President-elect Trump was wrestling with his Pentagon Pick this Sunday. He got turned down by Army Gen. Jack Keane, architect of the Iraq Surge, because of the recent passing of his wife after a 14 year bout with Parkinson’s Disease. Keane had been an adviser to defeated Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton on military affairs. When alleged asked by Trump, who Keane would recommend, he mentioned Marine Gen. James “mad dog” Mattis, storied commander of Marine land forces in Iraq and later CENTCOM Commander who was fired from that post by President Obama because of the General’s criticism of the Iran deal and threats in the region. The other candidate Keane recommended was ex-CIA Director Army Gen. David Petreaus who left under a cloud following his plea bargain over mishandling confidential documents.
President-elect Trump after meeting Mattis at his Bedminster, New Jersey Golf Resort Saturday said in Tweets: “All I can say is he’s the real deal. He’s the real deal.” General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who is being considered for Secretary of Defense, was very impressive yesterday. A true General’s General! That may be the case. However, not unlike Mattis’ controversial comments about the Iran Pact , Mattis has made comments on Israel after leaving his Centcom command that raise questions about possible relations with the Jewish nation under his leadership as Defense Secretary. His other hurdle is that his retirement after 44 years of service in 2013 is that he would be barred until 2020 to assume a Pentagon post. That would require a Congressional waiver of the seven year restriction.
Mattis, is considered a “Marine’s Marine”, who came up through the enlisted ranks and received a battlefield commission as Lieutenant in 1972. CNN Politics noted his storied career:
In Mattis, Trump has a candidate who was held in high regard throughout the ranks of the Marine Corps during his 44 years of service. A seasoned combat commander, he led a task force into southern Afghanistan in 2001 and a Marine division at the time of the Iraq invasion in 2003.
The retired four-star general, who was known as “Mad Dog,” was lauded for his leadership of Marines in the 2004 Battle of Fallujah in Iraq — one of the bloodiest of the war.
But he attracted controversy in 2005 when he said “it’s fun to shoot some people” while addressing service members in San Diego.
He also served as a commander of a major NATO strategic command, Allied Command Transformation, in Norfolk, Virginia.
Mattis, known as a plain-spoken leader well-liked by his Marines, was later promoted to run US Central Command in 2010 — a post that gave him command responsibility for all US forces in the Middle East. He also was an outspoken critic of the Iran nuclear deal.
When Mattis was fired as CENTCOM Commander in 2013, The Weekly Standard citedcomments by author Thomas E. Ricks wrote in Foreign Policy about why Obama fired him without even calling him:
Pentagon insiders say that he rubbed civilian officials the wrong way — not because he went all “mad dog,” which is his public image, and the view at the White House, but rather because he pushed the civilians so hard on considering the second- and third-order consequences of military action against Iran. Some of those questions apparently were uncomfortable. Like, what do you do with Iran once the nuclear issue is resolved and it remains a foe? What do you do if Iran then develops conventional capabilities that could make it hazardous for U.S. Navy ships to operate in the Persian Gulf? He kept saying, “And then what?”
If these alleged third hand comments are affirmed, then Mattis appears to have been prescient about the folly of the Obama Administration “engagement” with Iran leading to the JCPOA signed off on January 16, 2016, the so-called Compliance Date. Mattis was spot on about Iran’s aggressive behavior against US Naval squadrons in both the Persian Gulf and at the Bab al Mandab Straits at the Mouth of the Red Sea.
Notwithstanding, Mattis’ Israel comments at the Aspen Institute in July of 2013 have raised eyebrows in both the Jewish nation and among its supporters here in the US. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer interviewed Mattis at the Aspen Institute regarding his positions on Israel. The Times of Israel noted in a report on Sunday, November 20, 2016:
In July 2013, shortly after leaving his post running CENTCOM, Mattis said the current situation in Israeli was “unsustainable” and that settlements were obstructing the possibility of a two-state outcome between Israelis and Palestinians, comments that seem to fly in the face of Trump’s position as reported by his Israel advisers.
“The current situation is unsustainable,” Mattis told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer during a panel discussion at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado when asked about the peace process. “It’s got to be directly addressed. We have got to find a way to make the two-state solution that Democrat and Republican administrations have supported. We’ve got to get there, and the chances for it are starting to ebb because of the settlements, and where they’re at, they’re going to make it impossible to maintain the two-state option.”
Mattis specifically warned that if Israel continued to expand its settlement presence, its long-term character as a Jewish and democratic state would be at risk, ultimately leading to Israel becoming an apartheid state.
“If I’m in Jerusalem and I put 500 Jewish settlers out here to the east and there are 10,000 Arab settlers in here, if we draw the border to include them, either it ceases to be a Jewish state or you say the Arabs don’t get to vote — apartheid,” he said.
“That didn’t work too well the last time I saw that practiced in a country,” he added, presumably alluding to South Africa. “So we’ve got to work on this with a sense of urgency.”
In that same conversation, Mattis told Blitzer that the US paid a price for its support of Israel and the perception of bias it broadcasts to the rest of the Arab world.
“I paid a military security price every day as the commander of CENTCOM because the Americans were seen as biased in support of Israel,” he said, “and that moderates, all the moderate Arabs who want to be with us, because they can’t come out publicly in support of people who don’t show respect for the Arab Palestinians.”
Watch the Aspen Security Forum CNN Wolf Blitzer interview with Gen. Mattis at the 43 minute mark:
Assuming that Mattis stands behind those comments that may present difficulties for President-elect Trump as his principal Israel Advisor Jason Greenblatt, a day following the election, on an Israel Army Radio interview said, “He does not view the settlements as an obstacle to peace.”
The Times of Israel report on the Trump selection of General Mattis as a possible Pentagon chief reminded readers of a similar remark by ex- CIA Director, General David Petreaus, during a US Senate Armed Services Hearing said: “The [Palestinian] conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of US favoritism for Israel.”
In view of the changes in attitude towards Israel among the Saudis and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council perhaps these older views of Mattis and Petreaus may no longer are relevant. Ironically it is allegedly because of what Mattis told President Obama who fired him nearly four years ago: Iran’s rising bad behavior in the region of the CENTCOM Command threatening both the US presence and “moderate Arab states.”
@ watsa46:
A bit:
https://www.google.com/search?q=general+george+s.+patton&safe=active&rlz=1CAACAO_enUS719US719&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=674&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiekOWE6bvQAhXEbiYKHRwVAzEQ_AUIBigB
but, I think he looks more like Frank Perdue:
https://www.google.com/search?q=jim+perdue&safe=active&rlz=1CAACAO_enUS719US719&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=674&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjr2OrF6bvQAhVFMyYKHa9XDlAQ_AUIBigB#safe=active&tbm=isch&q=frank+perdue
Ted Belman Said:
The article describes him as a bulldog who always says what he thinks. So, is he a boot-licking opportunist or an anti-semite?
As people have pointed out, there are a lot of ways he could screw with Israel.
Soviet leaders usually followed Lenin’s example and died in office.
In a debate with Rosa Luxemburg over the role of democracy after the revolution, Lenin said, “good leaders are not born by the hundred.”
There were people who wanted to make George Washington king for life. He refused to run again for office after two terms and didn’t even believe in political parties.
We owe our freedom, in part, to the fact that our first founding George believed that good leaders ARE born by the hundred.
Which brings me to the words of our second founding father named George.
“My ambition in life is to be next”. – George Burns
NEXT, Please!
Anybody noticed that he resembles George C Scott! Patton movie.
The ultimate Boss is D. T.! Besides, Mattis will be given historical and geographical facts and evidences that will convince him of the righteousness of the Israeli position.
Once the SD antisemites are eliminated like cockroaches everything will show a new clarity and how to deal with the key issue: Syria and Assad family. It is vital to separate them from Iran and should therefore be given an Hobson’s choice.
Once Syria is separated from Iran many things will become a lot ore obvious considering that bot Su & Shi are really WEAK!
bernard ross Said:
They have been saying that canard since before 1948. Guess what …. we are still here and not only sustainable but going from strength to strength….. I wonder if America is sustainable????
Ted Belman Said:
I beleive he made those remarks after Obama “retired” him.
Perhaps he was hoping for a position in a think tank or a “consultancy” with the GCC?
@ Sebastien Zorn:
Yes he can if he has influence and confidence of the President. He might have been a fighter but looks like he ain’t no thinker
@ Ted Belman:
Ted: I agree that Mattis in 2013 was following Obama’s talking points on the 2-state solution.
However, there are dueling narratives, and we should want someone who knows the difference between the fabricated Palestinian narrative, and the truth.
I do NOT see Mattis as the next SecDef, if only to avoid that waiver process. The Dhimmi-Dems will use that as a major distraction on climate change, transgender rights, women in combat, etc, priorities that have so consumed DoD past few years.
Who knows? Perhaps Rick Perry, Defender of Jerusalem, will get the nod for SecDef. Then we can watch heads explode.
Perry is very articulate and smart when it comes to anything military. Probably knows more about the F-35JSF than anyone except Ashton Carter, who, as a nuclear physicist, might be a fine candidate for SecEnergy, once people realize DoEnergy is all about nuclear.
Who can forget anti-Israel Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Weinberger helped convince President Reagan to condemn Israel in the UN Security Council for bombing Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. He must have played a significant part urging Reagan against Israel’s 1982 Operation Peace for the Galilee. When an Iranian-Hezbollah suicide bomber murdered 241 U.S. Marines, Weinberger refused Israelis who offered to fly the wounded to Hospitals in Haifa, etc. This man will have President Trump’s ear. He is bad news.
The problem arises because the SecDef can drag his feet on weapons system, spare parts, or defense RD&D cooperation with Israel using many subtle mechanisms that avoid a direct confrontation. Any SecDef candidate must be fully on board with the Commander in Chief’s policies.
If Mathis becomes Def. Sec. he will be a voice in the Trump Cabinet that is not positive for Israel.
How much this will factor in determining Trumps policies we do not yet know. The other voices so far are very pro Israel.
As in all cases Israel must do what Israel believes is in its best interest. It helps if the USA has Israel’s back.
Bibi should have a good relationship directly with Trump unlike with Obama. Trump will in the end make decisions after getting advice and counsel from his advisors and Cabinet.
The two state solution Mattis was attempting to preserve, by sticking out his neck, is a mortal danger to Israel and a red flag. Mattis knows he was advocating strongly for Israel’s demise. He cannot claim ignorance given his background. Trump will be dependent upon the advise of his SOD. There are many like Mattis at the pentagon. Hatred of Israel is standard. He is just another garden variety gutless Israel hater. Mattis is not compatible with Trump’s stated policy on Judea and Samaria. There is no whitewashing this, Ted. Israel may need a sympathetic SOD in a future war.
Therefore, Mattis must be rejected from consideration, and for damn good reason.
The Petraeus remark is totally different. Petraeus was simply stating fact. I have no problem with this.
I think the importance of his remarks on settlements is overblown. He will have no say in Trumps policies regarding the territories. Besides when he made these remarks he was reflecting his government’s talking points. Apparently he has a lot going for him so I wouldn’t reject him because of these remarks.
As Secretary of Defense, can he unilaterally put pressure on Israel?