More Thoughts On POTUS Choice Matter...

[DDT (12)]

I recently posted asking the question about the appropriateness of the action POTUS just took in the middle east. I now confess I really wasn’t seeking insight about the morality or the nuts & bolts of that call; rather, I was attempting to make a point about the state of opinion formation amongst many of our fellow citizens. Most, I think, got that…
 
It’s really hard to find fault with that action for all the reasons stated in the replies, and I agree with every one of the responses made… every single one! If that decision had fallen to yours truly, and if I had had as much information as POTUS had, I think I’d probably have made the same call… I have no moral objection to the action taken, and it does appear to be warranted, measured, and in keeping with sound policy. However…
 
The general reactions around our nation have been predictable! Those who like and support our POTUS immediately saw the merit, rightness, and wisdom of such action, while those who don’t like him and oppose him immediately saw the folly and totally wrong-minded action as leading us, yet again, down the path to doom. Well, generally speaking, that is. Naturally the so-called leaders of various political factions played their roles as very much expected, and just as I’ve described. So too have the virtue-signaling celebs and many of the average folks. But, not everyone…
 
A couple of replies, interestingly, indicated a very thoughtful reaction… and that is what I was really looking to measure. Most of us have become ‘chess players’… We calculate our moves, consider the signals we send, and we work hard to ‘manage’ our subliminal messaging… We are part of the ‘team’ after all, and we have an important role to play in ‘saving and/or improving our way of life’ and preventing wrong thinkers from scoring points… Our default position for all uncertain or unknown questions of that sort is to knee-jerk respond ‘as appropriate’ for ‘our side’.

There are many ways to think about this surprise… Did the general have it coming? Absolutely. Did he set himself up for something like this? Yep, I think he did. Was POTUS within his rights to take such action? I believe he was. Should he have taken that action? Ummmm, it’s here that things get a bit dicey… If we look at the issue by itself, in isolation, reasonable people could see this one way, perhaps another, while still being sincere and objective. Most, however, would find little fault with the call.

If one were to take a longer-term view, a more strategic look, then the uncertainty mounts! No way to know today what the implications of this decision might be or become over time. Doubtless there will be some reaction, and retaliation, but at the end of the next year or so, I believe Trump will have been proven to have made the right choice. However, the law of unintended consequences has a way of popping-up in unexpected ways and at unanticipated times, and everything could go sideways.

When the then POTUS sent our troops after Saddam, few if any at all, foresaw the protracted war that would follow… let alone the death toll or drain on our national treasure. Did Bush make a good decision then?  I supported that call at the time. Has history proven that to have been a smart call? That’s subject to speculation and very biased interpretations… We do know that it was widely  supported at the time, though, and it even had at least nominal bi-partisan support back then.

Did Saddam have it coming? Absolutely. Did he set himself up for something like that? Yep, I think he did. Was POTUS within his rights to take such action? I believe he was. Should he have taken that action? Ummmm, it’s here that things get a bit dicey… again…

Meathead posted that he didn’t know what to think due to lack of sufficient reliable information… If one assumes as I do, based upon my own knowledge of him, he was taking a measured, long-term, strategic view of things, then I maintain his response was entirely appropriate. I saw nothing that indicated to me that he objected necessarily to that action… but neither was there an endorsement. He simply didn’t know how this would play-out over time... and neither do any of the rest of us, for that matter.

What was most interesting to me, however, was how this known non-Trumper and self-proclaimed liberal did not automatically default to a negative reaction/response. That he took a thoughtful, open-minded tack instead of what we might have anticipated, I find enormously refreshing… although, not all that surprising!

America will not move forward by the conquest of one group over another… Our best future interests lie in us bridging the chasms that separate us and finding solutions to our problems… together. No group of which I’m aware has the ‘answers’. Together, I steadfastly believe, we might find them in spite of ourselves. Hard work, to be sure…

Our politicos work very hard to drive wedges between us and fuel controversy in order for them to exploit situations for their own nefarious pursuits of power and wealth… Kudos to you, Rob… I’m really happy you didn’t yield to the temptation of a knee-jerk reaction… Come, let us reason together…

DDT

[The emperor has no clothes]

I hesitate to add to this thread. First off, I would like to thank Bruce for the kind words. For someone on the opposite side of "the aisle" to reach out in such a way is uncommon in our society and on here these days. But for all of us who know Bruce, it is not surprising in the least. I'm very proud, as all of us are, to call him my friend. I've many times felt I wish I could act more like him. His, along with a few others here, actions have been a guiding for me in how to behave as a man.
  As to the sentiment of Bruce's of us reasoning together. I heartily agree. I realize most here don't see my politics in a favorable light. And vice versa for me. But, I do acknowledge I don't have all the answers.
  I hope we as a country can get to the point that we don't see each other in the country as the enemy. There is much too much division. "Come, let us reason together" indeed 

[Gryphon Rider]

Someone made the comment that it was good that Trump did the "right thing" without considering the politics.  I think not giving the politics and other ramifications due consideration is short-sighted, and the complexity multiplies when dealing with international issues.  And it's tough to make a wise decision when you fire all your experienced people, replacing them with yes-men.

My wife and I needed to replace our worn-out box spring and mattress.  The "right" thing to do would be to pick up a nearly new or barely used (e.g. guest room) mattress set, finding it in the online classifieds, spending $200-$400.  The "political" factor, though, is my wife's leeriness of sleeping on someone else's mattress, even though it doesn't seem to be an issue when we stay at a hotel or staying in friends' or relatives' homes.  Taking the politics into consideration, we spent $900 on a new set with a mattress protector.

[Jess from VA]

Taking the politics into consideration, we spent $900 on a new set with a mattress protector.

You got off cheap.  Was that a single?   

[Moonshot_1]

Someone made the comment that it was good that Trump did the "right thing" without considering the politics.  I think not giving the politics and other ramifications due consideration is short-sighted, and the complexity multiplies when dealing with international issues.  And it's tough to make a wise decision when you fire all your experienced people, replacing them with yes-men.

My wife and I needed to replace our worn-out box spring and mattress.  The "right" thing to do would be to pick up a nearly new or barely used (e.g. guest room) mattress set, finding it in the online classifieds, spending $200-$400.  The "political" factor, though, is my wife's leeriness of sleeping on someone else's mattress, even though it doesn't seem to be an issue when we stay at a hotel or staying in friends' or relatives' homes.  Taking the politics into consideration, we spent $900 on a new set with a mattress protector.

Perhaps I should expand on my thoughts on this point. I've no doubt that the international political implications were considered. In fact, I would not be at all surprised if they were already previously considered a while ago and that there are other targets that have been thoroughly discussed, considered and plans of action readied. As I said, he is a pragmatist and those things would be considered by such a person.

My point on the politics and not considering the politics was in reference to the domestic political landscape. That Trump probably didn't do a focus group or some kind of poll to see if the decision would be popular. They had already decided that it would be the right thing to do when the opportunity came to be. How the domestic political fallout would affect Trump was not part of the equation for him.

[Gryphon Rider]

Taking the politics into consideration, we spent $900 on a new set with a mattress protector.

You got off cheap.  Was that a single?   

Not a single, cuz we ain't single  ???.  We laid down on a couple of sets in the $2000 range, and quite liked one of them that had the same softness but a firmer edge, but my strategy was that a softer edge would force us a little closer together.  .

[carolinarider09]

[/quote]My point on the politics and not considering the politics was in reference to the domestic political landscape. That Trump probably didn't do a focus group or some kind of poll to see if the decision would be popular. They had already decided that it would be the right thing to do when the opportunity came to be. How the domestic political fallout would affect Trump was not part of the equation for him.
[/quote]

I believe that is the correct way to handle things like this.  It should be the "right thing to do" and the politics be cursed.

For too long our elected leaders have been politicians first and leaders second.  Always seeming to worry about the next election, not what is good for America.  

I think that is the way President Trump thinks.  If he is wrong, it will be handled as it should be, at the ballot box, not on CNN or FoxNews or Twitter.  

Now some are going to say, "what if he makes a mistake or his judgment is in error".  You could ask the same question about past presidents who using focus groups and opinion polls before making decisions.  How many unnecessary deaths could have been avoided had they acted rather than waiting.    

Trump has been President for almost three years, the economy is doing well, people have more money in their pockets, even while the political landscape is as bumpy as the Democrats and the Main Steam News Media can make it.  

Imagine if you will, President Trump without all the negative press and politicians.  A country that accepted the will of the people when he was elected.  Just imagine what else could have been accomplished.  

[Gryphon Rider]

Perhaps I should expand on my thoughts on this point. I've no doubt that the international political implications were considered. In fact, I would not be at all surprised if they were already previously considered a while ago and that there are other targets that have been thoroughly discussed, considered and plans of action readied. As I said, he is a pragmatist and those things would be considered by such a person.

My point on the politics and not considering the politics was in reference to the domestic political landscape. That Trump probably didn't do a focus group or some kind of poll to see if the decision would be popular. They had already decided that it would be the right thing to do when the opportunity came to be. How the domestic political fallout would affect Trump was not part of the equation for him.

He doesn't care about the political fallout from liberal Democrats, because he could never win them over anyway.  Trump, and any politician seeking re-election for that matter, when he stops to think, will always factor in how big decisions affect his vote. He knows his power doesn't com from the Republican party, but from second amendment supporters and Evangelical churchgoers.  Trump knows his constituency and almost always plays to them when he's not hedging his personal interest.

[Willow]

...  Trump, and any politician seeking re-election ...

Two different categories and that is why President Trump was elected this time around.