Avatar feed
Responses: 5
MAJ Bryan Zeski
2
2
0
I'm glad to see a strong leader in that advisory position. My concern is what will happen when the President doesn't agree with the General's advice. The President doesn't seem to have a lot of tolerance for opposing viewpoints.
(2)
Comment
(0)
LTC Becky Yurek
LTC Becky Yurek
9 y
Checks & Balances-built into the Constitution.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Bryan Zeski
MAJ Bryan Zeski
9 y
LTC Becky Yurek - There are no real checks and balances in the Constitution for advisors. He can bring them in and cut them loose at the drop of a hat. My concern is that when he gets an advisor that he disagrees with, he'll just drop them until he gets advisors who advise what he wants to hear, rather than what is actually going on - or what he should really be considering - especially in terms of national security.

Given that we're near the anniversary of a very bad executive order about 75 years ago, I think it's important for the President to have advisors that see the big picture. I hope that's what this General provides - and I hope the President listens to him.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ James Woods
2
2
0
Yeah I remember McMaster and his reputation. Definitely a good pick.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Laborer
1
1
0
Edited 9 y ago
I was hoping that McMaster would be selected. He is far from being a "yes man" and, IMV, exactly the kind of National Security Advisor that Trump needs to rein the POTUS in as needed while giving him the unvarnished advice he will need to be successful in foreign affairs, particularly those with a military dimension.

McMaster has the added advantage of being highly respected on both sides of the political aisle. In that regard, he was a better choice than John Bolton whom I also liked for the position.

There were two other posts announcing this selection. I believe I've picked the first post made.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close