About Half of Active-Duty U.S. Military (Less Than One-Third of Officers) Supports Trump
Trump’s approval rating is falling in all demographics, and that includes active-duty military, where now, almost exactly half say that the country is imperiled by Trump’s incompetence and/or poor behavior. To that I would add:
• Even though the survey respondents were given anonymity, there must have been some who were afraid to answer in such a way that could be construed as disloyal to the president, and
• The survey was taken before the departure of Defense Secretary Mattis and before Trump’s decision to leave Syria (which flew in the teeth of the Pentagon and state department).
This is a fairly shocking result, especially considering that military people tend to be loyal to and respectful of superior officers.
Here’s a bit of conjecture:
• That very loyalty cuts both ways. The fact that the president has been horrifically combative towards traditional American allies must not be playing well.
• On the other side of the ledger, the coddling of avowed enemy Russia, along with other world dictatorships, must similarly be hurting his reviews.
• The military respects science, thus having a president who “doesn’t believe” the scientific reports coming from his own administration must be frustrating.
• The military is nothing if not organized, and Trump seems to thrive on chaos. The torrent of staff departures is a good example; as of now we have no Secretary of Defense, no Chief of staff , no Attorney General, no one’s sure who’s running the Justice Dept., the stock market is crashing and he’s shutting the government down.
• It’s hard to expect these people to favor a president who disagrees with the findings of 100% of its intelligence agencies.
• The military places a high value on honesty; students at West Point are given take-home closed-book exams. Having a president who’s clearly connected with crime and whose closest associates are being herded off to prison must cut like a knife. They’re probably not thrilled to be following the command of a man of revolting moral character who’s under 17 separate investigations.
When countries around the globe see their democracies dissolve into authoritarian control, this is normally facilitated by a close connection between the leader and his military. If Trump thinks he can rely on the same here, he’s sorely mistaken. It’s obvious that these people, especially those at the highest levels, can’t wait to see him go, by the fastest legal means. Godspeed.
Craig,
Now your getting desperate!
You even misquote and distort your own source of reference, by cherry-picking selective parts to distort the context.
What the article did say was the US military generally always follows the popularity trend of President in a similar context with civilians.
What you also failed to mention was these polls were taken in September,was a voluntary online poll, and concluded ;
“Troops surveyed continue to give high marks to the President for his handling of military issues specifically. More than 60 % said they believe the military is in better shape now than it was under President Barack Obama”.
The poll also concluded ;
“Only 13% believe that Obama’s military was in better shape than Trump’s, according to the poll”.
You also seem to have a romanticized Walt Disney idea of Students at West Point, who are no more, or less, honest than the rest of the population.
The withdrawal of US involvement in Syria, is consistent with the President’s non-imperial approach to international affairs. The US military on the other hand, especially officers, loves being involved in international conflicts as that provides a reason for the existence of an enlarged military, excitement, advancement, and purpose.
The President (whom you always label a a dangerous war-monger) is the first President in over 70 years determined to disengage the US from the futility of US involvement in long, unwinnable, expensive civil conflicts.
The Us still retains a huge and expensive troop presence in Europe, what for ? Why is the US taxpayer spending vast sums to maintain a US presence in Europe to counteract an organization or threat that disappeared more than 35 years ago ?
Russia is not the old USSR, the Russian economy is smaller than most European nation nations and minuscule in comparison to the EU. The Russian military budget also includes internal security forces whose duties further weaken it’s military capacity.
The Russian military has improved enormously under Putin, but remains underfunded and heavily reliant on conscripted personnel to flesh out it’s ranks. Conflicts in Syria, and border disputes have proved expensive and exhausting for Russia whose annual defense budget isn’t even 10% of the US, or only 25% of the EU (excluding UK), despite being nearly 6% of GDP.
Maintaining Russia as a “bogeyman” in the hope of increasing US military spending is a Pentagon obsession, whereas the real threat is the People Republic of China, who have been spending vast amounts modernizing and increasing it’s military capacity.
President Trump doesn’t agree with the need for the US to act as the “world’s policeman” nor does he see the US military as being needed to spread an American way of life to all corners of the world.
The military on the other hand, has a vested interest in exactly the opposite. Unfortunately, as Vietnam, Somalia, Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan and all the other trouble spots around the world have taught the US, getting bogged down in fighting often incomprehensible civil wars in far distant regions, seldom produce viable long term political solutions.
The military likes stability. Service careers built on longevity and seniority, these are not compatible to the fast moving career patterns of modern business, where long service is not valued but results are more important.
President Trump’s business career has been segmented. His loyalty to associates and subordinates lasts only as long as they are useful to a particular project or himself. When that usefulness ends he terminates the relationship, often amicably, and doesn’t rely on long term political alliances relationships which serve no useful purpose.
If given their way, the US military would never leave any assignment, remaining long after the mission is complete for fear of “losing ground”.
The President doesn’t believe in a policy of long term military involvement, he believes in projecting US power through trade and economy. He’s delighted if Putin gets involved in costly military adventures, especially those that require constant propping up.
His next target is withdrawal from Afghanistan. The President sees no value in holding on to this poverty ridden nation, riven with internal tribal disputes. In contrast, after nearly 18 years, many American soldiers have built careers and deep contacts with what has become an American colony.
Withdrawal will almost certainly see all the American influence swept away,making everything that was fought for seem a waste, and worse a betrayal. Soldiers hate such events. For a Four Star US marine like General Mattis, such pragmatism must be unbearable. Mattis, like nearly all his Pentagon colleague,s have spent their entire careers serving “Pax America”, projecting not only US power and prestige, but exporting the American way of life by military means.
President Trump doesn’t believe in “Pax America” or long term military doctrines. He believes in alliances of convenience. He believes in trade, commerce and economic power.
The President doesn’t believe he’s the self-appointed “leader of the Free World”, with on a crusade spread the American way of life to all corners of the earth. President Trump believes he was elected to be the US President and only look after the beat interests of US citizens.
He couldn’t care less about a civil conflict in some poverty stricken third world nation with no economic importance to the US. He doesn’t believe the US has any mission, or obligation to spend US money or lives to enforce an American solution.
Quite rightly, he believes the US is best remaining out of such conflicts.
US political observers just don’t seem to have grasped the difference between the Trump Presidency and previous administrations. The constant replacement of personnel and cabinet members is seen a chaotic and the result of conflict, while to the President it’s a normal process. The President sees Cabinet members and advisors as ‘consultant executives’ hired to do a specific task or to serve until an objective has been accomplished.
President Trump is not a party loyalist or ideologue, endorsing future Cabinet members as furthering his legacy or that of his party.
The departure of any Cabinet minister or advisor is no big deal to this President, he simply looks for a more suitable candidate.
In this way he’s typical of most business men who run family-owned enterprises. Rupert Murdoch and the Ford family have the same view of life.
Craig, for two years you’ve been ranting how different President Trump is from President Obama etc, and it’s true, he’s different. Cometh the hour, cometh the Man ! To understand President Trump needs you to open your mind and forget all your old ideologies, Trump is the future, whether you like it or not !
Future Presidents will be more likable, certainly with less baggage, but “Pax Americana” will never be revived. The old ideologies and party loyalties are broken forever.