RSS

Trump wanted “the kind of generals Hitler had”

While president, Trump said, “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had, people who were totally loyal to him, that follow orders.”

The Trump campaign denies it, but there were witnesses, Trump’s former chief of staff, People magazine reported (here). I believe the witnesses, not Trump and his sycophants.

The Atlantic published an article (here) detailing several instances of Trump disparaging soldiers, veterans, and military leaders. A 2022 book (get it here) recounted conversations between the former chief of staff, retired Marine General John Kelly, and Trump. The books says,

“Trump asked John Kelly, his chief of staff at the time, ‘Why can’t you be like the German generals?’ Trump, at various points, had grown frustrated with military officials he deemed disloyal and disobedient. … Kelly explained to Trump that German generals ‘tried to kill Hitler three times and almost pulled it off.’ This correction did not move Trump to reconsider his view: ‘No, no, no, they were totally loyal to him,’ the president responded.”

When the author of the Atlantic article asked Kelly this week about that, Kelly told him

“that when Trump raised the subject of ‘German generals,’ Kelly responded by asking, “‘Do you mean Bismarck’s generals?’ He went on: ‘I mean, I knew he didn’t know who Bismarck was, or about the Franco-Prussian War. I said, ‘Do you mean the kaiser’s generals? Surely you can’t mean Hitler’s generals? And he said, ‘Yeah, yeah, Hitler’s generals.’ I explained to him that Rommel had to commit suicide after taking part in a plot against Hitler.” Kelly told me Trump was not acquainted with Rommel.”

In other words, Trump doesn’t know any history, not even the generals’ names. This isn’t surprising, because Trump is uncaring about facts. He’s entirely fixated on the notion that America’s military leaders owe him personal loyalty, not loyalty to the Constitution or the nation, and should follow his orders no matter what they are. (As the Atlantic article details, he wanted them to shoot migrants and protesters.)

Why did the Atlantic choose this particular time, two weeks before the 2024 election, to blister Trump’s contempt for the U.S. military and his intention to misuse it? The article’s subhead, “The Republican nominee’s preoccupation with dictators, and his disdain for the American military, is deepening,” suggests a fluid situation in which Trump’s attitudes are evolving — in the wrong direction. That’s certainly material to the upcoming election.

As the election approaches, dozens of former high-ranking military officers have publicly raised alarms about the prospect of a second Trump presidency. That’s not fresh news, it’s been reported for months, but there is perhaps a heightened sense of urgency in both the media and military establishment because of recent polls showing Trump could win the election.

In all fairness, the article isn’t a hit piece, nor is it partisan. The concern about Trump’s fitness, and the possibility he might misuse the military, is real and deep. It comes from our top military experts. Trump’s own past behavior and comments raise these concerns. And it isn’t partisan, because it doesn’t involve policy, or preferring one party to the other; it’s entirely personal, about Candidate Trump’s demonstrated unfitness.

It’s worth noting this story is being widely disseminated by the mainstream media. All the major U.S. news networks — NBC, ABC, CBS — are covering it. This occurs in a context of the media being criticized for treating Trump as a normal candidate, and de-emphasizing both his cognitive decline and his extreme views. He isn’t a normal candidate; he’s the only presidential candidate in U.S. history who has openly talked about violating the Constitution as if it were nothing.

Either the polls are wrong, a large swathe of American voters are ill-informed or uninformed, or the half of U.S. voters whom polls suggest are about to vote for Trump either don’t care about his personal deficiencies or think he’s the solution to their concerns.

The bottom line is we’re all in this together, and if they elect him, we will all share the benefits or consequences. Whether a second Trump presidency would be beneficial or detrimental is a matter of opinion; but it certainly would be consequential for America, the world, and each of us as individuals.

Related story: The sister of a slain Army soldier disputed the Atlantic‘s version of how Trump treated her family, stating, ““President Donald Trump did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa” (read that story here).

Photos: Above, Trump caricatured as a banana republic potentate; below, Gen. Erwin “Desert Fox” Rommel in North Africa, circa 1942

Return to The-Ave.US Home Page


Your Comment