very much about two consenting adults and who they go to bed with.”
After the hearing, both the Senate and House took up the issue of the change in law that will be required for Mattis to serve in the Defense Department. Under current law, an officer must be retired seven years before taking the Pentagon’s top job, but Mattis only retired in 2013.
The Senate Armed Services Committee passed the waiver in a 24-3 vote Thursday, while Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee are expected to put up a fight after the Trump transition team cancelled Mattis’s scheduled testimony.
Be Well
may all be well
I agree with everything - I'd just add that the media is in it for a lot more than just ratings. They're the official propaganda arm of the dems/commiepuke/globalists and all their pets including the homo agenda, BLMers, moslems etc. They would get bigger ratings if they actually reported news and had shows (and ads) that weren't vomit inducing offal. They are committed propagandists.
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
TILLERSON HOUNDED BY RUBIO BREAKS WITH TRUMP VIEWS
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-pick-top-diplomat-breaks-him-key-ways-091206969--election.html
Trump's pick for top diplomat breaks from him in many ways
Associated Press
JOSH LEDERMAN
Associated PressJanuary 12, 2017
WASHINGTON (AP) — Rex Tillerson's foreign policy isn't sounding much like Donald Trump's.
At his confirmation hearing Wednesday, the former Exxon Mobil CEO selected by Trump for secretary of state called Russia a "danger" and vowed to protect America's European allies. He rejected the idea of an immigration ban on Muslims. He treaded softly on the human rights records of key U.S. partners like Saudi Arabia.
In the words of Sen. Bob Corker, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's GOP chairman, Tillerson "demonstrated that he's very much in the mainstream of foreign policy thinking." But doing so forced Tillerson to break with several of the president-elect's most iconoclastic statements on diplomacy and international security.
Again and again, Tillerson hewed more closely to long-standing, bipartisan positions on America's role in the world, and who are its friends and foes.
That may help Tillerson win over senators who've expressed wariness about his extensive relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But it could leave him putting a Trump foreign policy in place that looks little like the vision he outlined Wednesday.
A look at where Tillerson's views didn't quite match those of his would-be boss:
RUSSIA
Tillerson adopted a tough tone toward Moscow, apparently attempting to rebut the perception that he's too close to Putin.
The Russian leader previously awarded Tillerson his country's "Order of Friendship" following Exxon's deals with Russia's oil industry. But on Wednesday, Tillerson called Putin's Russia a threat to the United States.
Whereas Trump as a candidate played down Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine, arguing the population there was pro-Russian anyway, Tillerson said the annexation was illegal and amounted to "a taking of territory that was not theirs."
Whereas Trump's campaign team last summer softened language in the GOP platform calling for arming Ukraine, Tillerson said he would have recommended providing U.S. and allied defensive weapons, plus aerial surveillance, so the Ukrainians could protect their Russian border.
"The taking of Crimea was an act of force," Tillerson said. When Russia flexes its muscles, he said the U.S. must mount "a proportional show of force."
Still, the Kremlin said Thursday the former Cold War foes can overcome their differences once Trump takes office.
Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said he hopes the two presidents will get along and they can normalize ties if they show "mutual respect."
CAMPAIGN HACKING
Before Wednesday, Trump spent weeks ridiculing the U.S. intelligence agencies' accusations that Russia hacked and leaked emails, spread "fake news" and took other actions to interfere with the U.S. election.
Tillerson wasted no time in accepting the findings. He even went further than Trump, conceding it's a "fair assumption" the hacking couldn't have taken place without Putin's consent
Not Trump, who has repeatedly praised Putin's leadership. While he said at a news conference Wednesday that "I think it was Russia," Trump sidestepped the question of Putin's responsibility. Instead, he argued, "If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks? That's called an asset, not a liability."
THE MUSLIM BAN
During the campaign, Trump called for a temporary ban on Muslims immigrating to the U.S. The proposal then evolved into halting immigration from countries linked to terrorism. Trump later suggested he was reconsidering the Muslim ban.
"I do not support a blanket type rejection of any particular group of people," Tillerson said categorically at his hearing. He said the U.S. should "support those Muslim voices" that reject extremism and insisted Americans shouldn't be scared of Muslims.
RAPISTS AND CRIMINALS
Trump started his presidential bid by taking aim south of the border, accusing Mexico of sending "rapists" and criminals with drugs into the U.S.
Asked about those sentiments, Tillerson said he would "never characterize an entire population with any single term at all."
Mexico and other Latin American nations are anxious about Trump's campaign pledges to build a border wall and deport millions of immigrants illegally in the U.S.
Tillerson, by contrast, said he would engage closely with Mexico.
"Mexico is a long-standing neighbor and friend of this country," he said.
DEFENDING ALLIES
Trump sent chills through much of Europe when he suggested the U.S. might not defend its NATO allies if they came under attack, unless they'd contributed enough to the alliance's collective defense costs.
He later qualified his comments, while insisting NATO's future depended on members paying their fair share.
Tillerson offered ironclad support for NATO's Article 5, which obligates the allies to treat an attack on one as an attack on all. If a NATO member is invaded, the oil man said, the U.S. would join other members in coming to its defense.
"The Article 5 commitment is inviolable, and the U.S. is going to stand behind that commitment," Tillerson said.
SAUDI ARABIA
Trump used Saudi Arabia's shoddy human rights record as a campaign cudgel against Hillary Clinton, pointedly asking why she wouldn't "give back the money" the kingdom gave her family foundation.
He called out Saudi Arabia and other Mideast countries for violence against gays and women, and other human rights violations.
Tillerson played it more conservatively with a country at the heart of the American security strategy for the Middle East.
Saudi Arabia doesn't share American values, he said.
But Tillerson said he needed "greater information" before declaring Saudi Arabia a human rights violator.
It was an answer that wasn't well received by all the senators present. But it was, to use a turn of phrase, diplomatic.
___
AP writers Matthew Lee and Bradley Klapper contributed to this report.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-pick-top-diplomat-breaks-him-key-ways-091206969--election.html
Trump's pick for top diplomat breaks from him in many ways
Associated Press
JOSH LEDERMAN
Associated PressJanuary 12, 2017
WASHINGTON (AP) — Rex Tillerson's foreign policy isn't sounding much like Donald Trump's.
At his confirmation hearing Wednesday, the former Exxon Mobil CEO selected by Trump for secretary of state called Russia a "danger" and vowed to protect America's European allies. He rejected the idea of an immigration ban on Muslims. He treaded softly on the human rights records of key U.S. partners like Saudi Arabia.
In the words of Sen. Bob Corker, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's GOP chairman, Tillerson "demonstrated that he's very much in the mainstream of foreign policy thinking." But doing so forced Tillerson to break with several of the president-elect's most iconoclastic statements on diplomacy and international security.
Again and again, Tillerson hewed more closely to long-standing, bipartisan positions on America's role in the world, and who are its friends and foes.
That may help Tillerson win over senators who've expressed wariness about his extensive relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But it could leave him putting a Trump foreign policy in place that looks little like the vision he outlined Wednesday.
A look at where Tillerson's views didn't quite match those of his would-be boss:
RUSSIA
Tillerson adopted a tough tone toward Moscow, apparently attempting to rebut the perception that he's too close to Putin.
The Russian leader previously awarded Tillerson his country's "Order of Friendship" following Exxon's deals with Russia's oil industry. But on Wednesday, Tillerson called Putin's Russia a threat to the United States.
Whereas Trump as a candidate played down Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine, arguing the population there was pro-Russian anyway, Tillerson said the annexation was illegal and amounted to "a taking of territory that was not theirs."
Whereas Trump's campaign team last summer softened language in the GOP platform calling for arming Ukraine, Tillerson said he would have recommended providing U.S. and allied defensive weapons, plus aerial surveillance, so the Ukrainians could protect their Russian border.
"The taking of Crimea was an act of force," Tillerson said. When Russia flexes its muscles, he said the U.S. must mount "a proportional show of force."
Still, the Kremlin said Thursday the former Cold War foes can overcome their differences once Trump takes office.
Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said he hopes the two presidents will get along and they can normalize ties if they show "mutual respect."
CAMPAIGN HACKING
Before Wednesday, Trump spent weeks ridiculing the U.S. intelligence agencies' accusations that Russia hacked and leaked emails, spread "fake news" and took other actions to interfere with the U.S. election.
Tillerson wasted no time in accepting the findings. He even went further than Trump, conceding it's a "fair assumption" the hacking couldn't have taken place without Putin's consent
Not Trump, who has repeatedly praised Putin's leadership. While he said at a news conference Wednesday that "I think it was Russia," Trump sidestepped the question of Putin's responsibility. Instead, he argued, "If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks? That's called an asset, not a liability."
THE MUSLIM BAN
During the campaign, Trump called for a temporary ban on Muslims immigrating to the U.S. The proposal then evolved into halting immigration from countries linked to terrorism. Trump later suggested he was reconsidering the Muslim ban.
"I do not support a blanket type rejection of any particular group of people," Tillerson said categorically at his hearing. He said the U.S. should "support those Muslim voices" that reject extremism and insisted Americans shouldn't be scared of Muslims.
RAPISTS AND CRIMINALS
Trump started his presidential bid by taking aim south of the border, accusing Mexico of sending "rapists" and criminals with drugs into the U.S.
Asked about those sentiments, Tillerson said he would "never characterize an entire population with any single term at all."
Mexico and other Latin American nations are anxious about Trump's campaign pledges to build a border wall and deport millions of immigrants illegally in the U.S.
Tillerson, by contrast, said he would engage closely with Mexico.
"Mexico is a long-standing neighbor and friend of this country," he said.
DEFENDING ALLIES
Trump sent chills through much of Europe when he suggested the U.S. might not defend its NATO allies if they came under attack, unless they'd contributed enough to the alliance's collective defense costs.
He later qualified his comments, while insisting NATO's future depended on members paying their fair share.
Tillerson offered ironclad support for NATO's Article 5, which obligates the allies to treat an attack on one as an attack on all. If a NATO member is invaded, the oil man said, the U.S. would join other members in coming to its defense.
"The Article 5 commitment is inviolable, and the U.S. is going to stand behind that commitment," Tillerson said.
SAUDI ARABIA
Trump used Saudi Arabia's shoddy human rights record as a campaign cudgel against Hillary Clinton, pointedly asking why she wouldn't "give back the money" the kingdom gave her family foundation.
He called out Saudi Arabia and other Mideast countries for violence against gays and women, and other human rights violations.
Tillerson played it more conservatively with a country at the heart of the American security strategy for the Middle East.
Saudi Arabia doesn't share American values, he said.
But Tillerson said he needed "greater information" before declaring Saudi Arabia a human rights violator.
It was an answer that wasn't well received by all the senators present. But it was, to use a turn of phrase, diplomatic.
___
AP writers Matthew Lee and Bradley Klapper contributed to this report.
Be Well
may all be well
DD also paraphrased Gen. Kelly saying he wasn't for a wall, etc.
Either these candidates or nominees or whatever they're called are just saying whatever they need to say to get th votes or.... I sort of can't blame them too much if it's the former. If they really disagree with Trump's positions a lot or just generally believe crap, then I hope Trump has a behind the woodshed meeting with them.
What they think is immaterial.
They are being hired to carry out Trump's directives.
They are being hired to carry out Trump's directives.
Concur, 100%... There are a lot of Patriots out there, that can fill those slots... Once in the catbird seat, President Trump will have no problem filling them...
GBY&Y's
Maranatha
OldARcher
Ragnarok
On and On, South of Heaven
He gets my vote...
Mattis: ISIS ‘couldn’t last 2 minutes in fight with our troops’
SecDef nod calls for 'battles of annihilation” with “no survivors” against terror group, while beating drums of all-out war with Iran.
Defense secretary nominee Gen. Jim “Mad Dog” Mattis believes ISIS is “al-Qaida on steroids” and must be defeated in head-to-head “battles of annihilation” that leave “no survivors” on the enemy side, according to a recent discussion he participated in with a conservative think tank.
The career Marine, who faces Senate questioning at a confirmation today, also asserts that the US military “can handle Iran” in a shooting war, but cautioned that the Navy needs more warships to challenge “China’s bullying in the South China Sea.”
Mattis made the eye-opening remarks in a little-noticed interview with Stanford University’s Hoover Institution in Palo Alto, Calif., where he is a visiting fellow.
Before retiring in 2013 after a 43-year-career in the US Marine Corps, Mattis directed military operations of more than 200,000 troops and allied forces across the Middle East as commander of U.S. Central Command.
Mattis doesn’t believe in “managing” the Islamic State threat or just running ISIS out of Middle Eastern towns, but pulverizing the Islamist enemy.
He said the US currently has the forces available to wipe out ISIS, which operates primarily out of Syria and Iraq, but “they’re not in place” due to a lack of “political” will to deploy them, an attitude that is expected to change under a Trump administration.
“They’re a lot like al-Qaida philosophically, but operationally, they’re like al-Qaida on steroids. And when you put that together, they’re a uniquely capable organization,” he added during the revealing 2015 Hoover interview. “But the fact is, they couldn’t last two minutes in a fight with our troops.”
Mattis said America and the West can no longer tolerate “the assassinations, the mass killings, the mass rapes that are going on there,” to say nothing of the ISIS-directed and -inspired terrorist attacks plaguing both European and American cities.
“We should try to shut down its recruiting, shut down its finances, and then work to fight battles of annihilation — not attrition, but annihilation — against them; so that the first time they meet the forces that we put against them, there should basically be no survivors,” he asserted. “They should learn that we can be even tougher than them.”
Added the general: “If they want to fight, they should pay a heck of a price for what they’ve done to innocent people out there.”
Mattis didn’t pull any punches regarding Iran, either, which has aggressively pursued the development of nuclear weapons while threatening both the US and Israel.
Through its proxy Hezbollah, the Islamist regime has carried out terrorism around the globe, including attacks that have killed American citizens. In 1983, for example, an Iran-trained suicide truck bomber killed 220 of Mattis’s fellow Marines while they slept in barracks in Beirut. Iran is also responsible for IED-related deaths of US soldiers in Iraq.
Mattis, who joined the Marine Corps at 18, confidently predicted victory if the US had to go to war against Iran.
“It would take more forces if we had to go with the military option for Iran,” he said. “But we can handle Iran. I have no doubt.”
“It would be bloody awful,” he added. “But could we handle it from a military point of view? Absolutely.”
An invasion of Iran would be tougher than Iraq because Iran is surrounded by mountains, making it hard for tanks and artillery to pass. Behind the towering ranges, the terrain becomes unstable salt flats and dry lake beds oozing with thick black mud that would make it even more difficult to advance on Tehran.
It was the Great Salt Desert where the fateful 1980 military mission to rescue American hostages in Tehran ran into bad weather and had to be aborted.
Asked about Beijing seizing islands in the South China Sea and clandestinely building airstrips and other military installations there, Mattis says the US should no longer turn a blind eye to such territorial expansion in contested international waters. He says the US will need a larger naval presence there to check Beijing’s military aggression.
“In light of China’s bullying in the South China Sea, I don’t think we’re building enough ships,” Mattis noted, adding that China’s military maneuvers will require the Pentagon to adopt “a more naval strategy.”
Right now the Navy has 272 ships, more than 80 ships short of what the Navy Force Structure Assessment calls for to meet the new threat reality in the South China Sea and other global hotspots.
“We may have to give the Navy a bigger slice of the budget,” he added, to help reassure Taiwan and other allies in the region threatened by the communist army’s growing mischief.
“There are a lot of nations out in that region that would like to see more US Navy port calls in their harbors, from Vietnam to the Philippines, from Malaysia to Taiwan and Japan,” Mattis said.
He added that while the first option in the growing conflict ought to be diplomacy, “Sometimes the best ambassador you can have is a man-of-war.”
Mattis, who following 9/11 commanded the First Marine Expeditionary Brigade and Naval Task Force 58 in operations against the Taliban in southern Afghanistan, also revealed in the interview that he does not agree with President Obama that the US combat role in Afghanistan is over.
“We have irreconcilable differences with the Taliban,” he said.
Added Mattis: “They will continue to support al-Qaida, they will continue to do this kind of terrorism that they conduct over there every day. And as they do that, for us to declare arbitrarily that the war is over may not match the reality on the ground.”
Since Obama withdrew troops in 2014, ISIS and other terror groups have joined the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan, all working to topple the US-backed government in Kabul. All told, there are now 20 terrorist groups operating inside Afghanistan and along the Afghan-Pakistani border region.
http://counterjihad.com/mattis-isis-couldnt-last-2-minutes-fight-troops
Looming About-Face Coming On Social Experiments In Mattis’s Military
Secretary of Defense nominee James Mattis could swiftly reverse several social policies implemented by the Obama administration, Fox News reports.
The policies most at risk of reversal are the proposed integration of transgendered troops into the fighting force and the removal of gender specific ranks from the enlisted corps.
“Our focus is defending this country, and we should not spend so much time on social engineering,” Retired Army Lt. Col Robert Maginnis told Fox News. He continued that Mattis will “bring the warrior ethos back to the Pentagon.”
Mattis, along with a co-author, wrote in a recently published book, “We fear that an uninformed public is permitting political leaders to impose an accretion of social conventions that are diminishing the combat power of our military.”
“Social engineering was a distractor from what the main mission of the United States military was about,” Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane also emphasized. Keane declared “We were involved in conflict and war, and these reforms achieved a level of prominence that subordinated the issue of war itself.”
Mattis has opposed letting women serve in combat roles in the past saying, “The problem is that in the atavistic primate world” of close-quarters combat, “the idea of putting women in there is not setting them up for success,” Mattis said. He continued that the military must consider, “what makes us most combat effective when you jump into that room and you’re doing what we call intimate killing.”
http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/12/l...ng-on-social-experiments-in-mattiss-military/
Mattis: ISIS ‘couldn’t last 2 minutes in fight with our troops’
SecDef nod calls for 'battles of annihilation” with “no survivors” against terror group, while beating drums of all-out war with Iran.
Defense secretary nominee Gen. Jim “Mad Dog” Mattis believes ISIS is “al-Qaida on steroids” and must be defeated in head-to-head “battles of annihilation” that leave “no survivors” on the enemy side, according to a recent discussion he participated in with a conservative think tank.
The career Marine, who faces Senate questioning at a confirmation today, also asserts that the US military “can handle Iran” in a shooting war, but cautioned that the Navy needs more warships to challenge “China’s bullying in the South China Sea.”
Mattis made the eye-opening remarks in a little-noticed interview with Stanford University’s Hoover Institution in Palo Alto, Calif., where he is a visiting fellow.
Before retiring in 2013 after a 43-year-career in the US Marine Corps, Mattis directed military operations of more than 200,000 troops and allied forces across the Middle East as commander of U.S. Central Command.
Mattis doesn’t believe in “managing” the Islamic State threat or just running ISIS out of Middle Eastern towns, but pulverizing the Islamist enemy.
He said the US currently has the forces available to wipe out ISIS, which operates primarily out of Syria and Iraq, but “they’re not in place” due to a lack of “political” will to deploy them, an attitude that is expected to change under a Trump administration.
“They’re a lot like al-Qaida philosophically, but operationally, they’re like al-Qaida on steroids. And when you put that together, they’re a uniquely capable organization,” he added during the revealing 2015 Hoover interview. “But the fact is, they couldn’t last two minutes in a fight with our troops.”
Mattis said America and the West can no longer tolerate “the assassinations, the mass killings, the mass rapes that are going on there,” to say nothing of the ISIS-directed and -inspired terrorist attacks plaguing both European and American cities.
“We should try to shut down its recruiting, shut down its finances, and then work to fight battles of annihilation — not attrition, but annihilation — against them; so that the first time they meet the forces that we put against them, there should basically be no survivors,” he asserted. “They should learn that we can be even tougher than them.”
Added the general: “If they want to fight, they should pay a heck of a price for what they’ve done to innocent people out there.”
Mattis didn’t pull any punches regarding Iran, either, which has aggressively pursued the development of nuclear weapons while threatening both the US and Israel.
Through its proxy Hezbollah, the Islamist regime has carried out terrorism around the globe, including attacks that have killed American citizens. In 1983, for example, an Iran-trained suicide truck bomber killed 220 of Mattis’s fellow Marines while they slept in barracks in Beirut. Iran is also responsible for IED-related deaths of US soldiers in Iraq.
Mattis, who joined the Marine Corps at 18, confidently predicted victory if the US had to go to war against Iran.
“It would take more forces if we had to go with the military option for Iran,” he said. “But we can handle Iran. I have no doubt.”
“It would be bloody awful,” he added. “But could we handle it from a military point of view? Absolutely.”
An invasion of Iran would be tougher than Iraq because Iran is surrounded by mountains, making it hard for tanks and artillery to pass. Behind the towering ranges, the terrain becomes unstable salt flats and dry lake beds oozing with thick black mud that would make it even more difficult to advance on Tehran.
It was the Great Salt Desert where the fateful 1980 military mission to rescue American hostages in Tehran ran into bad weather and had to be aborted.
Asked about Beijing seizing islands in the South China Sea and clandestinely building airstrips and other military installations there, Mattis says the US should no longer turn a blind eye to such territorial expansion in contested international waters. He says the US will need a larger naval presence there to check Beijing’s military aggression.
“In light of China’s bullying in the South China Sea, I don’t think we’re building enough ships,” Mattis noted, adding that China’s military maneuvers will require the Pentagon to adopt “a more naval strategy.”
Right now the Navy has 272 ships, more than 80 ships short of what the Navy Force Structure Assessment calls for to meet the new threat reality in the South China Sea and other global hotspots.
“We may have to give the Navy a bigger slice of the budget,” he added, to help reassure Taiwan and other allies in the region threatened by the communist army’s growing mischief.
“There are a lot of nations out in that region that would like to see more US Navy port calls in their harbors, from Vietnam to the Philippines, from Malaysia to Taiwan and Japan,” Mattis said.
He added that while the first option in the growing conflict ought to be diplomacy, “Sometimes the best ambassador you can have is a man-of-war.”
Mattis, who following 9/11 commanded the First Marine Expeditionary Brigade and Naval Task Force 58 in operations against the Taliban in southern Afghanistan, also revealed in the interview that he does not agree with President Obama that the US combat role in Afghanistan is over.
“We have irreconcilable differences with the Taliban,” he said.
Added Mattis: “They will continue to support al-Qaida, they will continue to do this kind of terrorism that they conduct over there every day. And as they do that, for us to declare arbitrarily that the war is over may not match the reality on the ground.”
Since Obama withdrew troops in 2014, ISIS and other terror groups have joined the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan, all working to topple the US-backed government in Kabul. All told, there are now 20 terrorist groups operating inside Afghanistan and along the Afghan-Pakistani border region.
http://counterjihad.com/mattis-isis-couldnt-last-2-minutes-fight-troops
Looming About-Face Coming On Social Experiments In Mattis’s Military
Secretary of Defense nominee James Mattis could swiftly reverse several social policies implemented by the Obama administration, Fox News reports.
The policies most at risk of reversal are the proposed integration of transgendered troops into the fighting force and the removal of gender specific ranks from the enlisted corps.
“Our focus is defending this country, and we should not spend so much time on social engineering,” Retired Army Lt. Col Robert Maginnis told Fox News. He continued that Mattis will “bring the warrior ethos back to the Pentagon.”
Mattis, along with a co-author, wrote in a recently published book, “We fear that an uninformed public is permitting political leaders to impose an accretion of social conventions that are diminishing the combat power of our military.”
“Social engineering was a distractor from what the main mission of the United States military was about,” Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane also emphasized. Keane declared “We were involved in conflict and war, and these reforms achieved a level of prominence that subordinated the issue of war itself.”
Mattis has opposed letting women serve in combat roles in the past saying, “The problem is that in the atavistic primate world” of close-quarters combat, “the idea of putting women in there is not setting them up for success,” Mattis said. He continued that the military must consider, “what makes us most combat effective when you jump into that room and you’re doing what we call intimate killing.”
http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/12/l...ng-on-social-experiments-in-mattiss-military/
AlfaMan
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Bingo-the nominees are saying whatever the lynch mob wants to hear.
Trump wants the best people he can get, and he's got them. All of these people are going to be given an eventual thumbs up for their positions but the political kabuki theater has to play out. Socialists/Democrats have to appear relevant to their constituencies, don't they?
DC television stations-including Fox 5 here-are playing commercials vilifying Rex Tillerson's business contacts with Russia, his business over country decisions while CEO at Exxon, etc. Tillerson is the one that may end up with the hardest time being approved-Mattis should sail through easily by comparison.
Trump wants the best people he can get, and he's got them. All of these people are going to be given an eventual thumbs up for their positions but the political kabuki theater has to play out. Socialists/Democrats have to appear relevant to their constituencies, don't they?
DC television stations-including Fox 5 here-are playing commercials vilifying Rex Tillerson's business contacts with Russia, his business over country decisions while CEO at Exxon, etc. Tillerson is the one that may end up with the hardest time being approved-Mattis should sail through easily by comparison.
Dammit, it's not the size of the 9mm vs other calibers, but the ammunition, and the proper training, and continued practice, to properly employ it... As many trainers have so succinctly put it, "the pistol is a piss-poor substitute for a rifle or shotgun." Period.
As for the M4 and it's like, it's a great rifle that needs to be upgraded... It is, by it's very nature, capable of being modular, and adapted, efficiently and economically, for any battlefield, if one but resists the insanity to make it equal to a Barret .50 BMG sniper rifle, door breaching shotgun, or LAW- or bigger and better... As a platform, it is admirable... Execution of intent has been profit driven- not geared to the needs of those carrying, and employing it... It is not a Swiss Army knife, but as a weapon used by today's military troops, it still has, justifiable, promise... Proper ammunition, as in the Marine's Mk318 Mod-0, and improvements to Black Hills Mk 262 class ammo, can extend range, as well as obviate barriers, with greater precision and impact. Training, which the Marines assiduously, religiously, practice, is still something that needs to be inculcated within the mind/skill set of all military personnel, as we now live in an asynchronous world battlespace... Nowhere is safe, anymore, and enemies are no longer, 100%, identifiable...
Give our men and women the tools, training, and leadership that they deserve, and so desperately need- and once again, our enemies will tremble...
Pray for our military members, our Nation, and support them, with a whole heart, a clear mind, and all of your resolve...
GBY&Y's
Maranatha
OldARcher
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
Hmm, so Mathis writes that he wants to reverse the social engineering. Then in committee testimony he says he doesn't want to reverse them. Doomer Doug is getting confused here? I accept they have to do the dog and pony show, but this constant shifting of opinion is getting tiresome.
Given the 24 to 3 waiver vote, which is what he will be confirmed by, I am not sure why he is sucking up to the Democrat morons so much.
Given the 24 to 3 waiver vote, which is what he will be confirmed by, I am not sure why he is sucking up to the Democrat morons so much.
Be Well
may all be well
It doesn't sound as that Mattis said he doesn't want to reverese social engineering. I agree with AlfaMan, they're saying blah blah so they can get confirmed.
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
Step two is now over. The House just voted, 34 to 28, to grant Mathis his waiver. The Senate already voted, so Mathis is on track to become Secretary of Defense.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?42165...efense-secretary-nominee-general-james-mattis
Waiver for General James Mattis The House Armed Services Committee met and voted down party lines 34-28 to pass a waiver that would allow retired Gen. James Mattis to become the next defense secretary. The law requires a defense secretary be removed from uniformed military service for at least seven years. Earlier, the Senate voted in favor of the waiver, 81-17.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?42165...efense-secretary-nominee-general-james-mattis
Waiver for General James Mattis The House Armed Services Committee met and voted down party lines 34-28 to pass a waiver that would allow retired Gen. James Mattis to become the next defense secretary. The law requires a defense secretary be removed from uniformed military service for at least seven years. Earlier, the Senate voted in favor of the waiver, 81-17.
night driver
ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
Bingo-the nominees are saying whatever the lynch mob wants to hear.
Trump wants the best people he can get, and he's got them. All of these people are going to be given an eventual thumbs up for their positions but the political kabuki theater has to play out. Socialists/Democrats have to appear relevant to their constituencies, don't they?
DC television stations-including Fox 5 here-are playing commercials vilifying Rex Tillerson's business contacts with Russia, his business over country decisions while CEO at Exxon, etc. Tillerson is the one that may end up with the hardest time being approved-Mattis should sail through easily by comparison.
The OTHER thing Trump did was pick people who have MINDS and USE them. This will now and then (or more often) mean they come to differing conclusions. Trump's challenge will be to lead or convince or accept those people's conclusions.
==============================================
Uh Doug I BELIEVE that it takes an actual act of Congress to create that waiver which means that Step Two is only PARTIALLY complete until the whole House votes.
You are exactly right. The exception voted by both houses has to go to the President for signing before Congress can go back to voting Mattis in.
Obama said he would sign the exception, BUT he could also sit on it until the 20th.
Trump would then take office without his chosen Sec of Defense and the whole thing would have to go through the committees and congress again. Very time consuming and one last PITA compliments of Obama.
I belief when a new President comes in, bills sitting on the old president's desk die.
Either way Obama could be an ass and Trump would not have his Sec Defense on the 20th.
Ben Sunday
Deceased
This idiot Tillerson has got to be shown the door, NOW!
Too damn soft on Islam. He needs more info to decide? If he doesn't understand by now he never will.
He has some spine in his view of Russia but not nearly enough. European security and ultimately American power on the world stage require a hard edge and completely unforgiving diplomatic policy towards the Soviet Bolsheviks. No favors. No deals in the back room after Trump takes power. No press secretary expressions of hope for good will as 'partners.' What rubbish!
Tillerson's business relations with Russia are a negative and a potential area for both conflicts of interest and (way out there yet possible) blackmail.
Too damn soft on Islam. He needs more info to decide? If he doesn't understand by now he never will.
He has some spine in his view of Russia but not nearly enough. European security and ultimately American power on the world stage require a hard edge and completely unforgiving diplomatic policy towards the Soviet Bolsheviks. No favors. No deals in the back room after Trump takes power. No press secretary expressions of hope for good will as 'partners.' What rubbish!
Tillerson's business relations with Russia are a negative and a potential area for both conflicts of interest and (way out there yet possible) blackmail.
Doomer Doug
TB Fanatic
So, Obama won't sign it even if both the House and Senate vote the waiver until the 20th. The House and Senate will then have to revote the committee and then the full House and Senate. Sheesh, talk about petty. Of course, woo woo tinfoil hat now on, the fact the DC National Guard commander is relieved effective 12:01 means Trump can't replace him since Mathis isn't Secretary of Defense. Yep, a strange situation.
The Senate approval for Presidential cabinet appointments would be almost impossible to get if they nominees spoke their true mind.
In order to get approval they end up twisting and changing and going back on what they truly believe. Trump knows this and probably told them to bend as little as possible, but still to bend, in order to get approved.
Sad, but that is our government process.
Still what you are saying about Tillerson may be true. He has had decades of partnership with Saudi Arabia, or as he affectionately called it "the kingdom". I am worried about him too. We shall see.
night driver
ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
...BUT he could also sit on it until the 20th.
Trump would then take office without his chosen Sec of Defense and the whole thing would have to go through the committees and congress again. Very time consuming and one last PITA compliments of Obama.
I belief when a new President comes in, bills sitting on the old president's desk die...
Terry I'm unsure why they would die. The bills are for the specific session of Congress, not POTUS. When POTUS dies, the bills don't go away....at least not in '63.
Trump would then take office without his chosen Sec of Defense and the whole thing would have to go through the committees and congress again. Very time consuming and one last PITA compliments of Obama.
I belief when a new President comes in, bills sitting on the old president's desk die...
Terry I'm unsure why they would die. The bills are for the specific session of Congress, not POTUS. When POTUS dies, the bills don't go away....at least not in '63.