Home | About | Donate

Why Jeh Johnson Would Be a Better Defense Secretary Than Michèle Flournoy

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/12/07/why-jeh-johnson-would-be-better-defense-secretary-michele-flournoy


Even the Cabinet picks are LOTE based. What a world in which we find ourselves. Secretary of Defense? Maybe not so much.


"War violates the natural order of things, in which children bury their parents; in war parents bury their children. " A great summary of the nature of war; which certainly applies to the US big time.

He sounds like a realistic choice, and someone who is already in with that in crowd will be best able to restrain the hawks. It is interesting that Biden was against a number of Obama’s wars; but, unfortunately Hillary got her way.

Flournoy should be a Republican she is through and through a neo-con. She even has done some work with the Project of a New American Century people-the charming folk who designed W’s catastrophic foreign policy. Of course she is a chicken hawk, never having been in the military; she just studies it and advocates for others to put their butts on the line-despicable- and makes lots of money in the process.


Joseph Biden is a war criminal. He will do what war criminals do, without care or conscience.

We need to move far beyond the criminal inside the Offal Office, beyond the criminal heading into the Offal Office, and certainly don’t need to stoop to wishful thinking about maybe, hopefully having the "“least worst” enablers imposed upon us by these criminals.

It’s time to resist.


I like Medea but wow this one is a real clunker.

1 Like

This one being the article or being Jeh Johnson? If the latter, Medea clearly agrees and is simply expressing the difference between a clunker that would run very slightly in a better direction than another clunker (Flournoy) that is going to run in an even worse direction. If the former, I disagree. I’m for open discussion of options. Medea mentioned two people she would prefer (Barbara Lee and Ann Wright) but doesn’t see it as a possibility that we can force Biden to go for either of these two (do you?) so she spends a little time telling us who is the least bad among the 3. I don’t have any problem with that. She isn’t even telling you what to do in your voting strategy so we aren’t stuck with jerks like Biden in the future - that’s up to you - she is just giving us information and attempting to minimize the carnage for other countries which I certainly applaud.


The former. If we get a platform we should agitate against imperialism and warmongering, not play ministerial Beltway games.

1 Like

Medea’s choice of Barbara Lee is mentioned in an interesting document I had not seen till just now - ~https://filesforprogress.org/reports/progressive-cabinet-project-report.pdf But not her other choice, Ann Wright, who seems interesting after reading ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Wright but I can see why this choice might be even more unlikely that Barbara Lee. I was disappointed that my choice (Lawrence Wilkerson) was not mentioned, but there are a bunch of other names that I liked. Maybe some day we can get a decent Sec of State and Sec of Defense at the same time, but it isn’t likely to happen next year.


Hi dara:
Maybe whoever the War person is- that person who declares war should go to war too. If the deciders of war had to go to war too----I think that the world would be a more peaceful place. : )

Might give pause for some of them. Eisenhower was in war and he was just fine toppling governments that never threatened the USA in any way. At least he ended the Korean War even as I may not have approved of the methods (according to Wikipedia he threatened nuclear weapons).

I’d rather just have someone who intellectually understood the world better than all these presidents we’ve had during and before my lifetime. You don’t have to be afraid of losing your own life as the only motivator for understanding how dumb most wars have been (except for those who make more money - that is the key to many problems - money out of of politics - I always listen to any new ideas on that front).

1 Like

The new sec’y of war is Lloyd Austin.
As an army retired, he needs the senate to give him the bypass to serve.
His military bio is at wikipedia and i will not bore you with detail.

His first assign in Bavaria at 3rd Inf Div., Mechanized, is interesting.
Rifle Platoon Leader in A Company, 1st Battalion, 7th Infantry

Politico does not like Austin either. This article points out ethical issues in assigning so many military generals to top government positions. Quite a few of Biden’s choices are already retired generals, though it is not mentioned in all of their reviews.

It is what military governments do…


Welllll, maybe we just have a bigger army than most countries with a lot more generals to spare?:roll_eyes:

1 Like

Erm … shhh … you are not permitted to criticize the suggested alternative. What are you, anti-BLM?!!

1 Like

Both Benjamin and Davies are clear enough about their qualms with Johnson and have track records to show that they hold those qualms sincerely. A more subtle question is whether or when ceding this sort of point is actually practical.

There will be little resistance in Congress to Joe Biden’s putting together a militarist and corporatist cabinet. We know that will happen. Any official appointed by Joe Biden will be willing to work with Biden to expand the war fronts, reduce transparency in government, and decrease social safety nets. The administration is happy to hire women and minorities to do these things and call themselves egalitarian, and of course individuals among underrepresented groups have proven themselves just as willing and able to execute atrocities as are white men.

I do not see what is gained here one way or another, though maybe something will pan out differently than anticipated. Is Johnson capable of being Secretary of Defense? Is he willing to do the job that Biden may appoint him to do. I think so. But if so, to the pit of all devils with him.