The head of the White House accused the Pentagon leadership of striving to unleash and wage wars in order to enrich the military-industrial complex.
The US President said this during his regular press conference.
A recording of the speech was posted by the White House on Twitter.
“I'm not saying that the US military loves me - ordinary soldiers love me.
But the top of the Pentagon is probably unlikely.
They just want to fight wars, so as not to upset all these wonderful companies that make bombs, planes and everything else.
But we are emerging from endless wars, ”Trump said.
LIVE: President @realDonaldTrump holds a news conference https://t.co/FHxzG2rxZX
- The White House (@WhiteHouse) September 7, 2020
The American leader cited the defeat of the IS caliphate as an example.
“When I became president, there was chaos, it was everywhere.
Only ISIS could be seen on the maps.
A year later I said, "Where is he?"
“He's gone, sir.
Thanks to you, he is no more. "
Thanks to my philosophy.
He's gone.
Then I said, “Great.
Let's get our soldiers home, ”added Trump.
He did not forget to criticize his campaign rival, the Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, saying that the latter transferred American jobs to other countries and "sent young people to fight in crazy endless wars."
According to the director of the Franklin Roosevelt Foundation for the Study of the United States at Moscow State University, Yuri Rogulev, on the eve of the elections
Trump is trying to look like a person who is against US involvement in military conflicts.
US military in Syria
AFP
© Delil SOULEIMAN
“He has repeatedly spoken about the huge waste in the conflicts in the Middle East, from which the US has received nothing.
And to explain this, Trump talks about who benefits from such a policy.
But this is more pre-election rhetoric, the desire to paint your specious image, "the expert said in an interview with RT.
Commenting on Trump's statement, CNN reported that the president's words came after several Pentagon officials told reporters about the growing tension between the president and the leadership of the defense department.
So, Trump was criticized by Rear Admiral of the US Navy, retired John Kirby.
“The president's remarks about the motives for the actions of the military leadership do not just belittle their military service and the service of those they command;
(Trump in his own words. -
RT
) makes you believe more in the very contempt and thoughtlessness that he is trying to deny, "said the retired military man.
We are talking about a recent publication of The Atlantic magazine, in which, with reference to anonymous sources, it was reported about the disparaging words allegedly spoken by Trump to American soldiers and officers in 2018.
The publication had a great resonance, becoming the reason for a new wave of attacks on Trump.
Power accent
Over the past months, there have been political differences between Trump and the Pentagon leadership.
So, in early June, the head of the White House announced his readiness to send troops to suppress the riots that then swept a number of US cities.
Riots and protests began in the country after the death of an African American George Floyd by police in Minneapolis.
Demonstrators protested against police brutality and racism.
However, Trump's plan then met with resistance from the military leadership.
The head of the Pentagon, Mark Esper, said that in the current situation he does not support the idea of endowing the army with police functions.
As a result, the president abandoned his idea.
Protests under the slogan Black Lives Matter
Reuters
© Eduardo Munoz
Another topic of disagreement between the head of the White House and the leadership of the defense department was the initiative to rename the American bases, named after the commanders of the Confederate army.
This idea began to be actively discussed in US political circles against the background of anti-racist protests - in a number of cities, protesters dismantled monuments to the Confederates.
According to media reports that cite anonymous sources, the Pentagon is ready to take part in a bipartisan discussion on the issue.
At the same time, Donald Trump opposes the policy of renaming.
He stated that his administration does not even intend to consider such an idea.
According to Vladimir Bruter, an expert at the International Institute for Humanitarian and Political Studies, talks about friction between the head of the White House and the military leadership are similar to the truth.
“The relationship between Trump and Esper is really tense.
The army leadership does not like the president.
Trump's promises to end the wars cannot be fulfilled in most cases for political reasons, the American contingent still remains in the Middle East, "the expert noted in a commentary on RT.
A similar point of view is shared by Viktor Supyan, Deputy Director of the Institute for the USA and Canada Studies.
“Indeed, the army is not at all inclined to take part in dispersing protests and riots.
There is a police force for this.
So Trump's idea to involve the army could negatively affect the attitude of the military command towards him, "the expert explained in an interview with RT.
For his calls to use the military to suppress civil protests, Trump was accused of trying to involve the military in political processes on his side.
A number of media outlets made similar criticism of the head of the White House.
At the same time, Trump's opponent, Joe Biden, also spoke about the possible participation of the army in internal political processes.
Earlier, the politician said that if Trump refuses to leave the White House after losing the election, the military will escort him.
“I promise you, I am absolutely convinced that he will be escorted out of the White House very quickly,” Joe Biden said to the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Joe Biden
Reuters
© Kevin Lamarque
Subsequently, the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, General Mark Milli, sent a letter to Congress in which he said that the US military did not intend to interfere in the course of the presidential elections in the country in November 2020, nor to participate in resolving possible disputes over their results.
"In the event of a dispute regarding any aspect of an election, the law requires that any dispute be resolved by the courts and the US Congress, and not by the US military," the Associated Press quoted Milli as an excerpt.
According to Vladimir Bruter, Biden's statement that army forces can be used against Trump himself has no basis and is dictated only by the desire to hurt the opponent.
“If Trump loses, he will not cling to power.
And to say that he will have to be expelled from the White House by force is a clear exaggeration, ”the expert is sure.
As Yuri Rogulyov noted, on the eve of the elections, both sides are trying to involve the army in politics.
“In fact, the army cannot be completely outside of politics.
And the factor of the army's participation in politics has existed since the days of President Eisenhower, ”the expert explained.
Contradictory move
Although the head of the White House is now reproaching the Pentagon for large spending, back in December 2019, he proudly spoke of increasing defense spending.
“The bill that I will sign today provides for the allocation of $ 738 billion - namely, billions - to finance defense needs in 2020.
This is an absolute record, the largest amount of defense spending in the entire history of our country, "- said Trump during the ceremony of signing the budget document at the base of Andrews, Maryland.
Launch of the American ICBM Minuteman III
Reuters
© Kyla Gifford / US Air Force
The amount of funding provided for in the US budget for 2020 exceeded the previous year's figures by 3.1%.
It was Donald Trump who started the trend of increasing defense spending, while the Obama administration, on the contrary, sought to reduce the share of military spending in the treasury.
Trump called this policy in his speech at the Andrews base "disastrous" and recalled that, while still a presidential candidate, he promised to end it.
Democratic Congressman Ro Hannah drew attention to the contradiction between Trump's actions and his current words.
“I know you don’t believe facts matter.
But if you are really against the companies that produce bombs and planes making money, then why did you propose to increase defense spending by ANOTHER $ 140 billion more than under Obama, taking into account, among other things, a secret fund for maintaining endless wars ", - wrote the legislator on Twitter.
I know you do not believe facts matter.
But if you are really opposed to companies that make bombs and planes making money, why have you proposed over $ 140 billion MORE in defense spending than Obama, including a slush fund for endless wars.
https://t.co/W18IN0WGFM
- Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) September 7, 2020
Note that Trump himself also recalled defense spending in the same speech in which he criticized the Pentagon.
“We have upgraded our nuclear capabilities.
I hope we don’t have to use it, ”Trump said.
According to Vladimir Bruter, the contradictions in Trump's rhetoric are related to the fact that he uses any arguments to raise his rating before the elections.
“Trump makes contradictory statements.
In this case, he wants to show that although the growth of the defense budget is his merit, the Pentagon is spending this money ineffectively.
Thus, Trump is trying to emphasize his own merits, ”the expert summed up.
* "Islamic State" (IS, ISIS) - the organization was recognized as terrorist by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 29, 2014.