There was a horrifying moment during last night debates (there were several cringe-worthy moments as well) when Donald Trump said he would order soldiers to kill women and children. If you remain unconvinced that Donald Trump is singularly unfit to be Commander in Chief after this debate, then perhaps the words of a retired soldier will do the trick.
Tonight, in the Detroit debate, Donald Trump went further. He doubled down on his claim that American Soldiers should be in the business of assassinating innocent women and children because of the actions of their husbands/fathers. This is wrong. This is a war crime. This is an illegal order. When he was told U.S. troops do not obey orders to commit war crimes, he responded in typical Trump fashion. “I know leadership, I tell them to do it and they will do it. I’m a leader.”
This is not just a bad idea. This is not just embarrassingly stupid. This is even further trashing of the honor and dignity of the members of the world’s best military. No Soldier I trained would ever obey that order. Even worse is to contemplate the soul destroying reality for any that did obey it. Killing a combatant in defense of yourself and your battle buddies is right and just, but it never leaves you. In the back of your mind is always the realization that you took a human life, no matter how justified. How could anyone contemplate putting Soldiers in the position to live the rest of their lives seeing the faces of dead innocent children in their dreams every night?
Donald Trump cannot be the Commander in Chief of the United States Military. If nothing else convinces you to be #NeverTrump, think of the men and women who offer their lives in defense of your freedom. Think of what Trump as President means to them in light of what he said at the debate.
In case I was not clear: American Soldiers as a group will NOT obey illegal, unconstitutional orders to commit war crimes. They will not, and anyone who would consider asking them to should shut up and go home. Anyone who would consider that does not deserve the votes of the Republican party or of the American people.
This isn’t a joke. “Sticking it to the Establishment” ain’t worth the cost of losing your soul.
Paul,
I agree about Trump but can you envision a sane commander bombing a high level ISIS residence in Raqqa based on international law:
Geneva Convention IV
Article 28 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.”
I am beginning to see the light.
That’s more gratifying to hear than you could possibly know, Michael.
My question hangs in the air then but is based partly on the 1986 attempt by the Reagan administration on Quaddafi’s life which actually killed his adopted daughter.
Sorry Bill, I just wasn’t clear on the question. Are you saying it would be considered a war crime? I don’t think so. Morally, the the difference is intent. One has to decide how much, if any, collateral damage is acceptable in going after military targets. What we’re talking about in relation to Trump is the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians.
Where’s the specific situation he was responding to?
Because the situation Bill Bannon is talking about isn’t a war crime, it’s not trying to kill women and children because of what the man in their life has done. They’re collateral damage if they’re killed. (Our reluctance to do that is well known to be abused.)
I can’t find the quote of what Trump was responding to anywhere, and heck no I didn’t waste my time on the debates.
****
Found it, after much fighting with search engines, in– of all places– the NYTimes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics/transcript-of-the-republican-presidential-debate-in-detroit.html?_r=0
Trump is a moron. Per my husband– who, amusingly enough, is going to work in uniform this week for annual tour– gave a bright smile and said “hey, if you ever wanted to SEE the military uphold their oath….”
It’s about specifically targeting those related to a terrorist, not about them being killed in the process; he clearly knows it’s a bad thing, because he keeps trying to switch it around to waterboarding the terrorist, and away from those who happen to be related to him.
To Bill’s question, this mirrors the theological question of secondary effect. A person cannot morally kill an innocent in war. A person can morally do an act in war which has the secondary effect of killing an innocent. Detonating a drone to kill a terrorist? Yes. Detonating a drone to kill a terrorist in a place where his family may also be killed? Possible, although if the terrorist can be killed without killing the family, that’s better. Detonating a drone to kill a terrorist’s family, where the primary motivation is to discourage future terrorists? That’s terrorism.
Bill Clinton to Donald Trump in 2014; “We will reimburse you plus 10 points of each dollar you spend if you run for the Republican ticket in ’16.”. Donald; “Make it 17 points!”.
Bill; ” Done.”
Fly on the wall fiction that is looking more plausible ever day.
Donald Trump is insane.
A write in candidate must be organized soon.
Or else!
Hillary Clinton is also not morally qualified to be commander in chief (Benghazi nor Sanders.
Any of the three Republicans running could be trusted with the job.
If Trump is insane, what does that make his supporters?
I wrote an open letter to Trump Supporters here: http://sardonicexcuria.blogspot.com/2016/03/funs-over-lets-decide.html
His original quote was from before the debate. Trump said this:
We’re fighting a very politically correct war….And the other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. They, they care about their lives. Don’t kid yourself. But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families.
When he was asked about whether the military would obey this command during the debate, he said:
“They won’t refuse. They’re not gonna refuse me. Believe me.”
I don’t think he could be any more plain. Unless, somehow, “take out their families” means something other than the apparently plain meaning.
I do not know what to think about this. It is horrifying to me to think that an American military person would be ordered to kill a woman or child. Yet there have been many cases where a woman or child is used to threaten military personnel in the field – women carrying suicide bombs, 12 year old boys aiming automatic weapons at soldiers, etc. In circuumstances like that our troops have to espond with deadly force. I do not like that and I do not advocate that.
.
As Robert Heinlein said, “All is fair in love and war. What a contemptible lie!”
.
BTW, for all those faint of heart, did not God tell Joshua to kill every man, woman and child when he went into Canaan to conquer a city? Again, this does NOT mean Trump is justified to do the same with our military, but precedence has been set, in this case by God Himself, albeit for very special circumstances. Personally, however, I am horrified by what Trump is alleged to have said (I watched the debate but obviously missed that).
With Trump, you never know. Nor can you ever know.
That said, he’s not wrong about political correctness influencing the way we fight.
Potential for non-combatant casualties must be taken into consideration and mitigated consistent with the mission. But, that is not the issue here … or should not be.
The question is about his belief that the military will follow ANY order he gives. That is absolutely not true, underscored by the folks who were hanged and shot after WW II, whose defense was, ” I was only following orders.”
Also, substitute going after ‘terrorists’ families’ with going after ‘ Tea Party member families’. THAT open issue has been hanging out there for some years, given the lawlessness of the Obama Administration.
The way to think about this is that it’s typical Trumpean bombast & hyperbole. Trump’s opponents hear him say that and start having visions of a bloated, beshadow Brando talking about diamond bullet thoughts on the utility of ruthlessness. Trump’s supporters hear De Niro shouting he wants terrorism DEAD! Terrorism’s family DEAD! terrorism’s house BURNED TO THE GROUND!
.
Is it a debate gaff? Yes. Will it hurt him? Probably not before the general election, but Hillary was going to call the eventual nominee The Worst Person in the World EVER anyways, whoever he is, so even then it won’t hurt that much.
.
Did he mean it? At the time. He’s like the Clintons that way.
IS it a debate gaffe?
We’re fighting a very politically correct war….And the other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. They, they care about their lives. Don’t kid yourself. But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families. – Fox and Friends, December 1 or 2, 2015
Asked again during a later CNN debate, he said:
But Trump didn’t flinch, saying that he “would be very, very firm with families” and repeating his view that terrorists “may not care much about their [own] lives.” But, he added, “they do care, believe it or not, about their families’ lives.”
And then he confirmed those statements during the debate, and stated that the military would not refuse the orders…could not.
No – this is not a debate gaffe.
The GOP establishment majority in Congress funded Obamacare; funded executive order lawlessness; funded PP; voted for the latest, huge Federal budget. The establishment GOP is one wing (the Dems are the other) of a bloated bird (big government): which bird is an insatiable buzzard.
No, this isn’t a joke. Sticking with the loser GOP Establishment isn’t worth another lost election and a Hillary presidency.
The Bear asks if Trump is a psychopath.
This is not the position of a man who doesn’t get something. It’s the position of a man who doesn’t get anything.
Be clear on the enormity of what Trump is saying here. He’s not saying that we should make an airstrike or dronestrike on a terrorist target even if women or children are present. He spun a (false) story about how the 9/11 hijackers had wives and children living with them in the US (they didn’t) and sent them back to the Middle East right before the attacks. Trump proposes that in such a situation, we should send military revenge missions out specifically to kill those family members in order to teach terrorists a lesson.
.
That’s not just against the laws of a war, though it’s certainly that. Even at a strictly utilitarian level it’s a really stupid, non-productive mission on which to risk the lives of American men and servicemen.
Does anyone think Hillary is above the killing of others?
If Trump and Hillary are the candidates, how to choose the lesser evil????????
We are in big trouble in the US. God help us. Please.
Lucius,
On the Canaan massacres, it is not a precedent to be repeated since such is moral only if God clearly orders humans to do such ( He takes c.151,000 humans into the next life each day of the week)…which ordering He has not done since the Old Testament with 70 A.D. Jerusalem being different…an intersecting of God’s punishment with a Roman reaction to rebellion. The modern hierarchy at the non infallble level has erred on Canaan with Pope Benedict saying it was simply human sin in Verbum Domini sect.42 in 2010 and with the Pontifical Biblical Commission saying in a 2014 paper….that it never happened literally ( different than Benedict ).To hold those positions, both had to deny multiple biblical verses that had God commanding it…e.g. Wisdom 12:6 ” you willed to destroy by the hands of our ancestors”.
God kills such groups only when their sin is complete in His eyes and He tells us that in Gen. 15:16 while talking to Abraham (” the wickedness of the Amorites is not yet complete”) which was over 400 years til completed sin for them ( a standard that humans are incapable of judging … and Christ repeats that standard in Mt.23:32 as does Paul in I Thessalonians 2:16 as to Jewish leader sins being complete for the punishment of 70A.D. Relatedly as to God’s lordship over life: Ezekiel 18:4 God says, ” All souls are mine”…Deut.32:39 ” It is I who bring death and life…and from my hand, no one can deliver.”
Wisdom 12:10 tells us that during that 400 plus years, God was trying to convert the Canaanites by lesser punishments….only then does He finally kill a group as such. Til 70 AD it was over a thousand years of offenses by the Jews prior to completed sin with God wooing them all that time.
No – this is not a debate gaffe
.
Headline: Trump: “I will order the military to commit war crimes”
.
Pretty sure that’s a gaffe. Whether its a Kinsley gaffe or a conventional gaffe I’ll leave for others to decide.
Sticking with the loser GOP Establishment isn’t worth another lost election and a Hillary presidency.
I guess I don’t understand what that means in context.
“There is a class of people — men, women, and children, who must be killed or banished.”
–General William Tecumseh Sherman
Was General Sherman insane while waging his “total war” against the South?
For historical context here is a link to the whole letter:
https://books.google.com/books?id=igIpAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=There+is+a+class+of+people+%E2%80%94+men,+women,+and+children,+who+must+be+killed+or+banished&source=bl&ots=nWZbY1_Q6x&sig=1AHAshUz3IOWzBuo-lqdznFG8K8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjP2pHG66fLAhVEyyYKHa7xC9sQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=There%20is%20a%20class%20of%20people%20%E2%80%94%20men%2C%20women%2C%20and%20children%2C%20who%20must%20be%20killed%20or%20banished&f=false
Another letter from Sherman in which he makes clear that he is talking about partisans who take action against Union forces in Kentucky:
https://books.google.com/books?id=igIpAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=There+is+a+class+of+people+%E2%80%94+men,+women,+and+children,+who+must+be+killed+or+banished&source=bl&ots=nWZbY1_Q6x&sig=1AHAshUz3IOWzBuo-lqdznFG8K8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjP2pHG66fLAhVEyyYKHa7xC9sQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=There%20is%20a%20class%20of%20people%20%E2%80%94%20men%2C%20women%2C%20and%20children%2C%20who%20must%20be%20killed%20or%20banished&f=false
That OR in there matters
Ernst Schreiber asked; ” If Trump is insane what does that make his supporters? ”
Desperate?(!)
Kill them all and let God sort them out…oh that’s not it at all. Well, justifiable genocide is a trait of the left…see Abortion on demand supporters. If he is not insane he is delusional. I do not believe him to be right in the head or heart.
President Truman deliberately targeted civilians to achieve peace and end the war.
Mr. McClarey,
Once Sherman got into the business of burning down houses and farms, the inevitable result was the killing of civilians. Therefore, it is almost impossible for him not to have committed war crimes. Indeed, someone who says “War is hell” and proceeds to make war on civilians sounds more like a fiend than a human being.
Without doubt, the “entire” population of some Middle Eastern countries is hostile to the United States, just as it was in Japan. Invading any country there to try to bring peace would be next to impossible – an obvious morass, such as Iraq. ISIS could be stopped, or significantly slowed, by dropping 1-2 small nuclear weapons in the vicinity.
Forever may we avoid that action.
I liken Truman’s…and Trump’s…statements to the following:
A Mafia boss is besieged in his house. In the house with him are his family (wife, several children), several other mob bosses, and some friends of the children who just happened to be playing there at the time. In addition, every room is guarded by an underling. Taking the house would involve massive loss of life. If the boss is allowed to escape, he will continue a dangerous drug smuggling operation.
Therefore…the local police choose to firebomb the house out of existence. They plant C-4 at all the corners. They douse the house in kerosene, and light the C-4. It kills or horribly burns everyone in side. But, the police and other innocents are safe.
Based purely on a utilitarian calculus, this makes sense. If “our” lives are worth more than “their” lives, even of the innocents among them, then it also makes sense.
I suppose one could also analogize and say that eventually, the mafia don surrenders because the police begin executing his daughters one by one. After 3 of 4 daughters are dead, he surrenders.
More to the point, ‘our’ culture advances mankind, ‘their’ culture diminishes mankind … see also Islam. Per force, war between the two can envision only one winner, the more violent and persistent. So far, that would be Islam.
Ginny.
Are we there yet?
Do the killings of Christians in the middle East, the killings of the 9-11 attack, the US Cole, Benghazi, all terrorist attacks on the US allow you or me a clear conscience to flatten families believed to be terrorist?
Yes we have suffered. More so the Christians in the Holy Land, but do we start a retaliation campaign that kills by association?
Is this sound?
Trump has now reversed himself today on both torture and killing families..first reported by the Wall Street Journal two hours ago but here is CNN link:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/04/politics/donald-trump-reverses-on-torture/index.html
“Once Sherman got into the business of burning down houses and farms, the inevitable result was the killing of civilians.”
Except that Sherman never killed any civilians. He was speaking of partisans in Kentucky who were raiding Union lines and under the rules of war at that time were subject to immediate execution. The Confederates pursued similar policies in regions of the Confederacy that supported the Union, including East Tennessee, Western Virginia and Western North Carolina.
JTL,
Since you used the plural…imbeciles…and have no idea what each person has been outraged by over the past years, your post is nothing but indirect self promotion. You’re trying to impress readers that you are the real deal yet your post tells us explicitly that you enjoy spite. Take your post and show it to a good priest and follow his advice. May God bless you.
I am sure you ran a similar headline when Obama was running either time. 54% of the Church attending Catholics admitted to voting for him.?
JT, your comment consisted of nothing but gratuitous insults, so it was deleted, and you have been prohibited from commenting further.
Other comments about this blog or blogger in particular not being equally condemnatory of President Obama, Hillary Clinton, or the left in general are laughable.
Phillip,
It is not sound. We cannot win without prayer to cultivate charity in the hearts and minds of humankind. But we have lost the belief and regard for the supernatural and have fallen away into paganism. Unless God soon comes to our aid, the end of civilization is at hand.
I agree with the author. We cannot elect a narcist and self loving individuals. Trump does not care for anyone except himself. He a a little boy in a man’s body. He needs to mature to become a leader. It is very dangerous to elect this man after you saw him endorse by his children at the CBN appearance. How can one elect Trump when his morality is in the gutter. I am not judging Trump, but observing his behaviors and track records. It doesn’t matter if one elect this man for economic reason, morality comes first, and utmost respecting life. Trump supports planned parenthood, this shown this man is ignorance of Jesus, who died for our sins. Everyone one of us will be judge by Jesus and how we elect our presidence, since the repercussion will affect many lives and souls.
The rise of Trump is more than just about “Sticking it to the Establishment”. If that were the only, or even the main, reason, Cruz would be running away with the nomination. In fact, I get the sense the Establishment would rather see DaDonald get the nomination than Cruz. After all, they had to know that Romney’s speech would have the effect of helping Trump. It has more to do with the Cult of Personality worship that has become so ingrained in society. Hell, you even see it in the Church. If the Establishment were serious about stopping Trump, they would tell Rubio and Kasich to get out and throw their support behind Cruz.
Has anyone else seen this:
http://www.eyeofthetiber.com/2016/03/03/michael-voris-hair-trump-hair-get-together-for-drinks/
You anticipate PopeWatch tomorrow Greg!
How about voting for Hillary Clinton who supports the mass murder of babies? Will that be a cause of the loss of you soul?
How can one elect Trump when his morality is in the gutter? Easy. When his opponent’s morality is in the sewer.
Not everyone will agree that choosing the gutter over the sewer is defensible, or that opting not to choose between the gutter or the sewer is an honorable position. And that’s . . . okay.
Personality worship is only part of it. What people are really looking for Deliverer to save them from our feckless ruling class.
.
Everything implied by “Deliverer” fully intended.
is a Deliverer
.
(This typing one handed stuff ain’t easy, y’know)
“You anticipate PopeWatch tomorrow Greg!”
I am nothing if not ahead of the curve.
How about voting for Hillary Clinton who supports the mass murder of babies? Will that be a cause of the loss of you soul?
Yes. Any other questions?
I was in the car most of today, listened to the news radio stations and NPR. NOT ONE PEEP was to be heard about this statement by Trump.
A few minutes ago I was in a restaurant which had CNN on the wall with no sound but the moving transcript was on. biggest deal about this story appeared to be how Trump has backed away from his original statement.
–
If Cruz or Rubio had made this statement, the MSM would be crucifying them right now. Why not Trump? It may be Teflon, or that radiation-resistant cockroach DNA, but then again, it may be because Trump is one of them. The media knows its own, and they know that Trump like Clinton will protect that which is most dear to them. Everything else can go to hell.
Why not Trump? Because they’re saving it for the general.
.
And Trump is almost certainly more “them,” than “us.” Which only goes to show you how damaged “our” brand is.