The New York Times published an absolutely classic piece of propagandist garbage on Sunday, the narrative of which was generally this: Pentagon officials were beside themselves after they presented President Trump with the option of killing Iranian Gen. Qassem Suleimani…and the president took their advice!
We are definitely entering the world of the Orwellian right now when it comes to fake news.
From the Times:
In the chaotic days leading to the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s most powerful commander, top American military officials put the option of killing him — which they viewed as the most extreme response to recent Iranian-led violence in Iraq — on the menu they presented to President Trump.
They didn’t think he would take it. In the wars waged since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable.
After initially rejecting the Suleimani option on Dec. 28 and authorizing airstrikes on an Iranian-backed Shia militia group instead, a few days later Mr. Trump watched, fuming, as television reports showed Iranian-backed attacks on the American Embassy in Baghdad, according to Defense Department and administration officials.
By late Thursday, the president had gone for the extreme option. Top Pentagon officials were stunned.[…]
When Mr. Trump chose the option of killing General Suleimani, top military officials, flabbergasted, were immediately alarmed about the prospect of Iranian retaliatory strikes on American troops in the region. It is unclear if General Milley or Mr. Esper pushed back on the president’s decision.
Okay so, to understand here: Pentagon officials, including the Defense Secretary, gave Trump the option of killing Suleimani as a kind of game? Oh, he’ll see this crazy idea over there, and that way we can talk him into one of our moderate ideas over here in the center? Is that the psychology they’re trying to play with the President of the United States? Somehow, we kinda doubt it.
If it is, though, then what can you do but laugh when Trump actually picks the decoy option?
If it isn’t, then here’s what we actually have in The New York Times: A bunch of second-rate Trump haters inside the administration running to the paper to complain that THEIR option wasn’t picked. Be it “doing nothing” or “doing something so insignificant that it might as well be nothing.” And the Times, always on the lookout for a story that will make Trump look impulsive and dangerous, was all too happy to run with it.
Well, the bottom line is this: We didn’t elect those guys to be commander-in-chief; we elected Donald J. Trump. We’re sure plenty of career bureaucrats are still “flabbergasted” and “alarmed” by that national decision, but it’s probably time for them to come to terms with it.