Mattis Out as Trump Regime War Secretary
by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org - Home - Stephen Lendman)
Did Mattis quit or was he pushed? He once said he wouldn't resign as war secretary. He'd have to be sacked.
According to major media reports, he clashed with Trump over his announced pullout of US forces from Syria and Afghanistan.
On Thursday, the NYT, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and other US media reported that DLT ordered around half of the 14,000 US forces in Afghanistan to return home in the coming weeks - on top of his announced pullout of US forces from Syria.
Whether what's coming sticks to what he announced remains very much in question. More on this below.
In his "resignation" letter, Mattis said "(b)ecause (Trump has) the right to have a secretary of (war) whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position."
"The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed…"
Mattis turned truth on its head claiming "the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world…"
Freedom, other democratic values, and rule of law principles are rejected by bipartisan US hardliners. Comprising a dominant majority of America's ruling class, their goal is achieving and maintaining control over all other nations, premeditated war their favorite strategy.
Mattis lied pretending Pentagon forces are used "for the common defense." Washington's only enemies are invented ones. No real existed since WW II ended.
Yet endless US wars rage, notably post-the 9/11 mother of all false flags, a pretext for maintaining a permanent war footing at home and abroad.
Police state laws target ordinary Americans, increasingly enforcing totalitarian rule. Invented enemies unjustifiably justify smashing one nation after another, wanting all sovereign independent governments eliminated, risking nuclear war with Russia, China, and/or Iran.
Ruling authorities in NATO member states oppose what democratic governance is supposed to be all about, what's true about the US most of all. Mattis lied pretending otherwise.
He lied claiming Washington aims to defeat ISIS - the scourge it created and supports, along with al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and other terrorist groups in the Middle East and elsewhere.
They're used as proxy US forces, supported by Pentagon-led terror-bombing, massacring civilians most of all, along with destroying vital infrastructure - what Mattis directed as US war secretary.
His predecessors operated the same way. So will his successor. Peacemakers aren't considered for the job. Advancing America's imperium prioritizes waging endless wars of aggression.
All political and military officials involved in US warmaking are unindicted war criminals, including congressional members for authorizing naked aggression funding - most of all US presidents as commander-in-chief of the nation's armed forces.
Mattis lied claiming "China and Russia…want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model (sic) — gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions — to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies."
All of the above claims apply to the USA most of all, along with its key NATO allies and partnered countries, including Israel, the Saudis, Egypt, Japan, South Korea, and many others.
The "common defense" Mattis referred to involves endless wars of aggression against one sovereign independent nation after another, what he signed on to as war secretary, the way he operated when heading field commands - the highest of high crimes gone unpunished.
Advancing America's imperium through endless wars of aggression and other hostile actions won't change under his successor.
Nor will Trump's announced troop pullouts from Syria and Afghanistan change a thing. French European Affairs Minister Nathalie Loiseau said "we are staying in Syria" to fight ISIS, the Macron regime supports along with Washington, Britain, Israel, the Saudis, Turkey, and other key US imperial partners.
French Defense Minister Florence Parly tweeted: "ISIS has been weakened more than ever, but it has not been wiped from the map nor has its roots. It is necessary that the last pockets of this terrorist organization be definitively defeated militarily," - a pretext for continuing endless war in Syria for regime change, using ISIS jihadists, not combatting them.
Will troops from France and perhaps other US allies replace Pentagon forces in Syria and Afghanistan, leaving the status quo in both countries unchanged?
Will Trump about-face on his announced pullouts from both countries? Time and again, he says one thing and does another.
Jack Kennedy's announced pullout of US forces from Vietnam by end of 1965 led to his state-sponsored assassination.
Will a sinister plot be hatched against Trump if he follows through on withdrawing all Pentagon forces from Syria, Afghanistan, and perhaps other US war theaters?
Reportedly he wants aerial operations in Syria ended along with withdrawing US forces on the ground from northern and southern parts of the country.
According to USCENTCOM (the command Mattis earlier headed), "(a)s long as there are US troops (in Syria), we will conduct air and artillery strikes in support of our forces. We will not speculate on future operations."
Separately, so-called Syrian Democratic Forces, largely comprised of Kurdish YPG fighters, may relinquish control of northern parts of the country they hold in return for military help from Damascus against a Turkish offensive on their positions.
Assad officials have yet to comment on this issue. On Thursday, Syrian UN envoy Bashar al-Jaafari dismissed Trump's pullout announcement unless and until "we…see if this decision is genuine or not."
Despite earlier announced US troop pullouts, Pentagon forces remain in all countries Washington attacked post-9/11.
If past is prologue, expect no change in Washington's imperial agenda ahead, including where US forces are deployed.
At most, perhaps a change in tactics alone may follow Trump's announcements - in pursuit of longstanding objectives for unchallenged global dominance.
A Final Comment
At his annual marathon Q&A session on Thursday, Putin responded to a question on whether Russia aims to achieve control over other countries, saying:
"When it comes to ruling the world, we know very well where those who are trying to do exactly that have their headquarters," adding "it's not in Moscow."
There's no ambiguity about Washington's aim, what Putin clearly meant, what everyone everywhere paying attention understands.
VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at email@example.com.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."