By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following a 2017 French military parade, Trump’s proposed U.S. equivalent faced significant opposition, with projected costs reaching $92 million for the military and over $21 million for Washington D.C. Subsequently, the plan was abandoned amidst criticism from D.C. officials and military leaders. However, recent changes in military leadership, including the dismissal of several high-ranking officials, may signal renewed efforts to pursue the parade, potentially bolstering legal defense against future challenges. This personnel shift suggests a change in the political landscape surrounding Trump’s long-held desire for a large-scale military parade.
Read the original article here
Trump’s proposed $92 million military parade, ostensibly to honor the military, reeks of self-aggrandizement and a blatant disregard for responsible spending. The sheer cost is staggering, especially considering the current economic climate and the many pressing needs within the nation. This lavish expenditure, a figure easily capable of funding crucial social programs or addressing infrastructure deficits, instead serves as a testament to Trump’s inflated ego.
The timing of the proposed parade is particularly insensitive, coming on the heels of Trump’s absence from a repatriation ceremony for fallen soldiers. His choice to prioritize a golf outing over honoring those who sacrificed their lives in service is a profound insult, highlighting a callous disregard for the very people the parade is supposedly meant to celebrate. This callous disregard further underscores the parade’s true purpose—not to honor the military, but to bolster Trump’s image.
The scale of the planned event—a massive military display—evokes the imagery of authoritarian regimes. The parallels between this parade and those staged by dictators are undeniable, prompting valid concerns about the motivations behind it. It’s a blatant attempt to project an image of strength and power, reminiscent of the propagandistic spectacles employed by totalitarian leaders to consolidate their authority and cultivate a cult of personality.
Trump’s history of attempting to stage similar events during his previous term hints at a deep-seated desire for this type of extravagant display. This persistent yearning for such a spectacle only strengthens the suspicion that the primary purpose is to create a grandiose spectacle centered around him, transforming a tribute to the military into a personal coronation. The fact that he’s attempting this again, despite previous setbacks, reveals the obsession that drives this ambition.
The parade’s exorbitant cost isn’t just a financial concern; it represents a significant misuse of taxpayer funds. The money could be better allocated to address critical national needs – improving infrastructure, bolstering education, or supporting veterans – rather than funding a self-serving display of military might. This financial irresponsibility speaks volumes about Trump’s priorities and his detachment from the concerns of everyday citizens.
Furthermore, the parade comes at a time when Trump has purged numerous military leaders, replacing them with individuals perceived as more loyal to him. This alarming trend suggests an attempt to ensure the military’s participation in the event, even if it means subverting the chain of command and potentially compromising operational readiness. The implications for military morale and national security are deeply concerning.
The potential for the parade to become a rallying point for protests is considerable. The intense public outcry surrounding this proposal suggests broad opposition to its underlying motivations. The public perception of a massive, expensive military parade orchestrated solely to enhance Trump’s image is undoubtedly negative, and the resulting protests could overshadow the event entirely, turning it into a public display of disapproval.
Considering the timing, the cost, and the inherent symbolism, Trump’s proposed military parade raises more questions than it answers. The spectacle is nothing short of alarming, reinforcing concerns about his fitness for office and his disregard for democratic norms. The fact that such a proposal is even under consideration is a testament to the erosion of institutional checks and balances and the dangers of unchecked power. In the end, the planned parade appears to be less about honoring the military and far more about honoring a single man’s inflated ego.