I keep posting these because I regard them as snap-shots of how the combination of irresponsible biased journalism, bubble-bases ignorance, and peer reinforcement is warping our social discourse and pushing the public into foolish and dangerous misconceptions. Is it an ethical problem? Sure it is. Posts like the one below make readers upset and irrational. They create false framings that warp perceptions of reality. The activate cognitive dissonance, in which the people who like, admire and respect the writer are moved to feel postively about the absolute garbage that he has published.
The author of the screed below that arrived on my Facebook feed yesterday is a wonderful human being. He is kind and effusive in his positive rhetoric; he sends me a birthday card every year, and I have only spent time with him face to face twice in 30 years. He never posts political rants: he is a lifetime showbiz writer, scholar and producer.
I assume this was triggered by the latest “No Kings” lunacy. My friend is also virtue-signaling to his showbiz connections, including me; since he likes and respects me, he assumes that I must agree with his sentiments. My friend is way, way out of his lane.
Ethics Alarms 
There should be a name for situations like this where someone who is intelligent and kind also lacks critical thinking skills in a specific area of life. I think of it like textbook or kindergarten morality, where a person either doesn’t have the temperament or hasn’t studied deeply enough to have actual substantive opinions but sounds superficially plausible. Reducing war gaming to a kind of “office politics morality” is part of why we are where are as a nation. There are no really good decisions in war.
Your friend tracks with what I’ve experienced working in a college/office environment. It’s exactly the type of person who makes a great friend, who would visit you while you were dying in the hospital, but has no business being in leadership over anything complicated because of an overly saccharine view of morals. They are unable to look past unlikable characteristics of Trump or engage in real, fact based, hard reality.
This type of mentality is why college students weren’t suspended when they surrounded the sociology professor complaining about Halloween costumes and why college campuses have now become so erratic. No one wants to expel or suspend anyone anymore.
I think it goes beyond TDS to something deeper. It’s the Neville Chamberlin type of person, probably a great guy in his private life but is less interested in facts and rigorous philosophy than in peace and consensus.
“If China was going to risk invading Taiwan, doing so while Biden was non-President was the perfect opportunity to do it. There is “little we could do to stop them”? I’ll take that bet.”
There’s always a better opponent to them. The truth is that they would find fault with any military action Trump takes. He could take on Putin right now- everyone’s favorite villain- and they would act the same way they act now.
A leader LEADS; he gets people to follow him, within his country and abroad. A leader understands the art of compromising when needed, to keep everything moving forward. Trump knows how to belittle others. He knows how to behave like an extortionist (like threatening our NATO allies that he will leave NATO unless they do as he says). But that is not leadership.
Written by a person who does not understand leadership. Trump has been leading from the front, rather than the rear. He has show a willingness to take the political hit for making a decision that is unpopular with parts of his base and with independents, because he understands the stakes and is willing to pay the price.
“Soft” leadership is negotiating with all and sundry to build some kind of consensus, but our putative allies have shown no appetite at all for making difficult decisions that might have a political cost. Opposing Trump is cost-free for them — that is, until Trump shames them into seeing the world as it is rather than the fake world of their cloistered echo-chambers safe behind virtue-signalling force-fields.
Trump is leading the only way possible in the current environment — “hard” leadership with force and relentless decisiveness. It is impossible to “work” with today’s Democratic party and international leftist elites, because their base will rebel against them if they aid him in the least and do not oppose every single thing he says or does.
I think Trump is an incomplete and tragically thin-skinned person, and a sane country would’ve had a better choice than him available. The fact that we did not says more about the Democrats than Trump, and while he has vast personal shortcomings, leadership is not among them.