The anecdote about secdef ignoring an order from the president of the united states seems likely to be an incomplete telling of that situation. I would be cautious about that one.
-
-
I don't think that's what happened here.
-
Meaning you don't buy Woodward's account? I agree with that skepticism. Nevertheless, I've still seen people who uncritically accept the account and are cheering Mattis for ignoring the order.
-
I just think many more things occurred before and after this conversation that render WH's response to Syrian chem deployments more normal. Just smells like missing context,.
-
I'll grant that possibility. Either way, between the two, this was not a Moynihanian or Wilsonian moment.
@KyleWOrton@peterawolf -
I don't read it as ignoring an order. It seems to be early in the process, this was Trump's reaction, and Mattis used the process to work him down with all the usual guff - the "risk" of killing Russians, the air defences, attacks by Iran's proxies on U.S. troops in Iraq, etc.
-
Gotta keep that "political Islam" under control Kyle! All "swimmin' in the same sea". God-forbid we confront Iran Proxies. >.<
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We do NOT want that to be SOP.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.