Are Older Men in Thailand Trading Love for Financial Ruin

[webfact]

General known for sharp questions will be Trump's new top security adviser

By Jeff Mason and Patricia Zengerle

 

U.S. President Donald Trump and his newly appointed National Security Adviser Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster (L) speak during the announcement at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida U.S. February 20, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

 

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla./WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday named Lieutenant General Herbert Raymond McMaster as his new national security adviser, choosing a military officer known for speaking his mind and challenging his superiors.

 

McMaster is a highly regarded military tactician and strategic thinker, but his selection surprised some observers who wondered how the officer, whose Army career stalled at times for his questioning of authority, would deal with a White House that has not welcomed criticism.

 

"He is highly respected by everybody in the military and we're very honoured to have him," Trump told reporters in West Palm Beach where he spent the weekend. "He's a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience."

 

One subject on which Trump and McMaster could soon differ is Russia. McMaster shares the consensus view among the U.S. national security establishment that Russia is a threat and an antagonist to the United States, while the man whom McMaster is replacing, retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, appeared to view it more as a potential geopolitical partner.

 

Flynn was fired as national security adviser on Feb. 13 after reports emerged he had misled Vice President Mike Pence about speaking to Russia's ambassador to the United States about U.S. sanctions before Trump's inauguration.

 

The ouster, coming so early in Trump's administration, was another upset for a White House that has been hit by miscues, including the controversial rollout of a travel ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries, since the Republican president took office on Jan. 20.

 

Senator John McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a frequent Trump critic, praised McMaster as an "outstanding" choice.

 

"I give President Trump great credit for this decision," McCain said in a statement.

 

Trump also named Keith Kellogg, a retired U.S. Army general who has been serving as the acting national security adviser, as chief of staff to the National Security Council. John Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, will serve the administration in another capacity, Trump said.

 

Kellogg and Bolton were among those in contention as Trump spent the long Presidents Day weekend considering his options for replacing Flynn. His first choice, retired Vice Admiral Robert Harward, turned down the job last week.

 

The national security adviser is an independent aide to the president and does not require confirmation by the U.S. Senate. The role has varied from administration to administration, but the adviser attends National Security Council meetings along with the heads of the State Department, the Department of Defense and key security agencies.

 

McMaster, 54, is a West Point graduate known as "H.R.," with a Ph.D. in U.S. history from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He was listed as one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people in 2014, partly because of his willingness to buck the system.

 

A combat veteran, he gained renown in the first Gulf War - and was awarded a Silver Star - after he commanded a small troop of the U.S. 2nd Army Cavalry Regiment that destroyed a much larger Iraqi Republican Guard force in 1991 in a place called 73 Easting, for its map coordinates, in what many consider the biggest tank battle since World War Two.

 

As one fellow officer put it, referring to Trump's inner circle of aides and speaking on condition of anonymity, the Trump White House "has its own Republican Guard, which may be harder for him to deal with than the Iraqis were." The Iraqi Republican Guard was the elite military force of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein.

 

Trump relies on a tight, insular group of advisers, many of whom zealously guard access to the president, at times appear to have competing political agendas, and who, in the case of senior adviser Steve Bannon, involve themselves in national security matters.

 

McMaster's fame grew after his 1997 book "Dereliction of Duty" criticized the country's military and political leadership for poor leadership during the Vietnam War.

 

Trump's pick was praised by one of the president's strongest backers in the U.S. Congress, Republican Senator Tom Cotton, who called McMaster "one of the finest combat leaders of our generation and also a great strategic mind. He is a true warrior scholar, and I'm confident he will serve both the president and the country well."

 

Representative Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, also backed the choice, noting McMaster's "history of questioning the status quo."

 

'CRITICISM AND FEEDBACK'

 

In a July 14, 2014, interview with the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer in Columbus, Georgia, where Fort Benning is located, McMaster, then the base commander, said: "Some people have a misunderstanding about the Army.

 

"Some people think, hey, you’re in the military and everything is super-hierarchical and you’re in an environment that is intolerable of criticism and people don’t want frank assessments.

 

"I think the opposite is the case. ... And the commanders that I’ve worked for, they want frank assessments, they want criticism and feedback."

 

That attitude was not always shared by his superiors, and it led to his being passed over for promotion to brigadier general twice, in 2006 and 2007.

 

On McMaster's third and last try, General David Petraeus – who took himself off the list last week for Trump's national security adviser – returned from Iraq to head the promotion board that finally gave McMaster his first general's star.

 

Then a colonel, McMaster was commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment that in the spring of 2005 captured, held and began to stabilise Tal Afar on the Iraqi-Syrian border.

 

The city was held by Sunni extremists, a crossing point between Syria and Iraq for jihadists who started as al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia under Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and morphed into Islamic State after he was killed.

 

McMaster's preparation of the regiment is legendary: He trained his soldiers in Iraqi culture, the differences among Sunnis, Shiites and Turkomen, and had them read books on the history of the region and counterinsurgency strategy.

 

It was a sharp change from the "kill and capture" tactics the United States had used in Iraq since the invasion in March 2003, and to which the Obama administration returned in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

 

The strategy was largely a success, although McMaster's use of it and especially his willingness to acknowledge that Iraqis had some legitimate grievances against one another and the occupying coalition forces, did not endear him to his superiors and helped delay his promotion to brigadier general.

 

The strategy did not survive the departure of McMaster's troops, with Tal Afar falling into the hands of Sunni militants. Along with the west part of Mosul, it is now a key objective in the battle to rid Iraq of Islamic State.

 

(Additional reporting by John Walcott and Sarah Lynch in Washington; Writing by Patricia Zengerle, Frances Kerry, and James Oliphant; Editing by Peter Cooney and Jonathan Oatis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-21

[whatawonderfulday]

How long will this one last ?  Like the editorial comment about him liking to "buck the system".  Should get on well with Trump and the rest of the constitutional renegades he calls a team,  perhaps more apt just to say the Presidents mob.

[WaywardWind]

An article that I read said that "..he doesn't suffer fools gladly."

 

If that is accurate, he is going to have his hands full.

[boomerangutang]

         Trump's prior picks, to replace Flynn, insisted they have the option to pick staff.  Trump demured, so the prior two picks said they didn't want the job.  Can McMaster pick his staff, or do Trump and Bannon pick his staff?   If McMaster is NS Advisor, what's his relation to Bannon (who is also a top security advisor)?  With so many security advisers, it's a recipe for confusion at best, or big problems.    

 

         Imagine you had a restaurant.  Would you assign seven chief chefs?   If so, it would guarantee problems.

[Thailand]

4 interviewed at the Southern Whitehouse at the weekend , if a couple of those also turned down the job this guy is 5th choice!

3rd at best. 

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

what's his relation to Bannon

Somewhat parallel and almost cross purpose given Bannon's Leninist bent and McMaster's anti-Russian bent.

 

Bannon is the Senior Political Advisor while McMaster is the Senior National Security Advisor. I believe that both sit on the National Security Council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Security_Council

Trump reorganized the NSC to add Bannon.

 

Any conflicts between the two would be settled by Trump. Given McMaster's independence, I suspect he would resign rather than concede any disagreed security strategies to Bannon's viewpoint, ie., cyber warfare against pro-Russian insurgents operating in Eastern Ukraine.

[heybruce]

Based on this article he's an outstanding choice.  Whether he can penetrate the President's inner circle and influence Trump, who seems to have the attention span of a gnat, remains to be seen.

[bangkok101]

7 hours ago, whatawonderfulday said:

How long will this one last ?  Like the editorial comment about him liking to "buck the system".  Should get on well with Trump and the rest of the constitutional renegades he calls a team,  perhaps more apt just to say the Presidents mob.

and a strong mob at that.

[bangkok101]

5 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

         Trump's prior picks, to replace Flynn, insisted they have the option to pick staff.  Trump demured, so the prior two picks said they didn't want the job.  Can McMaster pick his staff, or do Trump and Bannon pick his staff?   If McMaster is NS Advisor, what's his relation to Bannon (who is also a top security advisor)?  With so many security advisers, it's a recipe for confusion at best, or big problems.    

 

         Imagine you had a restaurant.  Would you assign seven chief chefs?   If so, it would guarantee problems.

especially if one of those chefs was that ex football mouthpiece gordon ramsey.

[Redline]

I hope he can bring rationality and sanity

[elgordo38]

Ye gads not another general. The US is starting to look more like Thailand every day. 

[Jingthing]

Apparently a smart man but the question is if trump will listen to him. A lot of schizophrenic messages coming from the white house. What trump REALLY needs to do to have any chance of sanity and success in his administration is to FIRE Bannon! 

[Srikcir]

3 minutes ago, elgordo38 said:

Ye gads not another general. The US is starting to look more like Thailand every day. 

All the generals are retired. Active military cannot serve in any other federal position. Unlike Thailand.

Far from starting to look like Thailand.

Thailand on the other hand is beginning to look like China.

[elgordo38]

20 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

All the generals are retired. Active military cannot serve in any other federal position. Unlike Thailand.

Far from starting to look like Thailand.

Thailand on the other hand is beginning to look like China.

Are all the Thai generals inactive by that I mean duty wise not mentally. 

[elgordo38]

24 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Apparently a smart man but the question is if trump will listen to him. A lot of schizophrenic messages coming from the white house. What trump REALLY needs to do to have any chance of sanity and success in his administration is to FIRE Bannon! 

Shave him first and go to Goodwill and buy him a suit shirt and tie. 

[dunroaming]

Trump is learning.  Pick a serving military man and he cannot refuse.  He has to accept the poisoned chalice.  Doesn't matter if he is suitable as long as it's not another rejection to embarrass Trump.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, elgordo38 said:

Are all the Thai generals inactive by that I mean duty wise not mentally. 

Is there a difference?

Thai military (not just the generals) in Prayut's government (both Cabinet and NLA) who haven't retired remain active military meaning that they draw a pay check for being in the armed forces while also being paid as a government official regardless of whether they are "inactive" in regard to performing either their military or government duties.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Srikcir
additional comment

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

All the generals are retired. Active military cannot serve in any other federal position. Unlike Thailand.

Far from starting to look like Thailand.

Thailand on the other hand is beginning to look like China.

Correction.

McMaster will remain on active duty as a Lieutenant General, a selling point as he could not refuse Trump's offer to become his National Security Advisor as Trump is his superior as Commander in Chief. However, the position of National Security Advisor is not a federal employee position and not subjected to congressional approval. So there's no duplicity in federal employment. It is likely however, that he will not receive separate pay as NS Advisor from the Commander in Chief while receiving federal pay as active military.

[elgordo38]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

Is there a difference?

Thai military (not just the generals) in Prayut's government (both Cabinet and NLA) who haven't retired remain active military meaning that they draw a pay check for being in the armed forces while also being paid as a government official regardless of whether they are "inactive" in regard to performing either their military or government duties.

Double dipping I guess. Is the beer company general in on the action here as well. Must make hay while the sun shines. 

[Andaman Al]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

Based on this article he's an outstanding choice.  Whether he can penetrate the President's inner circle and influence Trump, who seems to have the attention span of a gnat, remains to be seen.

So outstanding, one wonders why he was not picked in the first place LoL.

 

He really has been handed the s**t sandwich, as he CANNOT refuse the appointment. I wonder what he really thinks. Trump has him over a barrel. Has this happened before when a current serving officer has been NSA?

 

[boomerangutang]

10 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Somewhat parallel and almost cross purpose given Bannon's Leninist bent and McMaster's anti-Russian bent.

Bannon is the Senior Political Advisor while McMaster is the Senior National Security Advisor. I believe that both sit on the National Security Council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Security_Council

Trump reorganized the NSC to add Bannon.

Any conflicts between the two would be settled by Trump. Given McMaster's independence, I suspect he would resign rather than concede any disagreed security strategies to Bannon's viewpoint, ie., cyber warfare against pro-Russian insurgents operating in Eastern Ukraine.

            I recall hearing Bannon was appointed Trump's Senior Security Adviser (or some such title).  It was in an Executive Order that Trump signed (but didn't read, beforehand) about 2 or 3 weeks ago.  Perhaps Bannon himself slipped that item in there, knowing Trump doesn't read most things which cross his desk.   Anyhow, when Trump was informed (of appointing Bannon), he was apparently annoyed, but didn't rescind the order.    

 

              I would expect better management from the Three Stooges on qualudes. 

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

[Morch]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

            I recall hearing Bannon was appointed Trump's Senior Security Adviser (or some such title).  It was in an Executive Order that Trump signed (but didn't read, beforehand) about 2 or 3 weeks ago.  Perhaps Bannon himself slipped that item in there, knowing Trump doesn't read most things which cross his desk.   Anyhow, when Trump was informed (of appointing Bannon), he was apparently annoyed, but didn't rescind the order.    

 

              I would expect better management from the Three Stooges on qualudes. 

 

Anyhow, when Trump was informed (of appointing Bannon), he was apparently annoyed, but didn't rescind the order.  

 

Is there a reliable non-hyper-partisan source for the above?