捍衛憲法與價值，以團結國家：Mattis聲明

 【縛雞之見】

前國防部長Mattisz並不是因為反川普而辭職，所以辭職之後也無惡言。他之所以嚴厲批評川普，理由是認為川普撕裂國家，以及下令美國軍隊違反

國民在憲法下的權利。

原文有“納粹「分而治之」的手法“Divide and Conquer”，但有一部義大利片反講納粹的，片名是”Dived We Fall”

Mattis點出a false conflict，武漢肺炎的篩檢爭吵，癥結就是這個。 

James Mattis Denounces President Trump, Describes Him as a Threat to the Constitution    JEFFREY GOLDBERG ＠The Atlantic   20200603

James Mattis, the esteemed Marine general who resigned as secretary of defense in December 2018 to protest Donald Trump’s Syria policy, has, ever since, kept studiously silent about Trump’s performance as president.  But he has now broken his silence, writing an extraordinary broadside in which he denounces the president for dividing the nation, and accuses him of ordering the U.S. military to violate the constitutional rights of American citizens.

“I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled,” Mattis writes.  “The words ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court.  This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding.  It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind.  We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers.  The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.”  He goes on, “We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.”

In his j’accuse, Mattis excoriates the president for setting Americans against one another.

 “Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try.  Instead, he tries to divide us,” Mattis writes.  “We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort.  We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership.  We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society.  This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.”

He goes on to contrast the American ethos of unity with Nazi ideology.  “Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that ‘The Nazi slogan for destroying us … was “Divide and Conquer.”  Our American answer is “In Union there is Strength.”’  We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.”

Mattis’s dissatisfaction with Trump was no secret inside the Pentagon.  But after his resignation, he argued publicly—and to great criticism—that it would be inappropriate and counterproductive for a former general, and a former Cabinet official, to criticize a sitting president.  Doing so, he said, would threaten the apolitical nature of the military.  When I interviewed him last year on this subject, he said, “When you leave an administration over clear policy differences, you need to give the people who are still there as much opportunity as possible to defend the country.  They still have the responsibility of protecting this great big experiment of ours.”  He did add, however: “There is a period in which I owe my silence.  It’s not eternal.  It’s not going to be forever.”

That period is now definitively over.  Mattis reached the conclusion this past weekend that the American experiment is directly threatened by the actions of the president he once served.  In his statement, Mattis makes it clear that the president’s response to the police killing of George Floyd, and the ensuing protests, triggered this public condemnation.

“When I joined the military, some 50 years ago,” he writes, “I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution.  Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.”

He goes on to implicitly criticize the current secretary of defense, Mark Esper, and other senior officials as well.  “We must reject any thinking of our cities as a ‘battlespace’ that our uniformed military is called upon to ‘dominate.’ At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors.  Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society.  It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.  Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them.

 

Mattis聲明原文

IN UNION THERE IS STRENGTH

I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled.  The words “Equal Justice Under Law” are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court.  This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding.  It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind.  We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers.  The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.

When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution.  Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.

We must reject any thinking of our cities as a “battlespace” that our uniformed military is called upon to “dominate.”  At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors.  Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society.  It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.  Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them.

James Madison wrote in Federalist 41 that “America united with a handful of troops, or without a single soldier, exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign ambition than America disunited, with a hundred thousand veterans ready for combat.” We do not need to militarize our response to protests.  We need to unite around a common purpose.  And it starts by guaranteeing that all of us are equal before the law.

Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that “The Nazi slogan for destroying us…was ‘Divide and Conquer.’ Our American answer is ‘In Union there is Strength.’” We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.

Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try.  Instead he tries to divide us.  We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort.  We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership.  We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society.  This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.

We can come through this trying time stronger, and with a renewed sense of purpose and respect for one another.  The pandemic has shown us that it is not only our troops who are willing to offer the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of the community.  Americans in hospitals, grocery stores, post offices, and elsewhere have put their lives on the line in order to serve their fellow citizens and their country.  We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square.  We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.  At the same time, we must remember Lincoln’s “better angels,” and listen to them, as we work to unite.

Only by adopting a new path—which means, in truth, returning to the original path of our founding ideals—will we again be a country admired and respected at home and abroad.