Mattis is out of the loop and Trump doesn't listen to him, say officials

Tom Horn · Oct 5, 2018

Tangmo said:
Mattis came to his maturity immediately as a junior officer whereas Jim Webb didn't become intellectually or personally mature until his early forties. And Mattis has always steered clear of politics whereas Webb was a right wing extremist until his middle age. Webb was writing right wing tomes prolifically and making extremist speeches for the longest time. I do commend Jim Webb for finally growing up.

Yet I have always been impelled to wonder what made the boy from the mid-Atlantic states hills who graduated Annapolis and was heroically wounded in the Nam take so long to become an actual adult in temperament and intellect. I am pleased to share with Jim the political migration to Democrat from Republican. (I fashion myself a Henry Jackson Democrat throughout.) Yet and indeed Webb's history is all the same erratic and meandering whereas Mattis has always had his true north.

While I rarely speak of Jim Webb out of deference to his later years of wisdom finally gained, I reference one of several dozen exhibits that can and do testify to my statements about Jim Webb...

Several Naval Academy alumni have asked the alumni association to rescind an award planned for former U.S. Sen. James Webb because of his decades-old essay questioning the decision to admit women into military service academies.

Webb, who also served as secretary of the Navy, wrote the 7,000-word essay "Women Can't Fight" for Washingtonian Magazine in 1979.

"There is a place for women in our military, but not in combat. And their presence at institutions dedicated to the preparation of men for combat command is poisoning that preparation," Webb wrote. He called the dormitory Bancroft Hall "a horny woman's dream."

The essay has been described by several alumni as a "manifesto" that potentially empowered male midshipmen to harass their female counterparts. Retired Navy Cmdr. Laureen Miklos, a 1981 graduate, wrote in an email that the decision by the Naval Academy Alumni Association to give its Distinguished Graduate Award to Webb was "a hit to the gut." She taught at the academy from 1998 to 2001 and described Webb's essay as a "living document" still referenced by mids.

Webb released a statement saying he wrote a "strongly argumentative magazine article" during the intense national debate of women serving in combat. "Clearly, if I had been a more mature individual, there are things that I would not have said in that magazine article," he wrote in the statement. "To the extent that this article subjected women at the academy or the armed forces to undue hardship, I remain profoundly sorry."

Naval Academy grads ask alumni group to rescind honor for former Sen. Jim Webb - Capital Gazette

Ip
Webb decided after all that he could not accept the award due to concerns over an open protest demonstration at the dinner ceremony had he attended.

Further, when the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was being approved for construction Webb opposed it, calling it a "wailing wall." He later changed his tune after heavy peer criticism, saying he could accept the Memorial as true and valid because a flag and a light had been added to it. This is specious and this was Jim Webb for too many decades. Trying to equate Jim Mattis and Jim Webb leaves much to be desired indeed. So as I say and emphasize, Jim Webb finally grew up. More power to him and I continue to wish him only the best.

Not mature? Good For You. Only problem with your assessment is he commanded the Walking Dead during Tet 68 outside of Hue.

American · Oct 5, 2018

Let me explain Mattis to you...

Tangmo · Oct 5, 2018

Tom Horn said:
Not mature? Good For You. Only problem with your assessment is he commanded the Walking Dead during Tet 68 outside of Hue.

"One universal fact of being in the Marine Corps is that no matter where we go in the world, we always end up in some random ****ty place." - Cpl. Michael Stinetorf.

An undated photo of James Webb at his platoon leader command post in Vietnam. SIMON & SCHUSTER

Jim Webb's Navy Cross Citation:

Date of Action: July 10, 1969

"The Navy Cross is presented to James H. Webb, Jr., First Lieutenant, U.S. Marine Corps, for extraordinary heroism while serving as a Platoon Commander with Company D, First Battalion, Fifth Marines, First Marine Division (Reinforced), Fleet Marine Force, in connection with combat operations against the enemy in the Republic of Vietnam. On 10 July 1969, while participating in a company-sized search and destroy operation deep in hostile territory, First Lieutenant Webb's platoon discovered a well-camouflaged bunker complex which appeared to be unoccupied. Deploying his men into defensive positions, First Lieutenant Webb was advancing to the first bunker when three enemy soldiers armed with hand grenades jumped out. Reacting instantly, he grabbed the closest man and, brandishing his .45 caliber pistol at the others, apprehended all three of the soldiers. Accompanied by one of his men, he then approached the second bunker and called for the enemy to surrender. When the hostile soldiers failed to answer him and threw a grenade which detonated dangerously close to him, First Lieutenant Webb detonated a claymore mine in the bunker aperture, accounting for two enemy casualties and disclosing the entrance to a tunnel. Despite the smoke and debris from the explosion and the possibility of enemy soldiers hiding in the tunnel, he then conducted a thorough search which yielded several items of equipment and numerous documents containing valuable intelligence data. Continuing the assault, he approached a third bunker and was preparing to fire into it when the enemy threw another grenade. Observing the grenade land dangerously close to his companion, First Lieutenant Webb simultaneously fired his weapon at the enemy, pushed the Marine away from the grenade, and shielded him from the explosion with his own body. Although sustaining painful fragmentation wounds from the explosion, he managed to throw a grenade into the aperture and completely destroy the remaining bunker. By his courage, aggressive leadership, and selfless devotion to duty, First Lieutenant Webb upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and of the United States Naval Service."

It was Jim Webb who first pointed out to me that the life expectancy of a second lieutenant of infantry in Vietnam was six months.

Webb's citation suggests unmistakably that he chose to investigate the bunker complex with another platoon member himself, rather than delegate the task. This has been noted and pointed out by infantry officers then and since. That is, usually, when a point or flanker element discovers/stumbles upon an enemy site or danger area, the news was communicated through hand and arm signals to the nearest commander. That's 1LT Webb as platoon leader.

Again, usually, the ptn cmdr/leader would order something like, "First squad, approach bunker complex and clear;" with further instructions to any supporting unit. Support if committed usually would consist of an additional squad or one of the two fire teams of a squad; or both elements. And while 1LT Webb's company commander did recommend Jim for the Navy Cross, we can have no doubt the c.o. much preferred keeping all his lieutenants whole for the maximum period of time under his command. This too has been noted by infantry officers of the time and since. So and as you note, it can safely be said that in the Nam the USMC 1LT of Infantry Jim Webb did things that can't be taught. And although Jim graduated first in his class at the Marine Corps Basic Officer School, Jim did some things that aren't taught.

Because Jim Webb is a warrior I commend his outstanding military record of bravery and heroism. I respect and honor his Navy Cross which is the second highest combat award in the Navy and Marine Corps. Moreover Jim was awarded the Bronze Star and two Purple Heart citations. Jim has always believed completely in whatever of the moment he espoused and did, and Mr. Webb the lawyer and former US Senator continues the trait to the present time.

James Webb as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, 1984.

Fledermaus · Oct 6, 2018

Tangmo said:
A huge number of veterans of the armed forces posting here are retired non-commissioned officers or retired petty officers. That is, they served as enlisted personnel (EP). Accordingly, any one or all of 'em are invited to state the education s/he was issued concerning their oath of enlistment. This invitation is extended also to enlisted personnel who served a one time tour of enlistment, to include those EP who may have served for less than 20 years. Some here for instance put in ten years then out, or eight years then out and so on.

Because I dare say: every veteran of enlisted service of any rank, experience, period of time, who has posted to DP, has said Potus being in the enlisted oath means their obedience is to the president. This is so despite the fact the oath of enlistment is to the Constitution and to the Constitution only. Further, while Potus is mentioned as such in the enlisted oath, the oath of EP is to the Constitution and not to the President of the United States.

What these EP need to know is that CinC is an executive and administrative position as specified in the Constitution, and that the military oath of enlisted and officer alike is to the Constitution itself and only. There is no oath to the Potus or to any Caesar, i.e., individual official or leader. This is because the Constitution is more important than the Potus and the Constitution is always superior to Potus. No person in any office or capacity is more important than the Constitution or is superior to it. I have yet to read a post to any thread at any time made by EP or former EP now retired or separated who state an awareness of these facts. Quite to the contrary in fact.

It was Washington who wrote the first oath which was for the Continental Army and Navy. Gen. Washington himself -- commander in chief of the Continental Army and the Navy -- reported directly to the Continental Congress. As president of the Constitutional Convention Washington proposed successfully an oath for all personnel of the US armed forces. Washington iterated specifically the armed forces oath is to the Constitution and the Constitution only. Washington's assertion is that there must never be an oath to any individual official of the government or to any leader. His rationale was that the armed forces must be the bulwark against a tyrant leader should one ever gain power in the government. And that the Constitution is more important than the president and the Constitution is always superior to the president.

Have you been to it...

Constitution Corner

Location: West Point, NY
Country: United States of America

Loyalty to the Constitution Plaque

The United States boldly broke with the ancient military custom of swearing loyalty to a leader. Article VI required that American Officers thereafter swear loyalty to our basic law, the Constitution

While many other nations have suffered military coups, the United States never has. Our American Code of Military Obedience requires that, should orders and the law ever conflict, our officers must obey the law. Many other nations have adopted our principle of loyalty to the basic law.

This nation must have military leaders of principle and integrity so strong that their oaths to support and defend the Constitution will unfailingly govern their actions. The purpose of the United States Military Academy is to provide such leaders of character.

https://www.historicalmarkerproject...tion-corner_West-Point-NY.html#prettyPhoto/3/

An order is given by a person whereas the law is provided by institutions.

The military oath to the Constitution exclusively means to the three branches of the government. Each branch has a chief. The three branches exist in a co-equal balance of powers under the system of checks and balances. The military is loyal to the whole of it, not to any single person or official of it. Accordingly, it is inconceivable that there could be a military coup d'etat in the United States. This is because the military chiefs, commanders, enlisted personnel, are subordinate to the civilian authority and its leaders of the three branches of the government. Never to one only or exclusively. The whole of it and to the many in it -- above any single part of it or any single individual or leader in it.

I've never read an EP active or retired posting to DP whose statements resemble any of this in any shape or form. Quite the opposite in fact.

All that typing... Only to lie again.

5,000 characters in search of truth.

Oozlefinch · Oct 6, 2018

Tom Horn said:
Not mature? Good For You. Only problem with your assessment is he commanded the Walking Dead during Tet 68 outside of Hue.

I did not even read this until I saw you quote it, and it is so unbelievably wrong it is almost sad.

Mr. Webb has never been a "far right extremist". In fact, it is ironic that the references made are the exact same reason why he has recently left the Democratic party.

His belief (which I share) is that it has become an ideological "Group Think" party, where anybody that dares to disagree with anybody is the enemy. This can be seen very clearly in the debates, when each candidate was asked to name the enemy they were most proud of making.

And of course, all of the candidates mention the Republicans, or some other political kind of group. Mr. Webb named the VC soldier who wounded him with a grenade. An actual enemy, not somebody who was just a politician.

And it is a shame to me when anybody names another an "enemy", simply because of political differences. That along showed me loud and clear the mindset of today's Democrats. If you are not 100% for them, you are the enemy.

And notice how his evidence was an article written in 1979. One in which we are seeing even 40 years later is still true. Women do serve in combat arms, but most of us who have actually been in those branches think it is a retarded idea, and that it is going to cause major problems the next time we have to fight.

Tangmo · Oct 6, 2018

American said:
Let me explain Mattis to you...

A couple of years ago I read an interesting bit at duffleblog.com.

The editors revealed Pentagon suppressed a sensational news story about the then Colonel James Mattis.

It was the day Mattis walked down the street with a hardon. Twenty-seven people were injured several of 'em seriously. Most of 'em were Taliban so Mattis got a Bronze Star during a private ceremony held at Hdq.

As long as we're at it here are a couple of other duffleblog scoops...

Pentagon celebrates first successful F-35 crash in South Carolina

The downing of an F-35 out of Beaufort is yet another historic feat for the $115 million aircraft, officials said.

The pilot ejected and was being evaluated by medical personnel and the F-35 program office for insight into whether officials could credit the pilot or Lockheed Martin for the aircraft hitting its most recent milestone. The crash came just one day after a different F-35B conducted its first combat strike in Afghanistan against an important enemy weapons cache of AK-47’s and RPG’s, costing the Pentagon only about $150,000 in spent munitions and aircraft flight hours.

“Just as the F-35 secretly outperformed the A-10 in a close air support role in the past, this aircraft has shown it is far better suited at crashing than the F-16,” said Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson.

The crash was considered by the Marine Corps as a “total loss” of the aircraft. Military analysts have also used that language to describe the F-35 program’s budget.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/09/...irst-successful-f-35-crash-in-south-carolina/

US says it will stay in Syria until it spends $1 trillion defeating ISIS

Mattis downplayed the idea of “mission creep” in Syria to reporters.

WASHINGTON — U.S. military officials have assured worried allies that the fight in Syria will continue until it spends at least $1 trillion defeating ISIS and a corrupt, democratically-elected government beholden to the U.S. can be instituted, sources confirmed today.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told reporters this week that the primary mission for the U.S. has not changed in Syria, which is to defeat remnants of the ISIS terrorist group. Still, he added that the situation was “complex” and the military would also remain in Syria to guard against Iranian influence, work to end the Syrian civil war, deal with humanitarian issues, play geo-strategic chess with Russia, support and defend against its ally Turkey, and ensure girls can attend school.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/10/...ated-1-trillion-spent-and-corruption-rampant/

Captain Jack Sparrow named new Coast Guard Commandant

The boating public reacted with alarm at the nomination.

FDF61WWr0I2bjGX4KPI4BZtfpjC763tBYJkgJonLOJc-e1538093244723.jpg

WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Donald Trump has nominated Capt. Jack Sparrow to serve as the 26th commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, sources confirmed today.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/10/jack-sparrow-coast-guard/

Zachariah · Oct 6, 2018

Tangmo said:
12 Stars In Washington

Three USMC 4-star generals share coffee at the official residence of the commandant (CMC) at the Washington DC Marine Barracks, April 19, 2013. L-R John Kelly, James Mattis, Joseph Dunford. Kelly is currently chief of staff at the White House. Mattis is SecDef. The then CMC Joseph Dunford hosting the meeting is currently chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Gen. Dunford's current residence is Quarters 6 on Grant Drive, Ft. Myer, Va., official residence of CJCS.

This is mostly about Trump who has a new crew of advisers, namely Mike Pompeo and John Bolton. Trump has made a sharp turn to advisers in the WH and cabinet who agree with him and who go with Trump's flow naturally and comfortably. Mattis never has done this and has opposed Trump on more issues than Trump would normally tolerate from within. Mattis doesn't go on tv and Mattis does not contradict Trump openly. Mattis doesn't call Trump names. Despite the strong differences between Mattis and LtGen. McMaster, the former national security advisor who tried to find a way to implement everything Trump said, Mattis never said a public word either way about McMaster's dereliction of duty. The two retired Marine four-star generals Kelly and Mattis with Gen. Dunford continue to work well together. For instance, anyone working at the WH who wants to talk to Mattis has to go through Kelly first. In contrast, Mattis and McMaster had to clear the room and turn off the speakerphone when they went at it which is all the two ever did. Kelly finished off McMaster by leaking that McMaster leaked his own DO NOT CALL PUTIN TO CONGRATULATE HIM memo.

Trump's not going to fire Mattis and Mattis has no reason to quit. Mattis will continue to send to Potus his choices of commanders of the armed forces across the services.

....

Reports are that Mattis has not forwarded to Trump a viable military option on either North Korea or Iran. We know well about NK. As for Iran, Mattis isn't giving Trump ammunition Trump wants, i.e., options, to blow some Iranian small boats out of the water. Mattis simply doesn't send that kind of stuff to Trump's desk. Mattis knows better. So do the Joint Chiefs.

A lot of innuendo and calls to Madam Chloe's Psychic Hotline here. Mattis is a hireling, and Trump doesn't need his permission for anything, so much of the gossip here is irrelevant. Most of Trumps's policy goals were laid out in the initial interviews before Mattis was appointed, so it's highly doubtful he's 'out' of any 'loop', not to mention he isn't going to run around telling his coffee buddies secrets beforehand; that news breaking belongs to the President, as CoC.

This all 100% gossip. 'Reports' from who? Sounds like just more Trump bashing rubbish.

Tangmo · Oct 6, 2018

Zachariah said:
A lot of innuendo and calls to Madam Chloe's Psychic Hotline here. Mattis is a hireling, and Trump doesn't need his permission for anything, so much of the gossip here is irrelevant. Most of Trumps's policy goals were laid out in the initial interviews before Mattis was appointed, so it's highly doubtful he's 'out' of any 'loop', not to mention he isn't going to run around telling his coffee buddies secrets beforehand; that news breaking belongs to the President, as CoC.

This all 100% gossip. 'Reports' from who? Sounds like just more Trump bashing rubbish.

Trump said he'd fire the generals. Which by direct implication means admirals too.

Trump fired none of either and hired a bunch of 'em starting with "Mad Dog" Mattis himself. Meantime a couple of generals and admirals turned Trump down:

Vice Admiral Robert Harward turns down national security adviser job

Harward, a 60-year-old former Navy SEAL, served as deputy commander of U.S. Central Command under now-Defense Secretary James Mattis. He previously served as deputy commanding general for operations of Joint Special Operations Command [when bin Laden got terminated with feeling].

Harward has also commanded troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan for six years after the 9/11 attacks. Under President George W. Bush, he served on the National Security Council as director of strategy and policy for the office of combating terrorism.

The president announced early Friday via Twitter that retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Keith Kellogg was now in the running to replace Flynn, along with “three others” that he could tap for the National Security Adviser post.

General Keith Kellogg, who I have known for a long time, is very much in play for NSA - as are three others.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2017

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/robert-harward-turns-down-national-security-adviser-job/

LTG Kellogg also turned down Trump's offer. As did the other three. And as one can see by the date the military brass set things straight with Trump right off.

Meanwhile...

Mattis Sends Trump a Scheduled Turnover of Upper Commanders for Senate Confirmation

https://www.debatepolitics.com/mili...ver-upper-commanders-senate-confirmation.html

Trump has avoided any collisions with Pentagon brass by turning everything there over to Mattis. Mattis chose his civilian deputy secretary, assistant secretaries, deputy assistant secretaries, general counsel, civilian-military liaison officials domestically and internationally and so on.

And now with a scheduled turnover of major theater commanders Mattis has sent the list of new brass hats to Trump for Trump's rubber stamping of 'em. Trump has already sent each of Mattis choices to the Congress for hearings and confirmation.

Both Trump and Pentagon know Colonel Klink, er, Cadet Trump, is incompetent as commander in chief. The congress knows this too. So Trump put Mattis in charge completely and Mattis remains in charge. Completely. Mattis will continue in charge indefinitely. Inside Pentagon Jim Mattis is the most respected secdef in the history of the office. Trump in contrast is the most disrespected CinC ever. Contempt is a good word for it. This is so despite the fact Trump threw a bunch of new money at the brass who took it and ran. Good on 'em for it.

Zachariah · Oct 6, 2018

Tangmo said:
Trump said he'd fire the generals. Which by direct implication means admirals too.

Trump fired none of either and hired a bunch of 'em starting with "Mad Dog" Mattis himself. Meantime a couple of generals and admirals turned Trump down:

Vice Admiral Robert Harward turns down national security adviser job

Harward, a 60-year-old former Navy SEAL, served as deputy commander of U.S. Central Command under now-Defense Secretary James Mattis. He previously served as deputy commanding general for operations of Joint Special Operations Command [when bin Laden got terminated with feeling].

Harward has also commanded troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan for six years after the 9/11 attacks. Under President George W. Bush, he served on the National Security Council as director of strategy and policy for the office of combating terrorism.

The president announced early Friday via Twitter that retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Keith Kellogg was now in the running to replace Flynn, along with “three others” that he could tap for the National Security Adviser post.

General Keith Kellogg, who I have known for a long time, is very much in play for NSA - as are three others.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2017

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/robert-harward-turns-down-national-security-adviser-job/

LTG Kellogg also turned down Trump's offer. As did the other three. And as one can see by the date the military brass set things straight with Trump right off.

Meanwhile...

Mattis Sends Trump a Scheduled Turnover of Upper Commanders for Senate Confirmation

https://www.debatepolitics.com/mili...ver-upper-commanders-senate-confirmation.html

Trump has avoided any collisions with Pentagon brass by turning everything there over to Mattis. Mattis chose his civilian deputy secretary, assistant secretaries, deputy assistant secretaries, general counsel, civilian-military liaison officials domestically and internationally and so on.

And now with a scheduled turnover of major theater commanders Mattis has sent the list of new brass hats to Trump for Trump's rubber stamping of 'em. Trump has already sent each of Mattis choices to the Congress for hearings and confirmation.

Both Trump and Pentagon know Colonel Klink, er, Cadet Trump, is incompetent as commander in chief. The congress knows this too. So Trump put Mattis in charge completely and Mattis remains in charge. Completely. Mattis will continue in charge indefinitely. Inside Pentagon Jim Mattis is the most respected secdef in the history of the office. Trump in contrast is the most disrespected CinC ever. Contempt is a good word for it. This is so despite the fact Trump threw a bunch of new money at the brass who took it and ran. Good on 'em for it.

More gossip. And how would you know any of this? You work in the Pentagon and you and the other employees sit around talking about this on your lunch breaks? What are your qualifications for determining Trump's competence at anything? You read it somewhere? These Generals and Admirals all call you up and confide in you? You're psychic?

Tangmo · Oct 6, 2018

Zachariah said:
More gossip. And how would you know any of this? You work in the Pentagon and you and the other employees sit around talking about this on your lunch breaks? What are your qualifications for determining Trump's competence at anything? You read it somewhere? These Generals and Admirals all call you up and confide in you? You're psychic?

Mark Felt turned out to be Deep Throat in Woodward and Bernstein's Watergate investigations.

How ‘Deep Throat’ Took Down Nixon From Inside the FBI

Former FBI deputy director William Mark Felt broke his 30-year silence and confirmed in 2005 that he was “Deep Throat,” the anonymous government source who helped take down President Nixon in the Watergate scandal.

https://www.history.com/news/watergate-deep-throat-fbi-informant-nixon

Me, I'm just a citizen who experienced Watergate the same as 99.9% of us did at the time. As a veteran of military service I'm in a smaller public but a valid one nonetheless thx. That my military service was in Washington DC entirely makes my experience more specific. Which makes your reliance on the psychic approach the absolute most desperate one. The dependency is understandable though given you're defending a certifiable in the oval office to include those around him and who support him in the congress. We're aware moreover Ma and Pa Kettle are Trump's principal supporters and worshipers wherever they may be in the country.

Accordingly, kindly choose the statement with which you identify most....

-It is okay to keep a secret so long as it is not harmful to another person.
-Information gathered by journalists from anonymous sources cannot be trusted.
-Journalists should always ask sources what their motives are for wanting to remain anonymous.
-Private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who have or seek power, influence or attention.

If you have your own statement however kindly enter it below.

Suggested to consider...

CHAOS

CHAOS can also mean sarcastically, Captain Has Another Outstanding Solution :lamo

Fledermaus · Oct 7, 2018

Zachariah said:
More gossip. And how would you know any of this? You work in the Pentagon and you and the other employees sit around talking about this on your lunch breaks? What are your qualifications for determining Trump's competence at anything? You read it somewhere? These Generals and Admirals all call you up and confide in you? You're psychic?

He claimed that he was in a ceremonial unit in the 1970s. Yet he is really very ignorant about many things military beyond what can be readily Googled.

Zachariah · Oct 7, 2018

Fledermaus said:
He claimed that he was in a ceremonial unit in the 1970s. Yet he is really very ignorant about many things military beyond what can be readily Googled.

Yes, certainly seems that way, just a Trump bashing spammer. Or, the first genuine psychic I've ever dealt with.

Tangmo · Oct 7, 2018

Fledermaus said:
He claimed that he was in a ceremonial unit in the 1970s. Yet he is really very ignorant about many things military beyond what can be readily Googled.

Strident and confident aren't we.

I'll resume ignoring your posts and do it only because of my own better judgement thx.

Carry on

Tangmo · Oct 7, 2018

Zachariah said:
Yes, certainly seems that way, just a Trump bashing spammer. Or, the first genuine psychic I've ever dealt with.

Your reliance on the bogus psychic approach is indeed the absolute most desperate tact. The dependency is understandable though given you're defending a certifiable in the oval office to include those around him and who support him in the congress. We're aware moreover Ma and Pa Kettle are Trump's principal supporters and worshipers wherever they may be throughout the country.

Carry on...

Fledermaus · Oct 7, 2018

Tangmo said:
Strident and confident aren't we.

I'll resume ignoring your posts and do it only because of my own better judgement thx.

Carry on

Feel free to lie about ignoring my posts....

American · Oct 9, 2018

Tangmo said:
A couple of years ago I read an interesting bit at duffleblog.com.

The editors revealed Pentagon suppressed a sensational news story about the then Colonel James Mattis.

It was the day Mattis walked down the street with a hardon. Twenty-seven people were injured several of 'em seriously. Most of 'em were Taliban so Mattis got a Bronze Star during a private ceremony held at Hdq.

As long as we're at it here are a couple of other duffleblog scoops...

Pentagon celebrates first successful F-35 crash in South Carolina

The downing of an F-35 out of Beaufort is yet another historic feat for the $115 million aircraft, officials said.

The pilot ejected and was being evaluated by medical personnel and the F-35 program office for insight into whether officials could credit the pilot or Lockheed Martin for the aircraft hitting its most recent milestone. The crash came just one day after a different F-35B conducted its first combat strike in Afghanistan against an important enemy weapons cache of AK-47’s and RPG’s, costing the Pentagon only about $150,000 in spent munitions and aircraft flight hours.

“Just as the F-35 secretly outperformed the A-10 in a close air support role in the past, this aircraft has shown it is far better suited at crashing than the F-16,” said Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson.

The crash was considered by the Marine Corps as a “total loss” of the aircraft. Military analysts have also used that language to describe the F-35 program’s budget.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/09/...irst-successful-f-35-crash-in-south-carolina/

US says it will stay in Syria until it spends $1 trillion defeating ISIS

Mattis downplayed the idea of “mission creep” in Syria to reporters.

WASHINGTON — U.S. military officials have assured worried allies that the fight in Syria will continue until it spends at least $1 trillion defeating ISIS and a corrupt, democratically-elected government beholden to the U.S. can be instituted, sources confirmed today.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told reporters this week that the primary mission for the U.S. has not changed in Syria, which is to defeat remnants of the ISIS terrorist group. Still, he added that the situation was “complex” and the military would also remain in Syria to guard against Iranian influence, work to end the Syrian civil war, deal with humanitarian issues, play geo-strategic chess with Russia, support and defend against its ally Turkey, and ensure girls can attend school.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/10/...ated-1-trillion-spent-and-corruption-rampant/

Captain Jack Sparrow named new Coast Guard Commandant

The boating public reacted with alarm at the nomination.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Donald Trump has nominated Capt. Jack Sparrow to serve as the 26th commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, sources confirmed today.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/10/jack-sparrow-coast-guard/

Jack Sparrow is a great selection. Hear Hear!! :applaud

Tangmo · Oct 9, 2018

American said:
Jack Sparrow is a great selection. Hear Hear!! :applaud

Jack was the choice hands up.

"Hellooo....is this your yacht? Not any more it isn't. I'm here to inventory your safe."

Runnerup was the boss of the Miami Longshoremen.

Head of the Somali Pirates Benevolent Association rounded out the top three. A guy with big hands named Capitain Kiddo. Given Trump hires only the best we know we're safe and sure with Jack.

American · Oct 9, 2018

Tangmo said:
Jack was the choice hands up.

"Hellooo....is this your yacht? Not any more it isn't. I'm here to inventory your safe."

Runnerup was the boss of the Miami Longshoremen.

Head of the Somali Pirates Benevolent Association rounded out the top three. A guy with big hands named Capitain Kiddo. Given Trump hires only the best we know we're safe and sure with Jack.

How about the Somali for Captain Phillips?

Tangmo · Oct 9, 2018

Kindly pardon me everyone but I'd prefer to switch gears to return to my post #53 which has gone unanswered. Here's some from the post....

A huge number of veterans of the armed forces posting here are retired non-commissioned officers or retired petty officers. That is, they served as enlisted personnel (EP). Accordingly, any one or all of 'em are invited to state the education s/he was issued concerning their oath of enlistment. This invitation is extended also to enlisted personnel who served a one time tour of enlistment, to include those EP who may have served for less than 20 years. Some here for instance put in ten years then out, or eight years then out and so on.

Because I dare say: every veteran of enlisted service of any rank, experience, period of time, who has posted to DP, has said Potus being in the enlisted oath means their obedience is to the president. This is so despite the fact the oath of enlistment is to the Constitution and to the Constitution only. Further, while Potus is mentioned as such in the enlisted oath, it changes nothing.

There is no oath to the Potus or to any Caesar, i.e., individual official or leader. This is because the Constitution is more important than the Potus and the Constitution is always superior to Potus. No person in any office or capacity is more important than the Constitution or is superior to it. I have yet to read a post to any thread at any time made by EP or former EP now retired or separated who state an awareness of these facts. Quite to the contrary in fact.

Click to expand...

My invitation to EP -- to include retired nco -- to show an awareness or respect of the fact seems to have gone unanswered. So this post provides a nudge for nco retired or active to acknowledge their folly or to try to deny it.

Fledermaus · Oct 9, 2018

Tangmo said:
Kindly pardon me everyone but I'd prefer to switch gears to return to my post #53 which has gone unanswered. Here's some from the post....

My invitation to EP -- to include retired nco -- to show an awareness or respect of the fact seems to have gone unanswered. So this post provides a nudge for nco retired or active to acknowledge their folly or to try to deny it.

Post #53 was Tangmo Babble about Webb. Post #50 was Tangmo Babble about oaths...

Introduction to the oath is in boot camp.

The oath is covered under the heading of 'Customs and Courtey' IIRC in the Guidebook for Marines.

It is covered in the Marine Corps NCO school.

The Advanced SCNO school covers it as well.

And it is repeated at each reenlistment.

Have you an intelligent question about the oath?

Tangmo · Oct 9, 2018

Career nco sergeants and career nco petty officers who have chosen to post about the armed forces oath get it wrong wrong wrong. No nco EP have ever pointed this out. Only I have taken the wrong headed to task in this matter.

Every nco EP who's chosen to post in the matter over the past couple of years has noted specifically Potus is in the oath each of 'em takes. Yes indeed each one has stated wrongly the EP oath means all armed forces personnel must obey the Potus. There have in fact been a constant drumbeat of these posts since Donald Trump became Potus.

These retired career lifer nco have not included in their nonsense the oath of the commissioned officer -- which includes all officers LT to General/Admiral -- and which makes no mention of Potus or of any official of the government. Yet no official of the government is in the officer oath. These vocal nco sergeants and nco petty officers as such have never taken the officer oath while in enlistment as EP. Rather, they speak as if there were only one oath which is the EP oath they know, and speak as if they presume the EP oath were the officer oath too. They are wrong in this presumption.

There are in fact two oaths of military/naval service. One is for EP and one is for officers and this applies to all armed services personnel across the services. Vital and central to the point here is that the oath of all armed services personnel of all ranks and of each service is to the Constitution. The armed forces oath is to the Constitution only and exclusively. Indeed, the EP oath taken by nco is to the Constitution and no one -- military or civilian -- can say otherwise nor should they claim otherwise as they haven't any basis in fact to make any such erroneous assertion.

So one can only draw the conclusion that nco generally are not instructed in the facts of the oath and its exclusive application to the Constitution. Or that some, many or most career lifer nco sergeants and nco petty officers were instructed inadequately. Or that they were instructed competently but failed to receive the instruction successfully or in any meaningful way. Or, further, they failed entirely to receive the instruction successfully.

Moreover those retired career lifer nco who were instructed and who successfully received the instruction on the oath -- and who retain the instruction -- have failed to correct their peers when the retired career lifer nco make the erroneous statement that the armed forces oath is to the president. The failure of any retired or active duty nco to correct nco peers would make the nco in either instance derelict in his/her duty and obligation to uphold the Constitution. This latter failure or disregard would therefore reflect poorly on their service in this respect and concerning their fidelity to the oath, i.e., the Constitution.

So shame on they who may know better but who choose to remain silent about it. Because we can be certain that when retirement approached or approaches they focus 100% on their broad and inclusive package of comprehensive post service benefits, privileges, status. And as we know, a number of the retired and active duty career lifer nco then go to public affairs websites on line to post their hard right wing views to the larger society in general. The Right has that right of course. (Wrong as they are in that too as they advocate removing Constitutional right after Constitutional right and in nullifying the Articles in the Constitution, which is relevant and material to yet another discussion.)

We can bet the farm SecDef James Mattis is in direct contrast to this dereliction of duty, i.e., General Mattis is the stellar model of the oath taker in the armed services of the United States.

Fledermaus · Oct 10, 2018

Tangmo said:
Career nco sergeants and career nco petty officers who have chosen to post about the armed forces oath get it wrong wrong wrong. No nco EP have ever pointed this out. Only I have taken the wrong headed to task in this matter.

Every nco EP who's chosen to post in the matter over the past couple of years has noted specifically Potus is in the oath each of 'em takes. Yes indeed each one has stated wrongly the EP oath means all armed forces personnel must obey the Potus. There have in fact been a constant drumbeat of these posts since Donald Trump became Potus.

These retired career lifer nco have not included in their nonsense the oath of the commissioned officer -- which includes all officers LT to General/Admiral -- and which makes no mention of Potus or of any official of the government. Yet no official of the government is in the officer oath. These vocal nco sergeants and nco petty officers as such have never taken the officer oath while in enlistment as EP. Rather, they speak as if there were only one oath which is the EP oath they know, and speak as if they presume the EP oath were the officer oath too. They are wrong in this presumption.

There are in fact two oaths of military/naval service. One is for EP and one is for officers and this applies to all armed services personnel across the services. Vital and central to the point here is that the oath of all armed services personnel of all ranks and of each service is to the Constitution. The armed forces oath is to the Constitution only and exclusively. Indeed, the EP oath taken by nco is to the Constitution and no one -- military or civilian -- can say otherwise nor should they claim otherwise as they haven't any basis in fact to make any such erroneous assertion.

So one can only draw the conclusion that nco generally are not instructed in the facts of the oath and its exclusive application to the Constitution. Or that some, many or most career lifer nco sergeants and nco petty officers were instructed inadequately. Or that they were instructed competently but failed to receive the instruction successfully or in any meaningful way. Or, further, they failed entirely to receive the instruction successfully.

Moreover those retired career lifer nco who were instructed and who successfully received the instruction on the oath -- and who retain the instruction -- have failed to correct their peers when the retired career lifer nco make the erroneous statement that the armed forces oath is to the president. The failure of any retired or active duty nco to correct nco peers would make the nco in either instance derelict in his/her duty and obligation to uphold the Constitution. This latter failure or disregard would therefore reflect poorly on their service in this respect and concerning their fidelity to the oath, i.e., the Constitution.

So shame on they who may know better but who choose to remain silent about it. Because we can be certain that when retirement approached or approaches they focus 100% on their broad and inclusive package of comprehensive post service benefits, privileges, status. And as we know, a number of the retired and active duty career lifer nco then go to public affairs websites on line to post their hard right wing views to the larger society in general. The Right has that right of course. (Wrong as they are in that too as they advocate removing Constitutional right after Constitutional right and in nullifying the Articles in the Constitution, which is relevant and material to yet another discussion.)

We can bet the farm SecDef James Mattis is in direct contrast to this dereliction of duty, i.e., General Mattis is the stellar model of the oath taker in the armed services of the United States.

See Tangmo

See Tangmo babble.

Babble Tangmo babble.

Hundreds of characters in search of reality... Endeavoring to find truth and failing.

Just another diatribe from a wannabe warrior who if his story is believed simply walked prettily while his peers fought and died.

In this case another diatribe so divorced from reality it suggests the stories of marching prettily are false as no officer would speak as he does.

Even when faced with reality he plows on...

Hard to tell if it is an intentional lie or complete ignorance....

Tangmo · Oct 10, 2018

Since nobody got it the first time I'm full of hope some retired career lifer nco or active duty EP can account for their silence in respect of the military oath and the fact it is not to a Caesar/Potus. That is, the military/naval oath is not to any person, official or leader of the government.

So one can only draw the conclusion that nco generally are not instructed in the facts of the oath and its exclusive application to the Constitution. Or that some, many or most career lifer nco sergeants and nco petty officers were instructed inadequately. Or that they were instructed competently but failed to receive the instruction successfully or in any meaningful way. Or, further, they failed entirely to receive the instruction successfully. Or that there was no instruction of EP in respect of their particular oath. Inquiring minds want to know about this.

Moreover those retired career lifer nco to include active duty nco who say they were instructed, and who successfully received the instruction on the oath -- and who retain the instruction -- have failed to correct their peers when the retired career lifer nco make the erroneous statement that the armed forces oath is to the president/c'nc/latter day Caligula. The failure of any retired or active duty nco to correct their wrong headed nco peers would make the perp nco in either instance derelict in his/her duty and obligation to uphold the Constitution. It would be a failure of duty period. This latter failure or disregard would therefore reflect poorly on the service of nco in this respect and concerning their fidelity to the oath, i.e., the Constitution. A failure of their competence and professionalism. Right Whingers are just that way I'd guess. Or maybe know.

No one over there seems to be able to discuss it for even a moment. Very sad given some certain mouths shoot off constantly about the oath while being wrong wrong wrong or just flat out evasive and deflective. While it could be regarded as a failure of brainpower it more likely would be that a right whinger is just a right whinger who does not care about his oath taking. Same as Trump of course who took his oath of office then wiped his arse with it. Same day turnaround besides.

Fledermaus · Oct 10, 2018

Tangmo said:
Since nobody got it the first time I'm full of hope some retired career lifer nco or active duty EP can account for their silence in respect of the military oath and the fact it is not to a Caesar/Potus. That is, the military/naval oath is not to any person, official or leader of the government.

So one can only draw the conclusion that nco generally are not instructed in the facts of the oath and its exclusive application to the Constitution. Or that some, many or most career lifer nco sergeants and nco petty officers were instructed inadequately. Or that they were instructed competently but failed to receive the instruction successfully or in any meaningful way. Or, further, they failed entirely to receive the instruction successfully. Or that there was no instruction of EP in respect of their particular oath. Inquiring minds want to know about this.

Moreover those retired career lifer nco to include active duty nco who say they were instructed, and who successfully received the instruction on the oath -- and who retain the instruction -- have failed to correct their peers when the retired career lifer nco make the erroneous statement that the armed forces oath is to the president/c'nc/latter day Caligula. The failure of any retired or active duty nco to correct their wrong headed nco peers would make the perp nco in either instance derelict in his/her duty and obligation to uphold the Constitution. It would be a failure of duty period. This latter failure or disregard would therefore reflect poorly on the service of nco in this respect and concerning their fidelity to the oath, i.e., the Constitution. A failure of their competence and professionalism. Right Whingers are just that way I'd guess. Or maybe know.

No one over there seems to be able to discuss it for even a moment. Very sad given some certain mouths shoot off constantly about the oath while being wrong wrong wrong or just flat out evasive and deflective. While it could be regarded as a failure of brainpower it more likely would be that a right whinger is just a right whinger who does not care about his oath taking. Same as Trump of course who took his oath of office then wiped his arse with it. Same day turnaround besides.

Another long diatribe about enlisted personnel that a real officer would not post...

Real enlisted personnel understood their oath.

Especially those who repeated it time and again.

Imaginary troops under an imaginary officer might not. But then again they were imaginary.

Tangmo · Oct 10, 2018

Have no doubt as to who is still running the show in the WH and the Pentagon over Trump who is regarded by Pentagon as an incompetent commander in chief....

Report: H.R. McMaster to Be Fired – at Kelly and Mattis’s Behest

MAR. 1, 2018

The White House is preparing to replace H.R. McMaster as national security adviser as early as next month in a move orchestrated by chief of staff John Kelly and Defense Secretary James Mattis, according to five people familiar with the discussions.

Report: McMaster to Be Fired ? at Kelly and Mattis?s Behest

So that's three Marine Corps Amigos: Mattis, Kelly and chairman JCS Gen. "Fighting Joe" Dunford who is former commandant of their beloved Corps. Both Kelly and Dunford served under Mattis command in Iraq. Trump knows he needs to be careful in dealing with the Pentagon and the national security folk that he's not the one who gets fired.

Why Trump hasn’t fired Mattis

Trump is said to divide the members of his Cabinet into first-tier “killers” and second-tier “winners.” Mattis is indisputably a killer, but he’s also something rarer: a sometime loser — of policy arguments, that is — who manages to disagree with the president without squandering his clout or getting under Trump’s skin. He opposed Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate change accord, decertify the Iran deal, slap tariffs on steel and aluminum, and move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. He opposes the president’s proposed ban on transgender service members and has reportedly ignored requests from the White House to see plans for a military strike against North Korea.

Yet Mattis has been able to present the president with views he doesn’t like without bearing the brunt of his frustration. One senior administration official called him “bulletproof.”

Even his detractors on the right are reluctant to criticize Mattis, a retired Marine general who fought in both Gulf wars and Afghanistan, on the record, because despite their disagreements, they are happy he’s there. Those critics say privately that Mattis is too cautious and conventional in his thinking, and that he doesn’t sufficiently appreciate the political nature of his current job. But “they regard him as better than the likely alternatives,” one such critic told me, and consider him “a restraining hand on an otherwise unpredictable and impulsive president.”

politico.com/magazine/story/2018/03/23/james-mattis-defense-secretary-how-to-succeed-in-trump-cabinet-without-getting-fired-217699

Mattis is out of the loop and Trump doesn't listen to him, say officials

Tom Horn

Well-known member

American

Trump Grump Whisperer

Tangmo

Fledermaus

Oozlefinch

Tangmo

Zachariah

Tangmo

Zachariah

Tangmo

Fledermaus

Zachariah

Tangmo

Tangmo

Fledermaus

American

Trump Grump Whisperer

Tangmo

American

Trump Grump Whisperer

Tangmo

Fledermaus

Tangmo

Fledermaus

Tangmo

Fledermaus

Tangmo