[Music]
they may be involved in virtually every
Modern War they may be constantly
sanctioning dictatorships in random
places and they may be involved in
funding gigantic technological projects
on and off planet Earth but if there is
one thing we almost never hear from the
United States it is some problem or
other that calls into question its
democratic system or at least that's how
it was until not so long ago today we
can even find many representatives right
inside Congress R saying that the
elections in the United States were
stolen and that therefore we cannot
speak of a true democracy what better
example of all this than Donald Trump
himself the Biden dictatorship will be
over and we are going to bring our
country back from Hell going to bring it
back from H and it's in hell right now
on day one I will break up the Biden
administration's illegal censorship
machine and any official who has
violated American's constitutional
rights
will be held very very accountable but
don't worry this is not your typical
video about the former
president visual politic viewers the
issues and clashes have not only
exploded like never before in the
political Arena America's political
polarization is running deep on all four
sides of the country from the subject
matter of Broadway shows to the staging
of the Superbowl to the heated debates
in the classroom and what about
Hollywood but watch out because we can
also talk about the Armed Forces which
up until now have been cohesive when I
began teaching at the naval war College
I was there long enough ago that I
actually had people who were prior
enlisted folks in Vietnam and the thing
I've noticed is that our officers are
resolutely nonpartisan they serve the
Constitution but the willingness to
think in very partisan terms was growing
over the years by the time I retired in
20122 I was hearing officers saying
things almost verbatim from you know
talking points from Fox that I before
indeed the armed forces are not escaping
this growing tension and of course that
can have important consequences
precisely because of this we here on
visual politic have asked ourselves a
few questions to what extent can we say
that the US military is becoming
politicized how might this affect the
greatest War Machine ever built by man
what exactly are the most divisive
debates within the military ranks well
we're going to see all this and more
coming up let's get into
[Applause]
it
[Music]
to say that the United States has always
been immune to social and political
divisions is nonsense today it may seem
very distant because obviously it is but
in the middle of the 19th century
Americans endured a very very harrowing
Civil War in which between 600,000 and
800,000 people lost their lives of
course since the end of that war
internal tensions and political CL
clashes in the United States have
developed without ever questioning the
nation's deep and solid Democratic
pillars you will know what they say
about the land of the free and keep in
mind this was respected even in the
times of racial Strife with this faith
we will be able to transform the
jangling discords of our nation into a
beautiful Symphony of Brotherhood that
is the electoral system the national
symbols The Anthem the flag the
Constitution and also the armed forces
were never questioned and even until not
so long ago the Electoral campaigns were
quite different there was much more
respect do you want proof well take a
look at this he's an Arab he is
not no no no ma'am no ma'am he's a he's
a he's a decent Family Man citizen that
I just happen to have disagreements with
on on fundamental issues and that's what
this campaign is all about I'll say it
again John McCain served his country
with honor he deserves our thanks and of
course when there was a problem cohesion
was almost Universal what better example
than 9/11 the importance of 911
transcended age gender Geographic and
even political differences the public
largely set aside political differences
and rallied in support of the nation's
major institutions as well as its
political leadership in October 2001 60%
of adults expressed trust in the federal
government now however everything is
different the campaigns of the parties
are marked by judici problems insults
and cross accusations we live in an era
of constant hyperbole the problem is
that this now threatens to infiltrate
the barracks but let's start at the
beginning the fact is that after the
September 11 attacks the federal
government began to have much more
influence over the Armed Forces than had
been customary in other words
politicians began to have more and more
influence in decision- making both at
the Strategic and operational levels
you see the use of military force
generally comprises three levels first
the Strategic level which is where
resources and objectives are decided
here Washington politicians have always
carried a lot of weight even more than
the points of view of their own military
second we have the operational level
which is when resources begin to be used
and very specific management decisions
are made about resources troops and
supplies here politicians and the
military typically shook hands although
the uninformed perspective usually
prevailed and then finally we have the
third level the Tactical level which are
the quick decisions that are taken
practically in the field and which were
almost exclusively the responsibility of
the military well after 9/11 these last
two levels began to be taken over by
Washington
politicians obviously when politicians
take control one thing tends to happen
those in charge come and go with each
Administration and the decisions have a
much greater political component the
effects began to be clearly seen when
Trump took control of the federal
government in 2016 and they have
continued to this day listen
up make defense a debate
again Donald Trump was sworn in as
president in January 2017 from that
precise moment on defense policy took a
major turn you see Washington's
political intervention in military
operations is generally managed through
what is known as the National Security
Council this body reports to the
president and its members include three
heavyweights the National Security
advisor the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of Defense well this body was
precisely the first area that Trump
wanted to modify you could say that the
idea was to reverse the strategy put in
place by the Bush Administration the
National Security Council was
reorganized to focus more on strategic
issues and less on tactical and
operational functions for example Trump
tasked this body with preparing a
strategy to reign in China not only in
the military field but also in terms of
foreign policy and the economy at the
same time the role of the National
Security advisor was also reduced so
that he ceased to participate in all
military meetings and also lost direct
communication with foreign governments
in principle with this strategy the
National Security Council would take on
a more political Focus while the
military would regain its lost influence
that was the idea however the reality
was quite different in reality the new
model was designed to give Trump much
more weight and more direct influence in
decision-making the result an
unprecedented turnover of positions
began for example Lieutenant General
Herbert Raymond McMaster resigned from
his post as National Security adviser in
April 2018 he claimed personal reasons
but in Washington everyone points to the
constant political friction with the
presidency his place was taken by John
Bolton who then ended up being badly out
Ed by Trump in September 2019 now in a
recent book Bolton has revealed that
Trump often tried to decide directly byp
passing the National Security team on
key issues in relations with turkey
Venezuela Russia and China and he did so
even if he had little or no knowledge of
the subject there is no precedent for
such a thing but I insist this is not
coming from us this is coming from
Bolton himself one of the great
Republican Hawks of American foreign
policy a guy who these days says things
like this
the damage that Trump had done in the
first term while significant was all
reparable but I feared in a second term
that the damage might not be repairable
and I think that that concern second
Trump term could be uh could be very
very damaging uh to the United States
but that is not the end of
it if we look at the Secretary of
Defense the comings and goings were
similar first Trump appointed General
Jim matis but his resistance over troop
withdrawals from Syria and Afghanistan
cost him his job at the end of 2018
here's what the general says about his
former boss Donald Trump is the first
president in my lifetime who does not
try to unite the American people does
not even pretend to try instead he tries
to divide us we are witnessing the
consequences of 3 years of this
deliberate effort we are witnessing the
consequences of 3 years without mature
leadership then began a veritable
Whirlwind of appointments dismissals and
resignations in all five different
defense secretaries followed Mattis in
Just 2 years crazy one of mattis's
successes Mark esper also ended up
resigning as Secretary of Defense after
refusing to go along with Trump's idea
of using the military to disperse the
racial unrest protests that were taking
place in the US in the late 2020s this
guy by the way has denounced Trump as
proposing very complex military
operations without much substance at
various times during the certainly the
last year of the administration you have
folks in the White House are proposing
to take military action against
Venezuela uh to to to strike Iran at one
point somebody proposed we blockade Cuba
these ideas would happen uh it seemed
every every few weeks something like
this would come up and we'd have to swat
them down and finally with the role of
Secretary of State the outcome was quite
similar Rex Tillerson who was Trump's
first man of confidence to lead us
diplomacy was removed in March 2018 the
reasons well at this point in the video
it may seem like more of the same but of
course there are already three versions
that come inside president would say
well here's what I want to do and and
here's how I want to do it and I'd have
to say to him well Mr President I
understand what you want to do but you
can't do it that way it violates the law
it violates a treaty you know he got
really frustrated I didn't know how to
conduct my affairs with him any other
way than in a very straightforward
fashion as you can see all those who
accompany the military as well as
national security policy agree that the
president did not want to give the
military more say than the politicians
but that he wanted to set the terms by
himself and okay many of you will say so
what he is the
president the problem visual politic
Community is no longer that one person
cannot cover so many issues or that this
stance led to improvised decisions
without any strategy or sufficient
information but that it also contributed
to suddenly making the armed forces and
security policy appear much more
partisan and of course that perception
did not escape the military itself
although president Trump did not weaken
the underlying structures of Civilian
control he politicized the military by
attempting to draw it into the fold as a
loyal political actor Trump allowed
himself the luxury of saying things like
this you still feel like you know more
about Isis than the generals well they
don't know much because they're not
winning that I can tell you now I think
they're not winning for a different
reason I think Obama's hurting them the
problem is that this way of Behaving had
several consequences first it led to
rewarding or giving more say to those
military members most loyal to the
president loyal not to just any
president but to president Trump second
Trump's direct meddling in
decision-making in his trademark style
began to polarize the military as well
and suddenly in a way it all came
crashing down what had been a watertight
wall for decades collapsed suddenly
things gotone out of hand and all at
once once we began to see political
statements right and left from the
highest ranking military offices even
some that seem to call into question the
soundness of the US political framework
something pretty unusual in the United
States we do not take an oath to a king
or queen a tyrant or dictator we do not
take an oath to an individual no we do
not take an oath to a country a tribe or
religion we take an oath to the
Constitution yes we we just saw General
Mark Millie who was no less than Army
Chief of Staff during Donald Trump's
tenure and also during Biden's first two
years insinuate that the ex-president
was behaving like a tyrant we are
talking about the same general who was
Furious when Trump wanted to
instrumentalize his office in the 2022
elections the campaign didn't seek
approval from joint Chief's chairman
General Mark Millie to use his image in
the ad a defense official said the
military has strict rules against
uniformed service members participating
in political campaigns and the ad is
just the latest example of the president
or those around him pulling the nation's
highest ranking officer for those of you
who don't know things between Mark
Millie and Trump's team ended badly to
put it mildly he was accused of nothing
less than being a traitor and the former
president even called for his execution
the charge was that he had not been
loyal and we don't mean to the
presidency or Constitution but to Trump
personally top US general taking steps
to protect family after Trump death
comments Trump last week criticized
Millie's handling of the chaotic us
withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan in
2020 and said without providing evidence
that this guy turned out to be a woke
train wreck who if the reporting is
correct was actually dealing with China
to give them a heads up on the thinking
of the president of the United States He
is suggesting that you be punished by
death the former commander-in-chief to
his former top military adviser um look
at I'm I'm a soldier I've been faithful
and loyal to the Constitution of the
United States 44 and half years uh and
my family and I have sacrificed greatly
for this country but visual politic
Community let's put the brakes on for a
moment we are talking about a former
president who has a chance of winning
the 2024 elections openly talking about
executing the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces
between 2018 and 2023 and offer
allegedly not being loyal to him isn't
this kind of behavior a huge red flag
what if Trump's voters believe that
large proportion of the military
leadership is not loyal to the United
States what happens to the soldiers
themselves who hear the president say
such things about their commanders well
guess what since 2019 confidence levels
in the military have plummeted surprised
I'm guessing you're not the point is
that all these controversies and all
these accusations are infiltrating the
Armed Forces it's gone from being an
apolitical institution on a day-to-day
basis to the current situation where the
political divide is becoming more and
more present and that that hasn't
escaped the latest Administration over
the past few years top Democratic
heavyweights have placed items on the
pentagon's agenda that probably
shouldn't be there for many analysts
issues such as climate change or lgtbi
rights do not have to involve the
military the point is that in the long
term all this may be another major
problem for the most powerful military
in the world another problem to add to
those we already have told you about
here on visual politic in previous
videos but for now the question is over
to you how far do you think the division
Within the US military will go could
this process end up being a threat to
democracy leave us your impressions in
the comments and let's start a debate
and now if you found this video
interesting don't forget to like And
subscribe to visual politic if you
haven't already done so thank you for
watching all the best see you next
[Music]
time