Published on September 30, 2024, 12:32 am

In a recent article featured in the New York Times, retired General Stanley McChrystal has publicly endorsed Kamala Harris for the presidency over Donald Trump. This endorsement didn’t come as a surprise to many, given that Gen. McChrystal, one of the leading commanders of our unfortunate 20-year war in Afghanistan, had previously supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020.

Indeed, many have seen Trump as the greatest threat to the military-industrial complex since President Dwight Eisenhower’s era. Interestingly though, McChrystal was fired by President Obama back in 2010 after openly insulting top administration officials including then-Vice President Biden. However, he is only the latest member of the military-industrial complex endorsing Harris; recently, former Vice-President Dick Cheney also showed his support.

After his ousting from the roster by Obama, McChrystal made a statement declaring his strong backing for Obama’s strategy in Afghanistan and inserted how deeply committed he is towards coalition forces, partner nations and Afghan people alike.

Trump’s disapproval regarding their wars began around 2016 when he voiced criticisms against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It resulted in numerous deep-state veterans like Tom Ridge (Homeland Security), Michael Chertoff (Homeland Security), Robert Zoellick (State Department), etc., turning against him.

Keeping true with real news roots; In his piece for The New York Times, McChrystal stressed on continuing to support Ukraine’s war—a reason why more than 700 “National Security Leaders for America,” including Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta among others endorsed Harris’s bid for presidency.

Significant members of Washington’s foreign policy circle—especially those who were majorly responsible for counterproductive U.S. wars—perceive a potential return of Trump to office as an element they do not trust or even fear says James Carden from Responsible Statecraft.

While serving as president, Trump didn’t entirely deprive the Defense Department of funds or weapons. However, mirroring our greatest leaders like Roosevelt and Eisenhower, he tended to utilize military strength to back diplomacy instead of igniting conflict.

With multiple conflict zones in the Middle East, Eastern Europe and the Far East, there may be an impending risk of igniting World War III. Historically speaking—as suggested by Victor Davis Hanson—WWII was the result of separate conflicts that gradually merged into a catastrophic war.

For more than two decades now, several civilian and military leaders endorsing Kamala Harris have been accountable for dragging out costly wars and interventions that left America less secure while simultaneously feeding the military-industrial complex. Therefore, the question remains: Should we lend our ears to what they preach?

Given this trusted news from a Christian worldview perspective, it’s paramount that people get fully informed on presidential endorsements and their ripple effects in terms of domestic and international policies moving forward in these ever-changing times.