655

Trump a ‘danger to US security’, say generals ahead of Harris debate (www.telegraph.co.uk)

submitted 3 months ago by Theprogressivist@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

79 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Retired military generals have described Donald Trump as a “danger” to America’s security as they endorsed Kamala Harris.

On the eve of a critical debate between Ms Harris and her Republican rival, 10 former top US military chiefs released a letter calling the vice-president the only candidate “who is fit to serve” in the country’s highest office.

While Ms Harris had “demonstrated her ability to take on the most difficult national security challenges in the Situation Room and on the international stage”, they wrote, Trump posed “a danger to our national security and democracy”.

The letter, signed by retired General Larry Ellis and retired Rear Admiral Michael Smith, among others, accused Trump of disparaging service members and putting them in “harm’s way”, including with his deal to free 5,000 Taliban fighters.

It coincided with a new Harris campaign advert placed in Palm Beach featuring Trump’s most senior former officials warning of the risks of his White House return.

The attack advert shows a montage of scathing comments about the Republican ex-president by some of his most senior former cabinet officials in what appears to be an effort to goad him ahead of their televised live showdown on Tuesday night.

“In 2016, Donald Trump said he would choose only the best people to work in his White House,” the attack advert’s narrator said. “Now those people have a warning for America: Trump is not fit to be president again.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] slumlordthanatos@lemmy.world 110 points 3 months ago

I want to be the one to point out that retired generals making political statements is heavily frowned upon, so for them to take a step beyond that and ENDORSE A CANDIDATE is practically unheard of except in fringe cases like Michael Flynn.

Upper brass is a pretty exclusive club, and retirees don't generally make political statements to avoid stepping on the toes of the currently serving generals/admirals. If multiple generals/admirals felt the need to take this step, they would've done it with the knowledge and consent of current leadership.

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 6 points 3 months ago

Do you Michael Flynn the convicted felon?

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 94 points 3 months ago

Top Ranking US Military Generals are WOKE and HATE AMERICA! The OBVIOUS Patriot is the One who Stole Documents and calls US Troops Losers and Suckers!

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 37 points 3 months ago

Why should we listen to a Rear Admiral, anyway? Shouldnt our military be out front, not in the rear?

[-] Gork@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago

I only trust Vice Admirals, like Tharn.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Thrawn?

[-] bacon_saber@fedia.io 4 points 3 months ago

He's one of the "smart ones"

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 66 points 3 months ago

Wait, but the folks on lemmy.ml told me that a vote for Kamala was the same as voting for Trump, especially the single issue voters on Palestine. How is it possible that Trump is more dangerous‽

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 39 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I can confidently say that Kamala Harris will never be President of lemmy.ml

load more comments (26 replies)

[-] vegeta@lemmy.world 31 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Wacky generals, who only got 3 stars at most in the military, they got fired like dogs. They never made it, never will. They begged me for a job, tears in their eyes, I said Ok. People in the military hated them. They were vicious, but not smart. I would rarely see them but heard ...really bad things. Nasty to people &, would constantly miss meetings &, salutes. When Gen. Kelly came on board he was a loser &, nothing but problems.

-@RealDonaldTrump

[-] aseriesoftubes@lemmy.world 38 points 3 months ago

It’s so sad that this could easily be a real tweet. Only the consistency of the punctuation errors tips me off that it isn’t.

[-] FloatingAlong@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago

Not enough randomly capitalized Words that shouldn't be capitalized.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

SAD!

[-] EchoCranium@lemmy.zip 25 points 3 months ago

Our international partners began moderating the intelligence they would share while Trump was in office. They couldn't trust him to not blab about state secrets during dinner parties just to try to impress people with how smart and important he was.

[-] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 25 points 3 months ago

he wasn't fit the first time. he was NEVER fucking fit

i wouldn't trust him to walk my dog. and she passed on years ago

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

He'd use your dog's remains for some sort of tax scam and throw you under the bus saying it was your idea.

[-] phx@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 months ago

Or a voting scam

"Hmm, it says here that Sir Barkinwoof IV is a registered Republican. If there is some discrepancy out must be the fault of the former owner"

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

If appeals to conscious thought worked on Repubs, Donald wouldn't have gotten in there in 2016 to prove he is unfit. Unfortunately, all Repubs are dimwitted cultists or sociopaths.

[-] TownhouseGloryHole@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Hey, that's not fair. Some of those dimwitted cultists are sociopaths.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago

People aren't really targeting the cultists. We are targeting the undecideds with these statements, or the people who think democrat policies are bad, but at the same times are not sure about supporting trump.

[-] eatCasserole@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

'danger to US security'

Oh yes that's one of his finest qualities.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Trump is a danger to lgbtq people

Trump is a danger to illegal aliens

Trump is a danger to progressives and liberals

That’s all some people want to hear.

[-] andxz@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

The fuckwit is a danger to everyone.

[-] carl_dungeon@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

No shit

[-] goferking0 5 points 3 months ago

No shit, been that way since before the 2016 election

[-] couch1potato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 months ago

Hehe, rear admiral

load more comments

this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024

655 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19248 readers

2198 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News