James Mattis Eyed As Trump's Possible Pick for Defense Secretary

originally posted by: DBCowboy
“When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy”

― General James N. Mattis

Good one.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

I think Chuck holds the Generals place in line for the shower on the FOB...

All joking aside, as an Army veteran General Mattis is one of maybe 4-5 Marines I have true admiration for.

Hayes, Hathcock, Puller, Butler, Mattis.

Interservice rivalry gets set aside for men like that.

yep Mattis does Chesty proud.
couldn't have picked a better Marine.

I like General Mattis. I think he'd make a decent Sec D or Chairman of joint chiefs of staff, or really any other defense related position. He's a hard ass, outspoken and apparently dammed smart, effective,and well liked by those he commanded.
There are also rumors that Petraus may be offered something as well, I liked him too as a General, but I just can't see that happening. He has adultery and failure to secure classified material scandals close in the past. He's smart and highly competent but offering him a job could be problematic, on several fronts.

a reply to: odzeandennz

That is his job. To be ready to do just that, if called upon to do so.

It's the jobs of the president, the state dept., and oh, by the way, us by way of oversight, to make sure they don't have to.

Honestly I would prefer a Civilian to a retired general in Sec Def. No offense to the General. We have more than enough generals in the military as it is no need to appoint a retired one to the second highest civilian position.

Much better than the domestic appointees or possible candidates. This one makes sense. At least to me it seems a great choice.

a reply to: Pyle

He may agree with you.

It's been my experience that the harder the warrior, the more likely it is that they'll prefer civilian control.

That was certainly the case with my Dad, and all his brothers, and his brother-in-laws, too, now that I think on it. About half of them were career military, all had at least some combat experience--WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. In the case of my Dad, all three.

originally posted by: 200Plus
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

I think Chuck holds the Generals place in line for the shower on the FOB...

All joking aside, as an Army veteran General Mattis is one of maybe 4-5 Marines I have true admiration for.

Hayes, Hathcock, Puller, Butler, Mattis.

Interservice rivalry gets set aside for men like that.

This army vet agrees as well. If he did accept the job, I think he could really bring back morale and functionality to the services. And it would be one of the best drainages of the swamp ever. We actually need people who understand national defense in that position.

originally posted by: 1TruthTeller
a reply to: Snarl

General Mattis would be a superior pick as the Secretary of Defense. This man, this soldier, the decorated 4 Star Marine Corps General is brilliant, tough, and has the respect of the men and women that serve our great nation.

In one sense, he comes across as a modern day General Patton, whom you've heard Mr. Trump mention as one of his hero's.

America will be well served if he infact is named Secretary of Defense. Could come as quickly as some time tomorrow on Sunday.

I support it.

Candidate Trump , when discussing how the U.S. Military needed to be Rebuilt after 8 Years of the Obama Administration cutting it's Funding , Relieving Generals would not Agree with his Foreign Policies , and Installing Rules of Engagement that Stifled it's Ability to React to Foreign Threats , Mentioned the Need for Another " Patton " or " MacArthur " to Reassert America Military Power around the World . Considering the Reputation Marine Corps General James Mattis has among his Peers , I Personally think he would be an Excellent Candidate for Secretary of Defense .

originally posted by: Pyle
Honestly I would prefer a Civilian to a retired general in Sec Def. No offense to the General. We have more than enough generals in the military as it is no need to appoint a retired one to the second highest civilian position.

Civilians who have never been to war and do not know what it means to fight and win or fight to the last man and then die ? We as a nation have fought many wars where the civilians get involved in the frag missions and everything turns to a pile of touchy feely, let's be nice, and lose this sucker.... no matter some of your countries finest have been slain in horrible ways for ..... NOTHING !

Let the warriors fight the wars and let the civilians set policy. If it is serious enough to start a war then it should be common sense to win the sucker.. Just don't ask a soldier to fight with both hands tied behind his back and no ammo. The B-52 pilots basically told Mc Namara to F.O. as he had them flying the same routes at the same time of day to Bomb North Vietnam.. Why because he was a stupid civilian with no business planning missions of war.

Tell the military what you want done and then get the heck out of the way.. Mission accomplishment is one of the tenants to being a soldier/airman

a reply to: Snarl

I LOVE Gen Mattis. He truly is Patton of our time. This man is true to cause to the bone, and is completely untouchable. He is man of pure business, and just from the looks of him - it freezes wimps to death.

a reply to: 727Sky

We have the Joint chief of staffs for the military if they don't have the political balls to stand up for their soldiers that is their problem. I just don't want a retired general in the position.


Besides he cannot legally hold the position as far as I know.

Title 10 Section 113(a)
There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force.

Title 10 Section 113

He only retired 3 years ago.

originally posted by: Pyle
Honestly I would prefer a Civilian to a retired general in Sec Def. No offense to the General. We have more than enough generals in the military as it is no need to appoint a retired one to the second highest civilian position.

Why do you have a Secretary of Defense, AND a Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff?

a reply to: carewemust

Sec def is a civilian position. Chairman of the JCOS is a military position.

Trump couldn't make a better choice. Have actually met General Mattis a couple of times some years back. Stand up guy.

a reply to: Pyle

Title 10 Section 113

He only retired 3 years ago.

Thanks I did not know that.. which sucks IMO

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: 727Sky

We have the Joint chief of staffs for the military if they don't have the political balls to stand up for their soldiers that is their problem. I just don't want a retired general in the position.


Besides he cannot legally hold the position as far as I know.

Title 10 Section 113(a)
There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force.

Title 10 Section 113

He only retired 3 years ago.

If Nominated, Mattis would need a Waiver from Congress to become Defense Secretary . With a Majority in Congress , Republicans could Issue a Waiver for General Mattis if so Desired or President Elect Trump would not have Even Considered him for that Post .

a reply to: Snarl

Isn't this the guy who said Islam was cancer?

This guy is the one appointment Trump got right. The media is focusing on some (totally based and #ing badass) quotes taken out of context, when they should be talking about # like this:



*He asserts that the best way to lose a war is to fail to formulate a clear, achievable political endstate before engagement.

*He also notes that employing good people with good ideas doesn't count for # if you're working with bad processes.

*He advocates for strategic reallocation of the defense budget to best meet the demands of today's geopolitical realities.

*Despite being kicked in the nuts by Obama for asking too many pointed questions about Iran, he point blank refuses to throw him under the bus, and voices his strong belief in a politically neutral military.

*Mattis carries a copy of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius when out on deployment.

*He once pulled Christmas duty to relieve a major who then got to spend the holiday with his wife and kids.

*He has an excellent grasp on the sources, practices, strategies, and cultural nature of Islamic extremism, and actually seems to read intel reports.

The only criticism one could possibly throw at the guy is that he's not hep to new paradigms of warfare, and believes that nothing but the technology has changed since Alexander the Great was kicking ass and chewing whatever the Iron Age equivalent of bubble gum was.