Trump’s ugly attitudes toward the military come into focus

In modern American politics, officeholders and candidates from both parties tend to treat the U.S. military with a certain amount of respect. This is, in part, what makes Donald Trump’s antics over the past decade so extraordinary: Common sense suggests that any politician who belittles those who wear the uniform with such regular derision and contempt would face a swift, political backlash that would end the your career.

The former Republican president, however, paid no price – which, not surprisingly, had the predictable effect of encouraging even more bad behavior.

In his stunning new article, The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg summed it up this way:

Very good. If the conversation were limited to a small handful of easily forgotten gaffes, it would be much less interesting. But Trump’s career in politics has been defined in part by his criticism of those who wear (or wore) the uniform.

Goldberg’s article, for example, highlights an incident in which Trump, during his tenure in the White House, offered to personally pay for the funeral services of Vanessa Guillén, a 20-year-old Army soldier who was killed by a fellow soldier in Fort Hood. The family accepted the then-president’s offer and sent a bill to Trump. Guillén’s funeral cost $60,000.

“It doesn’t cost $60,000 to bury a damn Mexican!” he reportedly told his team, adding that he no longer wanted to cover the costs. The family’s lawyer told The Atlantic that “no money was received from Trump by the family.”

It is, without a doubt, an impressive story. But I wouldn’t go so far as to describe it as surprising.

Shortly after Goldberg’s article reached the public, The New York Times published a story about new comments from former White House chief of staff John Kelly, a retired four-star general.

“And I thought he was asking one of those rhetorical, you know, questions,” Kelly told the newspaper. “But I didn’t realize he was serious – he just didn’t understand what the point was. As I got to know him, once again, this altruism was something he simply didn’t understand. What’s in it for them?”

Trump and his team have denounced Kelly and denied the veracity of the latest reports, even though they are incredibly easy to believe.

It was earlier this month that Trump said during an interview, in reference to the nation’s status quo: “The military is evil. We have generals who do a terrible job.” In the same interview, the Republican Party candidate continued to complain that US military leaders “never get fired.”

At the same time, he downplayed the importance of American troops who suffered traumatic brain injuries during an Iranian-backed attack.

Six weeks earlier, the former president, hoping to impress a party mega-donor, also downplayed the significance of the Medal of Honor — comments the Veterans of Foreign Wars described as “stupid” — before sparking a controversy over a political appearance. at Arlington National Cemetery.

As regular readers know, Trump also reportedly belittled wounded veterans, blamed military leaders for failed missions he approved, feuded with Gold Star families, and famously declared in reference to American prisoners of war: “I like people who haven’t been captured, okay?”

Two weeks ago, the Republican went so far as to promise to establish a task force that would help keep military leaders out of the Pentagon if he found them ideologically unacceptable.

It is not strange to see Trump as the country’s first modern presidential candidate who has demonstrated open hostility toward the military.

It’s probably worth reemphasizing that the Republican Party candidate who pointed out “bone spurs” to avoid the draft is not mandatory respect military service. If he wants to belittle those who wear the uniform or denigrate their sacrifices, I find it bizarre, but that’s his problem. It’s a free country – so free that it can launch rhetorical attacks against the military if it wants.

In the United States, even presidents, former presidents, and presidential candidates can insult military personnel and veterans if they so choose.

But the next time Trump hugs a flag or touts his “pro-military” bona fides, it’s worth keeping his royal record in mind.

This post updates our related previous coverage.