The Next President is...

[disgruntledemployee]

Mattis would be a really good choice.  However, I don't think you'll see a yuge (Trumpism) growth spurt in defense.  From my time in the same organization and others that worked around him, he's not much for red tape, inefficiency, and large staffs.  A lot of DCers could be looking elsewhere for a job.  And talk about someone that knows the world and the inhabitants.  In a way, making him Secretary of War (I kinda like the old name) sends the world a great message, and one of my favorite quotes of his, " I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all."

I mean think of it, when was the last time the persona of a SecDef sent chills down the spine of our adversaries?

Great choice, can't wait for the annoucement

Out

[Ram]

I'm actually unsure of the message we are sending the world.  Lemmie drop some info about the Korean perspective, courtesy DLI and a year doing ROKAF ACSC:

Obviously, the Koreans aren't thrilled about a Trump presidency.  They're certainly nervous, as most of their news about the US is translated almost directly from what CNN and the AP pump out (watching the news cycle hit here about 6.9-36 hours after it breaks in the US is interesting).  It's no surprise they think Trump a crass madman...that's what CNN told them.  Thanks, CNN.

So, after the Mattis announcement, I perused Korean media online.  The majority of the copy does indeed focus on Mattis' experience leading troops in the middle east.  However, this isn't necessarily seen as a positive here on the ROK, as local media generally view the Iraq war (and to a small degree, Afghanistan too) as a costly failure and huge strategic mistake.  (I'm not here to argue this point...I'm just telling you about the Korean perspective.)

The rest of the copy I've read describes Mattis as a general that's really respected by the US Military and by US Conservatives.  Again...this fact also carries positive and negative baggage.

I'd like to say that he's quoted well in Korean media, but that's not the case yet.  The only time I've seen him quoted was a direct translation of his "it's fun to shoot people" soundbite about killing terrorists that deserve to die.  But only the "fun to shoot people" part of the quote was printed...what was NOT included was his discussion about how the people he likes to shoot are all dickwads that rape women, kill kids, rape little boys, and are generally assholes.

Also (and partially thanks to Mr. Trump), he's now "Mad Dog Mattis" to Korean media.  Not "Chaos Mattis," which the general has been rumored to prefer.

 

So, to readers of Korean papers and online media, you have a USMC former general who commanded in long, bloody Asian land wars, who has said "shooting people is fun," and everyone is calling him "mad dog Mattis."  

 

Koreans are, understandably (albeit incorrectly) scratching their heads and thinking "what the fvck-mida?"

 

I'm certain that Gen Mattis will impress as soon as he starts giving speeches as our SECDEF, but he's got an uphill battle over here in Asia.  What we view as a smart, seasoned, and cautious general (who really brings the pain when it's appropriate), Asia views very differently.  It doesn't change MY mind about Mattis (I think he's Mr. Trump's best pick yet), but just FYSA.

 

I just typed too fvcking much....and I just remembered that no one cares what the ROK thinks.  Thanks for reading anyway.  Maybe someone finds it interesting.

Edited December 2, 2016 by Ram

[Ram]

Election day in the States went late into the wee hours of the morning, which put the most exciting parts at about mid-day in Korea.

The atmosphere was that of a funeral.  I speak often with the ROK Chief of Joint Strategic Planning at school over lunch, and he literally said to me "what the hell did you people DO?"

I chuckled a little bit.  The ROK is new to the whole democracy game, so don't expect them to always have a grasp on how it works.  (Hell, their president is going bonkers over here if you've been keeping up with the news.)

This picture also came to mind:

 

Edited December 2, 2016 by Ram

[pbar]

@Kiloalpha, when I attended the ROKAF Staff College, not one ROK officer I asked about us leaving the Peninsula mentioned the alliance, US-ROK friendship, our sacrifices for them, etc.  They ONLY mentioned that it would be too costly for them to replace our capabilities. They only care about the money. Even the pro-US ROKAF guys were like this.  As an aside, the most pro-US ROKAF officer I've met in my RAS duties is Lee Chol-sul, the ex-NKAF MiG-19 pilot who defected in 1996 and was a ROKAF Lt Col (since promoted to colonel) when I was at the Staff College.

 

[sqwatch]

@Kiloalpha, when I attended the ROKAF Staff College, not one ROK officer I asked about us leaving the Peninsula mentioned the alliance, US-ROK friendship, our sacrifices for them, etc.  They ONLY mentioned that it would be too costly for them to replace our capabilities. They only care about the money. Even the pro-US ROKAF guys were like this.  As an aside, the most pro-US ROKAF officer I've met in my RAS duties is Lee Chol-sul, the ex-NKAF MiG-19 pilot who defected in 1996 and was a ROKAF Lt Col (since promoted to colonel) when I was at the Staff College.
 

I like the stability we bring to the region by being there. I also can get cheap billeting when I pick up my tailored suits from Mr moon.

I know, we're under appreciated but we should be used to that by now.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[waveshaper]

Maybe he will run for President in 4 years. I can see the slogans/Tshirts now "Mad Dog 2020".

Question; Does anyone know the real story about this particular incident that happened at the Rhino LZ (2001/Afghanistan)? Did the USAF bail out General Mattis/USMC by taking the initiative and rescuing the wounded SF troops?

https://m.reddit.com/r/Military/comments/24spkh/mattis_veterans_are_not_victims/

[HuggyU2]

[Ram]

2 hours ago, pbar said:

@Kiloalpha, when I attended the ROKAF Staff College, not one ROK officer I asked about us leaving the Peninsula mentioned the alliance, US-ROK friendship, our sacrifices for them, etc.  They ONLY mentioned that it would be too costly for them to replace our capabilities. They only care about the money. Even the pro-US ROKAF guys were like this.  As an aside, the most pro-US ROKAF officer I've met in my RAS duties is Lee Chol-sul, the ex-NKAF MiG-19 pilot who defected in 1996 and was a ROKAF Lt Col (since promoted to colonel) when I was at the Staff College.

 

My experience echoes yours.

 

I don't think we should move out of NE Asia like the isolationists like to suggest, but this region has been on the gravy train for too long.  Mr. Lim is getting old, and Songtan ain't what it used to be.

 

[waveshaper]

2 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Tidbit; General Mattis will be our first Secretary of Defense "ever" that's single. General Mattis A.K.A. "The Warrior Monk" is a life-long bachelor, who has never been married and has no children.

My recommendation; The first order of business for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on day one, should be to get this dude hooked up/laid.

[HuggyU2]

1 hour ago, waveshaper said:

My recommendation; The first order of business for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on day one, should be to get this dude hooked up/laid.

Classy. 

[Stitch]

2 hours ago, waveshaper said:

My recommendation; The first order of business for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on day one, should be to get this dude hooked up/laid.

It'll be like an old-school green bean tour of Son-Tong/A-Town, take him downtown get em' drunk, find him an acceptable female accompaniment and let nature take it's course.... Ahhhh amore'

[Blue]

3 hours ago, waveshaper said:

Tidbit; General Mattis will be our first Secretary of Defense "ever" that's single. General Mattis A.K.A. "The Warrior Monk" is a life-long bachelor, who has never been married and has no children.

My recommendation; The first order of business for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on day one, should be to get this dude hooked up/laid.

Since when does "single = not getting laid?"

[pbar]

All the married guys want to be single; all the single guys want to be married....

[Learjetter]

Since when does "married = getting laid" ?

[Ram]

Dude, your wife puts out all the time, brah.

[SurelySerious]

Married/Single is no factor.  He's joining the Trump administration.....just grab 'em by the pu$$y.

Nice try OSI

[Seriously]

On 11/27/2016 at 0:37 PM, Ram said:

The last 2 sources on this Facebook copy/paste don't work, and the first source is a link to a short and irrelevant biography of John Bonifaz.

That said, is it not extremely obvious that the recount attempt was made because Jill Stein doesn't like Donald Trump? She's the green party candidate for crying out loud. There might... might be some legitimate arguments in favor a recount, but the political bias in the attempt is fairly obvious.

Regardless, Obama, himself, has said the election results should stand. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/audit-the-vote-recount-jill-stein-election-hillary-clinton-trump-2016-11

In other words, this is a non-story. The real story is Trump's bombastic approach to foreign policy, deeply concerning choices for his cabinet (with the except of Mattis), and unpresidential/unprofessional use of Twitter (among all of the other things wrong with him as a person).

This post of yours is just another shout in the echo-chamber. 

 

 

 

[Ram]

It's obvious that the Stein recount was a money grab by the Green Party. As far as how she managed to raise more money in a week than she did during her WHOLE CAMPAIGN, I guess we can just speculate.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[tk1313]

1 hour ago, Kiloalpha said:

Trump is now taking aim at the F-35. Not going so far as to say it's cancelled (like Air Force One), but he's making it clear that it needs to be cleaned up.

Source (for people of the Republican persuasion):https://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/12/f-35-program-cost-is-out-control-trump-says.html

Source (for @nsplayr): https://www.rt.com/usa/370014-trump-f35-save-billions/

Source (for everyone else): https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/10/29/trump-wants-fire-f-35/74800906/

 

I knew I'd have to deal with the consequences of picking the wildcard eventually... One week he's appointing Mattis, and the next he's acting like a 17-year-old girl on Twitter. Maybe I'm a broken record, but regardless of your stance on the F-35, Trump needs to leave the military stuff to the guys who didn't defer the draft due to 'heel spurs' (no matter how accurate a diagnosis that was) and/or call out McCain because he likes "people who weren't captured." Get off of Twitter and deal with our economy - that's why I chose you instead of the butcher of Benghazi.

[nsplayr]

1 hour ago, Kiloalpha said:

Trump is now taking aim at the F-35. Not going so far as to say it's cancelled (like Air Force One), but he's making it clear that it needs to be cleaned up.

Source (for people of the Republican persuasion):https://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/12/f-35-program-cost-is-out-control-trump-says.html

Source (for @nsplayr): https://www.rt.com/usa/370014-trump-f35-save-billions/

Source (for everyone else): https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/10/29/trump-wants-fire-f-35/74800906/

 

Wait, you're insinuating that it's the liberals who are sympathetic to Russian sources of news these days? That's pretty funny man...ask Gen. Flynn about how legit RT is if you run into him around the White House.

Reagan is rolling over in his grave re: Trump's ongoing connections to the Russians and apparently even the GOP NATSEC crowd is finally taking notice. 

[viper154]

41 minutes ago, tk1313 said:

I knew I'd have to deal with the consequences of picking the wildcard eventually... One week he's appointing Mattis, and the next he's acting like a 17-year-old girl on Twitter. Maybe I'm a broken record, but regardless of your stance on the F-35, Trump needs to leave the military stuff to the guys who didn't defer the draft due to 'heel spurs' (no matter how accurate a diagnosis that was) and/or call out McCain because he likes "people who weren't captured." Get off of Twitter and deal with our economy - that's why I chose you instead of the butcher of Benghazi.

Our military acquisitions process needs a serious overhaul. The government is letting contractors stick in our ass without a common curtesy of a reach around. If we can get this asinine process we use un fcked maybe we get hardware that works, on time, and not 2-6x times the price we were quoted. 

[matmacwc]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

Wait, you're insinuating that it's the liberals who are sympathetic to Russian sources of news these days? That's pretty funny man...ask Gen. Flynn about how legit RT is if you run into him around the White House.

Reagan is rolling over in his grave re: Trump's ongoing connections to the Russians and apparently even the GOP NATSEC crowd is finally taking notice. 

Liberals and the Demo party was all about Russia in the 80's, what changed? 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/oct/27/20061027-084248-4386r/

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/remember_when_ted_kennedy_asked_the_soviets_for_help_defeating_reagan.html

https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/book_teddy_kennedy_plotted_with_soviets_to_oust_reagan/

Fuck the Russians, this (D) strategy is just that and nothing more. 

Reagan: "Weakened spiritually, morally and economically".....sounds like a Democrat rallying cry.

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by matmacwc

[nsplayr]

25 years is apparently what changed.  Your point is my point exactly - the Russians don't have our best interests in mind and I trust our own intelligence community more than I trust RT and the Kremlin propaganda machine.  Can the same be said uniformly across the right?

Now look to the President-elect's administration as the one wanting closer ties to Russia, as not believing the CIA's assessment that Russian hacks were meant to help get Trump elected, etc.  Flynn and Tillerson (National Security Adviser and Secretary of State to be [rumored]) have extensive ties with Russia, as did Paul Manafort, Trump's one-time campaign manager.

That's why I find it ironic.  The "liberals are commies and love Russia!" meme doesn't quite hold today the same way it did in the 80s.  Some liberals are commies and fuck 'em, I agree, but let's allow our distain for Russian intersts to cross party lines when necessary as well.  Today it's the incoming GOP administration that can rightfully be charged with cozying up to Putin, not the Democrats.

Edit to add: I'll also say that I remember laughing when Obama mocked Romney during the 2012 Presidential debates re: Russia.  "The 80s want their foreign policy back, etc."  I was wrong then and so was the President, Romney was right to identify the Russians as the biggest (or top 2) geopolitical threats to the U.S. VEOs aren't an existential threat...Russian undermining of Western institutions (EU/NATO/U.S.), grabbing land in Europe and energy deals in the Middle East and offering a shitty alternative to Western-back norms and power is an existential threat, and that's what Romney was getting at I think.

Edited December 12, 2016 by nsplayr

[tk1313]

45 minutes ago, viper154 said:

Our military acquisitions process needs a serious overhaul. The government is letting contractors stick in our ass without a common curtesy of a reach around. If we can get this asinine process we use un fcked maybe we get hardware that works, on time, and not 2-6x times the price we were quoted. 

Trust me, I could name drop the big contractors on this forum, talk sh!t for the next 5 hours, and sleep like a baby...  But right now, we need less Twitter posts and more of Trump saying "OK, Mattis, go pick off your favorite limb from that willow tree and apply corrective action the old fashion way -- to the offenders in the government or their contractor buddies."

[pawnman]

17 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Wait, you're insinuating that it's the liberals who are sympathetic to Russian sources of news these days? That's pretty funny man...ask Gen. Flynn about how legit RT is if you run into him around the White House.

Reagan is rolling over in his grave re: Trump's ongoing connections to the Russians and apparently even the GOP NATSEC crowd is finally taking notice. 

Well, Reagan's opposition to Russia revolved around them being a communist country.  To think that the US and Russia can't find common ground in things like fighting radical Islamic terrorism, or potentially hemming in a rising China, or any number of trade agreements, it ludicrous.  Just because we were enemies in the Cold War doesn't mean we have to remain enemies forever.