Six veterans on Pete Hegseth and Trump’s emerging military policy
“Army, Coast Guard, Navy and Marine Corps vets debate plans for the new administration.
As a former U.S. Army officer, I know I am not alone in feeling concerned about the path President-elect Donald Trump is taking with respect to the branches of the military we veterans served in.
Pete Hegseth is unsuited for command of the Defense Department. He has plans to fire those serving as generals or in the flag ranks whom he deems “woke,” and an outside group has assembled a list of specific targets. As The Post reported, it was several soldiers who served with Mr. Hegseth who flagged him as possibly unfit to work at President Joe Biden’s inauguration. A Defense Department under Mr. Hegseth would be dysfunctional. He lamented the fact that “we bend over backwards as Americans to provide for the welfare of these radical Islamic terrorists” detained at Guantánamo Bay.
I also detest the fact that Mr. Trump is thinking about ways to go after officers he believes are responsible for the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, exploring whether they could be court-martialed on charges including treason. While the U.S. withdrawal did indeed leave much to be desired, one must ask what an ideal departure from the country would have looked like. A group of people sitting in a secure room in D.C. might monitor combat in a theater of operations halfway around the world, but the decision to commit troops to combat or to remove them is not made by people who are in uniform, much less under arms. That decision is made by the civilian leadership of our government.
In this case, the decision to leave Afghanistan was made by Mr. Trump.
I am afraid that Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth would attempt to punish military officers for a botched mission that was doomed to fail because it was impossible to begin with. That would be dangerous. Instead, we need more honest conversations about the nature of what happened in Afghanistan and more officers like H.R. McMaster, who, before he rose to the rank of lieutenant general and served as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, wrote the best-selling book “Dereliction of Duty.” Mr. McMaster held senior military officers of the generation before ours responsible for not persuading the political leadership at the White House, Congress, and the Defense and State departments that the war in Vietnam was never winnable.
The withdrawal from Afghanistan was no more of a surprise to me and a number of other former soldiers than the failure to prevail in Vietnam was to those who came before us. The after-action reports that were written about Kabul will be studied, and as time passes there will be a diminishing amount of reflection on what happened, especially if punishment obscures who is really responsible.
We can do better. We must.
Roland Nicholson Jr., Towson, Maryland
The writer is a retired U.S. Army officer.
Like most of us who served, Pete Hegseth showed dedication, competence and ability, which is exactly what we need after all this woke nonsense. Mr. Hegseth has a size 12 boot to kick out all of the incompetent fools who have infested our government and military.
Lewis Brackett, San Diego
The writer is a veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard.
Pete Hegseth might be qualified for many Cabinet roles, but defense secretary is not one of them. The defense secretary, along with the president, is part of the National Command Authority. The NCA is responsible for all decisions involving the utilization of nuclear weapons. Clearly, both members of the NCA must be sober and available at all times.
Grant Gary Jacobsen, Woodbridge
The writer is a retired U.S. Marine Corps colonel.
The standard “good order and discipline” is a fundamental military imperative that governs an individual’s behavior while serving. Army Regulation 670-1 includes a prohibition against extremist tattoos (more explicitly defined in the regulation) on the grounds that they “are prejudicial to good order and discipline.” Soldiers with banned tattoos can be subject to punitive action, including removal from military service.
President-elect Donald Trump’s intended nominee for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, served as a commissioned officer in the National Guard, for which he has been lauded. He was decorated with two Bronze Star Medals during his active-duty service and rose to the rank of major.
Mr. Hegseth also has several tattoos. One is a Jerusalem cross. Another is the words “Deus Vult,” a Latin phrase meaning “God wills it.” As The Post has reported, when a number of military personnel saw a photo with Mr. Hegseth’s tattoos, they reported him to the Antiterrorism and Force Protection Team of the D.C. National Guard. Mr. Hegseth had been placed on active duty with the National Guard to provide security during President Joe Biden’s inauguration. But after researching the matter and applying the Army regulation, the AFPT informed Maj. Gen. William Walker of the D.C. National Guard that the phrase is associated with white supremacist groups. Mr. Hegseth was told he was not needed for inauguration duty.
Mr. Hegseth’s response to this reporting is revealing. In a recent podcast, he proudly showed part of the Jerusalem cross and said it was “just a Christian symbol.” He has characterized the response to his tattoos as “anti-Christian bigotry.” But the written record suggests that it was the “Deus Vult” tattoo that prompted at least one superior officer to lose confidence in Mr. Hegseth.
As a former Marine Corps officer, I believe Mr. Hegseth fails to understand and appreciate the standards of “good order and discipline” such as those explicitly defined by the Army. For the good of the military, Mr. Hegseth should not be defense secretary. Our military personnel deserve much better.
James Haugen, Livermore, California
The writer is a former U.S. Marine Corps officer.
A serious Navy secretary
John Phelan, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the greatest naval force in the world, has no military experience.
Rather, the potential secretary of the Navy is a businessman and an art collector. Perhaps his most important qualification is that he hosted a fundraiser for the incoming president at his home, which has been featured in Architectural Digest, over the summer.
Instead of a candy bar for a reward, Mr. Phelan gets to be the person ultimate responsible for hundreds of ships and hundreds of thousands of sailors.
Contrast the résumé of Mr. Phelan with that of John Lehman, the secretary of the Navy I served under in the 1980s.
Mr. Lehman, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, had decades of military service, including serving in A-6 Intruders as a bombardier-navigator and commander.
To further illustrate the respect Mr. Lehman earned as a member of our armed forces, a warship bearing his name has been announced. I look forward to the day when the USS John F. Lehman will join our revered fleet in service of our nation.
John Phelan, you are no John Lehman.
Vin Morabito, Scranton, Pennsylvania
Don’t pardon Edward Snowden
Regarding the Dec. 5 news article “Trump advisers renew push for a pardon of Snowden”:
I gave four years of my life to the intelligence community while serving in the Navy from 1965 to 1969. I took my job seriously and did it to the best of my ability. Betraying my country by revealing its most sensitive secrets never crossed my mind.
Now there is talk in support of pardoning one of America’s most egregious traitors, Edward Snowden. The decision will rest in the hands of President-elect Donald Trump. Yes, the same Donald Trump who waves the flag every chance he gets and constantly espouses his love for America.
I would like all of you loyal patriots and Trump supporters to explain to me why he would even consider such a shameful act.
William D. Markert Jr., Warminster, Pennsylvania
Give Ukraine Russia’s money
In his Dec. 5 op-ed, “How Trump can end the war in Ukraine for good,” Marc A. Thiessen correctly states that we must increase military aid to Ukraine that does not require U.S. taxpayer support. However, he does not mention the obvious solution that the Biden administration has purposely avoided to date: seizing Russian sovereign assets that are held overseas.
Ukraine needs more economic support beyond the Group of Seven’s promised loan to ensure its long-term economic viability. If President Joe Biden does not seize all Russian sovereign assets in the United States to aid Ukraine at no cost to U.S. taxpayers, then President-elect Donald Trump should. This will be a litmus test for him: He either protects American taxpayers by using Russian assets first, or he shrinks from his peace-through-strength posture and fails to make Vladimir Putin pay for his illegal aggression against a peaceful neighbor.
Although the amount of Russian assets in the United States remains classified by the Treasury Department, the total is probably significant and could materially help Ukraine, especially if other nations join us in doing likewise. The global total is estimated to be as much as $300 billion.
If the United States and its allies want to send a strong message to dictators that naked aggression does not pay, then the consequences must be clear and certain. All peace-loving nations should seize these Russian assets immediately to help Ukraine.
Post Opinions wants to know: What resolutions are you setting for yourself? And what resolutions do you think The Post should try to live up to in 2025? Share your responses and they might be published as Letters to the Editor or on our weekly Free For All page.“
No comments:
Post a Comment