Will McMaster Cuck Out?

[clubgop]

Post the rest of the poll asshole.

Meanwhile, a recent Pew Research Center poll has shown that most Europeans believe the US would come to the aid of its European NATO allies if war broke out with Russia, despite Trump’s criticism of the military alliance.

On average, 66 percent of the citizens in seven major NATO member states said that Washington “would use military force” against Russia to defend a NATO ally in the event of a “serious military conflict,” a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center between February and early April of 2017 found.

About 70 percent in Spain, the Netherlands, and Canada believe the US is ready to intervene militarily should there be conflict with Russia, while between 60 and 66 percent of people in France, the UK, and Germany do. This remained unchanged throughout the first quarter of 2017, despite Trump’s sharp criticism of NATO during the US presidential election campaign, the Pew Research Center says

Everyone knows if it really came down to it NATO would be defended. Dont worried about your ski resort country.

As for the OP,

Establishing back channels is status quo for incoming administrations. Supposedly this is different cause Russia is an "adversary".

You establish back channels precisely because you have an adversarial relationship. This is mind bogglingly stupid. What did the Obama admin do with Iran? I mean fuck. You can tell the Democrats got beat the fuck up, they have no grown ups left. Wacked out Finnish conspiracy theorists are running their shit.

[Smitty-48]

The Russians lack the combat power to project forces significantly beyond their Near Abroad, in the event of, there would certainly be a conflict between Russia and the American Hegenomy, but more likely the Americans would simply cede the margins to the Russians, conduct a political campaign to "free the peoples of Eastern Europe from Russian agression!", while maneuvering military at the strategic level, jockying for a counterforce position, largely at sea, backed by the deterence of countervalue.

Cold War 2.0 would simply ramp up to its full capacity. It would all just cut straight to a global nuclear standoff without stopping for a conventional war in Europe.

[TheReal_ND]

The EU is going to punish based Poland for not taking refugees by the end of this year.

Cap this

[ssu]

Post the rest of the poll asshole.

Meanwhile, a recent Pew Research Center poll has shown that most Europeans believe the US would come to the aid of its European NATO allies if war broke out with Russia, despite Trump’s criticism of the military alliance.

On average, 66 percent of the citizens in seven major NATO member states said that Washington “would use military force” against Russia to defend a NATO ally in the event of a “serious military conflict,” a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center between February and early April of 2017 found.

About 70 percent in Spain, the Netherlands, and Canada believe the US is ready to intervene militarily should there be conflict with Russia, while between 60 and 66 percent of people in France, the UK, and Germany do. This remained unchanged throughout the first quarter of 2017, despite Trump’s sharp criticism of NATO during the US presidential election campaign, the Pew Research Center says

Everyone knows if it really came down to it NATO would be defended. Dont worried about your ski resort country.

That just reaffirms my point, asshole. That people are here a bit delusional imagining an Russia-US alliance and Russia as being their friend...and think that other Europeans (except Russians) hate Americans. So kybkh can rant on the evils of the your own American IC.

It's more delusional because the Trump administration has been pro-NATO. Oh, if Trump didn't say anything about article 5, well, he was just so busy about telling how wise the Saudi king was that he just met. Anyway, even the Trump administration stands on the side of NATO and standard American foreign policy, unlike some people here think.

You establish back channels precisely because you have an adversarial relationship. This is mind bogglingly stupid. What did the Obama admin do with Iran? I mean fuck.

So, the Obama went on to form those back channels behind the IC? Really when handling Iran? One thing is to have the Congress in the dark about your intensions before you are ready to show them. Now the Obama foreign policy surely wasn't the best one the US has had...

[ssu]

The EU is going to punish based Poland for not taking refugees by the end of this year.

Cap this

And Poland has been the most gung-ho NATO nation being against Russia. The Polish were so against the Russians after war in the Ukraine, that basically they were sidelined... for NATO and the EU not to look too hostile against Russia.

[TheReal_ND]

So kybkh can rant on the evils of the your own American IC

Still waiting on your child molesting spooks to show us the evidence.... anyway now surely.

[C-Mag]

I'm suspicious of him, too well liked by the MSM propaganda ministers

[Smitty-48]

McMaster is the least likely to buck the Commander-in-Chief, unless he's looking to retire, as McMaster is the only one who is still on active duty, but since he is destined to be the CJCS, I don't see him blowing his career up for the MSM.

As McMaster remains in the uniformed chain of command, barring an unlawful order, he is bound by oath to salute and say "yessir" to anything Trump tells him to do, his only other option would be to fall on his sword, but since he's a Jedi Knight on the path to the very top, I'm not seeing it.

In terms of going behind Trump's back to play footsie with the MSM, I'm not seeing that neither, as another career killer that would be, that will get you blacklisted for life, might as well just fall on your sword with honour, rather than bother with that.

Bear in mind, McMaster had no choice in the matter, in terms of taking this job, he's still a Lieutenant General; if the CinC says you're the new PNSA, then you're the new PNSA, if McMaster was going to fall on his sword and blow his career up, he would have done it already, and retired in lieu of taking the posting.

For the active duty military, it's "up or out", and since he didn't get out, you can extrapolate that he intends to continue on the path up. IMO, there's no way McMaster would put up with Trump for even five minutes, unless he was still shooting for CJCS.

He's been riding 73 Easting for 25 years now; simply doesn't want to blow it all up, so close to the finish line.

[ssu]

McMaster is the least likely to buck the Commander-in-Chief, unless he's looking to retire, as McMaster is the only one who is still on active duty, but since he is destined to be the CJCS, I don't see him blowing his career up for the MSM.

As McMaster remains in the uniformed chain of command, barring an unlawful order, he is bound by oath to salute and say "yessir" to anything Trump tells him to do, his only other option would be to fall on his sword, but since he's a Jedi Knight on the path to the very top, I'm not seeing it.

In terms of going behind Trump's back to play footsie with the MSM, I'm not seeing that neither, as another career killer that would be, that will get you blacklisted for life, might as well just fall on your sword with honour, rather than bother with that.

Bear in mind, McMaster had no choice in the matter, in terms of taking this job, he's still a Lieutenant General; if the CinC says you're the new PNSA, then you're the new PNSA, if McMaster was going to fall on his sword and blow his career up, he would have done it already, and retired in lieu of taking the posting.

For the active duty military, it's "up or out", and since he didn't get out, you can extrapolate that he intends to continue on the path up. IMO, there's no way McMaster would put up with Trump for even five minutes, unless he was still shooting for CJCS.

He's been riding 73 Easting for 25 years now; simply doesn't want to blow it all up, so close to the finish line.

Actually for McMaster it hasn't been such all so successfull: his time in Afghanistan didn't go so well, but anyway it wasn't something that would have gone well if your task is there to deal with anti-corruption.

But what you above say is true. And first and foremost, McMaster didn't have any connection with Trump in 2016 and now when in power, the actual Trump administration is behaving quite normally when it comes to foreign policy and defence policy. So if McMaster is there trying to defend the latest whatever the media is after from Trump, it's not that of a big deal.

In fact, if some earlier national security advisor stepped down from his active military position to be the advisor, I guess that McMaster clings to the that active military position of his. He can allways say that he has to / had to be there, whatever later could happen in the Trump administration.

[Smitty-48]

Nobody's getting hung out to dry for the failings of Iraqistan, nobody did well there, so you'd have to hang them all, the General's are off the hook for that, that's all being hung on Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, and unless you're a total disaster, American General's are rarely held repsonsible for the wars they fight, almost never in fact, I mean; even Westmoreland couldn't be fired.

It's mutually assured destruction, if the politicians start shooting General's, the General's could start shooting back, and the politicians want no part of that. The Blame Game would be a Circular Firing Squad, thus; nobody gets blamed.