Letters to the Editor: Presidential safety isn’t a partisan issue and shouldn’t be made into one

To the editor: The recent letters criticizing the security protocols and operations used during President Trump’s departure from Turkey demonstrate a troubling amount of Monday morning quarterbacking that is indicative of a fundamental issue that continues to stall progress in our country (“Letters to the Editor: Trump’s plane ruse reveals how much he cares about anyone other than himself,” Aug. 13).

Operational security in high-threat environments is determined by seasoned military, intelligence and Secret Service professionals who must assess and prioritize credible, real-time risks to the president, top administration officials and others in the presidential entourage. We will likely never know the details of how it was determined that the risk to Air Force One was ultimately deemed to be acceptable at the time. When unqualified commentators casually dismiss these assessments or twist legitimate safety precautions into a character attack, it highlights just how reflexively partisan our public discourse has become, ultimately leading to, among other things, a continuing lack of legislative progress on a wide variety of critical issues.

This knee-jerk impulse to turn every serious national security decision into fodder for bashing political opponents only accelerates the toxic polarization eroding our civic life. The safety of a commander in chief is not a partisan issue, nor is it a game. When credible threats arise, the priority must always be protecting the office of the president and ensuring the stability of the United States government — regardless of who happens to occupy the Oval Office.

We would do well to remember that respecting the security apparatus tasked with defending our leadership is fundamental to the nation’s security, no matter where one stands on the political spectrum.

Robert Baizer, Newport Beach