Here you go, Dear.
https://www.vox.com/2017/5/25/15632614/trump-military-generals-syria-yemen-afghanistan
The US military is making many life-or-death decisions without input from the person who matters most: the president of the United States.
In Trump’s first months in office, the US conducted
drone strikes in Yemen and a
special operations raid where a
Navy SEAL was killed, dropped the “
mother of all bombs” in Afghanistan, and on Thursday struck
Assad’s forces in Syria. What all of these military operations have in common is that none of them required approval from the commander in chief, Donald Trump.
Why? Because he doesn’t feel like his approvals are needed — and because his predecessor micromanaged the Pentagon to a dangerous degree.
Trump’s hands-off approach — allowing battlefield commanders to take daily decisions affecting US foreign policy and national security — is a major shift in the American way of war. The Pentagon now does not require the president’s sign-off when military commanders believe an action is necessary. That's potentially good news for generals who felt hamstrung by the Obama administration, but it carries clear risks for both Trump and the US.
“Conflict is a lot more complex” than it seems, according to former Navy Undersecretary Janine Davidson. “You can blow stuff up … but where do things end?”
For a president who came into office with an “America first” worldview, proclaiming on the
White House website that the US does “not go abroad in search of enemies,” he has given the Pentagon free rein to go out and search — and destroy.
NBC’s Matt Lauer
pressed him on the comment, and Trump’s response revealed his mindset: “I have great faith in the military, great faith in certain of the commanders.”
Trump also
told Dickerson that “
f we had the leadership, meaning the go-ahead, you could knock [ISIS] out fast.”
Trump wouldn’t have it any other way. Surrounded by “my generals,” as he calls Mattis and Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, both retired Marines, Trump prefers to pursue an “alpha male” foreign policy, as Seb Gorka, a White House national security aide, characterized the administration’s approach.
And why is that? Trump may paint himself as a tough guy, but he’d rather not be held responsible should anything go wrong.
“Total authorization” absolves Trump of blame
Trump seems to wrongly believe his “total authorization” stance would absolve him of any blame if something were to go wrong. President Harry Truman used to say the “buck stops here,” meaning all credit — good or bad — fell to him as the president.
That’s not how Trump sees it. One military action Trump did personally authorize, after military officials explained the plan to him, was a special operations raid in Yemen targeting an al-Qaeda leader on January 29. Twenty-three civilians were killed, including women and children, as well as Senior Chief Petty Officer William “Ryan” Owens, a US Navy SEAL.
The president took no responsibility for the casualty. Instead, he proclaimed “they lost Ryan,” laying blame at the feet of the troops charged with completing the mission. (He also claimed that the planning for the raid “started before I got here.” That’s true — the Obama administration planned it.)
Trump is trying to have it both ways. He takes credit for successes, like the bomb drop in Afghanistan, and he passes blame when things go badly, like in Yemen.