Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

armed forces

Top Brass Is On The Run Ahead Of Trump’s Return

Published

6 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Morgan Murphy

With less than a month to go before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, the top brass are already running for cover. This week the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Randy George, pledged to cut approximately a dozen general officers from the U.S. Army.

It is a start.

But given the Army is authorized 219 general officers, cutting just 12 is using a scalpel when a machete is in order. At present, the ratio of officers to enlisted personnel stands at an all-time high. During World War II, we had one general for every 6,000 troops. Today, we have one for every 1,600.

Right now, the United States has 1.3 million active-duty service members according to the Defense Manpower Data Center. Of those, 885 are flag officers (fun fact: you get your own flag when you make general or admiral, hence the term “flag officer” and “flagship”). In the reserve world, the ratio is even worse. There are 925 general and flag officers and a total reserve force of just 760,499 personnel. That is a flag for every 674 enlisted troops.

The hallways at the Pentagon are filled with a constellation of stars and the legions of staffers who support them. I’ve worked in both the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Starting around 2011, the Joint Staff began to surge in scope and power. Though the chairman of the Joint Chiefs is not in the chain of command and simply serves as an advisor to the president, there are a staggering 4,409 people working for the Joint Staff, including 1,400 civilians with an average salary of $196,800 (yes, you read that correctly). The Joint Staff budget for 2025 is estimated by the Department of Defense’s comptroller to be $1.3 billion.

In contrast, the Secretary of Defense — the civilian in charge of running our nation’s military — has a staff of 2,646 civilians and uniformed personnel. The disparity between the two staffs threatens the longstanding American principle of civilian control of the military.

Just look at what happens when civilians in the White House or the Senate dare question the ranks of America’s general class. “Politicizing the military!” critics cry, as if the Commander-in-Chief has no right to question the judgement of generals who botched the withdrawal from Afghanistan, bought into the woke ideology of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) or oversaw over-budget and behind-schedule weapons systems. Introducing accountability to the general class is not politicizing our nation’s military — it is called leadership.

What most Americans don’t understand is that our top brass is already very political. On any given day in our nation’s Capitol, a casual visitor is likely to run into multiple generals and admirals visiting our elected representatives and their staff. Ostensibly, these “briefs” are about various strategic threats and weapons systems — but everyone on the Hill knows our military leaders are also jockeying for their next assignment or promotion. It’s classic politics

The country witnessed this firsthand with now-retired Gen. Mark Milley. Most Americans were put off by what they saw. Milley brazenly played the Washington spin game, bragging in a Senate Armed Services hearing that he had interviewed with Bob Woodward and a host of other Washington, D.C. reporters.

Woodward later admitted in an interview with CNN that he was flabbergasted by Milley, recalling the chairman hadn’t just said “[Trump] is a problem or we can’t trust him,” but took it to the point of saying, “he is a danger to the country. He is the most dangerous person I know.” Woodward said that Milley’s attitude felt like an assignment editor ordering him, “Do something about this.”

Think on that a moment — an active-duty four star general spoke on the record, disparaging the Commander-in-Chief. Not only did it show rank insubordination and a breach of Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 88, but Milley’s actions represented a grave threat against the Constitution and civilian oversight of the military.

How will it play out now that Trump has returned? Old political hands know that what goes around comes around. Milley’s ham-handed political meddling may very well pave the way for a massive reorganization of flag officers similar to Gen. George C. Marshall’s “plucking board” of 1940. Marshall forced 500 colonels into retirement saying, “You give a good leader very little and he will succeed; you give mediocrity a great deal and they will fail.”

Marshall’s efforts to reorient the War Department to a meritocracy proved prescient when the United States entered World War II less than two years later.

Perhaps it’s time for another plucking board to remind the military brass that it is their civilian bosses who sit at the top of the U.S. chain of command.

Morgan Murphy is military thought leader, former press secretary to the Secretary of Defense and national security advisor in the U.S. Senate.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

armed forces

Canada among NATO members that could face penalties for lack of military spending

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By J.D. Foster

Trump should insist on these measures and order that unless they are carried out the United States will not participate in NATO. If Canada is allowed entry to the Brussels headquarters, then United States representatives would stay out.

Steps Trump Could Take To Get NATO Free Riders Off America’s Back

In thinking about NATO, one has to ask: “How stupid do they think we are?”

The “they,” of course, are many of the other NATO members, and the answer is they think we are as stupid as we have been for the last quarter century. As President-elect Donald Trump observed in his NBC interview, NATO “takes advantage of the U.S.”

Canada is among the “they.” In November, The Economist reported that Canada spends about 1.3% of GDP on defense. The ridiculously low NATO minimum is 2%. Not to worry, though, Premier Justin Trudeau promises Canada will hit 2% — by 2032.

quarter of NATO’s 32 members fall short of the 2% minimum. The con goes like this: We are short now, but we will get there eventually. Trust us, wink, wink.

The United States has put up with this nonsense from some members since the collapse of the Soviet Union. That is how stupid we have been.

Trump once threatened to pull the United States out of NATO, then he suggested the United States might not come to the defense of a NATO member like Canada. Naturally, free-riding NATO members grumbled.

In another context, former Army Lt. Gen. Russell Honore famously outlined the first step in how the United States should approach NATO: Don’t get stuck on stupid.

NATO is a coalition of mutual defense. Members who contribute little to the mutual defense are useless. Any country not spending its 2% of GDP on defense by mid-year 2025 should see its membership suspended immediately.

What does suspended mean? Consequences. Its military should not be permitted to participate in any NATO planning or exercises. And its offices at NATO headquarters and all other NATO facilities should be shuttered and its citizens banned until such time as their membership returns to good standing. And, of course, the famous Article V assuring mutual defense would be suspended.

Further, Trump should insist on these measures and order that unless they are carried out the United States will not participate in NATO. If Canada is allowed entry to the Brussels headquarters, then United States representatives would stay out.

Nor should he stop there. The 2% threshold would be fine in a world at peace with no enemies lurking. That does not describe the world today. Trump should declare the threshold for avoiding membership suspension will be 2.5% in 2026 and 3% by 2028 – not 2030 as some suggest.

The purpose is not to destroy NATO, but to force NATO to be relevant. America needs strong defense partners who pull their weight, not defense welfare queens. If NATO’s members cannot abide by these terms, then it is time to move on and let NATO go the way of the League of Nations.

Trump may need to take the lead in creating a new coalition of those willing to defend Western values. As he did in rewriting the former U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, it may be time to replace a defective arrangement with a much better one.

This still leaves the problem of free riders. Take Belgium, for example, another security free rider. Suppose a new defense coalition arises including the United States and Poland and others bordering Russia. Hiding behind the coalition’s protection, Belgium could just quit all defense spending to focus on making chocolates.

This won’t do. The members of the new defense coalition must also agree to impose a tariff regime on the security free riders to help pay for the defense provided.

The best solution is for NATO to rise to our mutual security challenges. If NATO can’t do this, then other arrangements will be needed. But it is time to move on from stupid.

J.D. Foster is the former chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget and former chief economist and senior vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He now resides in relative freedom in the hills of Idaho.

Continue Reading

armed forces

Military may be ground zero for the war on woke

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

“We’ve seen under the last three and a half years of the Biden-Harris administration, it’s been hard to recruit and keep good service members, in part because of the bad woke policies, the loss of focus by this administration on what the mission is”

President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Defense, though not yet confirmed, has pledged to root out “woke” ideology in the military.

Other Republicans have lamented the same issue for years but done little about it, but if Peter Hegseth can be confirmed, the U.S. military may become ground zero in the Right’s war on woke.

Military veteran and Fox News Host Hegseth has repeatedly attacked the military leadership’s embrace of “woke” culture, which usually refers to the ideology around transgenderism, gender pronouns, and racial identity politics.

Despite allegations and attempts to end his bid, Hegseth has stood firm, though his fate in the Senate is unclear. A public statement from Trump last week put to rest any thoughts that Trump was considering withdrawing the pick.

“Pete is a WINNER, and there is nothing that can be done to change that!!!” Trump said in a statement.

The American Accountability Foundation released a list of 20 officers who Hegseth should fire. Notably, during his viral interview with Joe Rogan, Trump told a story about how military leaders in Washington, D.C. told Trump that destroying ISIS quickly wasn’t possible, but when Trump visited the military leaders on the ground, he heard a different story. Those commanders, Trump said, told him it was doable but Washington, D.C. had tied their hands.

“The woke takeover of the military is a major threat to our national security,” AAF President Thomas Jones wrote in a letter to Hegseth earlier this week.

“As global tensions rise, with Iran on the march, Russia at war, and China in the midst of a massive military buildup, we cannot afford to have a military distracted and demoralized by leftist ideology,” he added in the letter, first obtained by The New York Post. “Those who were responsible for these policies being instituted in the first place must be dismissed.”

That anecdote highlights growing sentiment on the Right that the effectiveness and mission of the military has been hijacked by a handful of leaders in the Pentagon.

Lawmakers have raised that concern for years, pointing to a slew of recent federal spending backing controversial Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies.

Last year, Trump’s pick to lead the U.S. State Department, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., told The Center Square that woke policies were “hollowing out” our military.

A Department of Defense comptroller report from the same year included $86.5 million for “dedicated diversity and inclusion activities” as well as language showing the importance of DEI to the military.

Syrian children are back in schools, in sign of some normalcy

“The Department will lead with our values – building diversity, equity, and inclusion into everything we do,” the report said.

The actual figure spent on backing the same kind of policies is likely much larger and impossible to know, as the language and ideology has permeated much of the employee training, H.R. policies, and more.

Other anecdotes highlight the prevalence of the newfound way of thinking for Armed Forces. For instance, as The Center Square previously reported, official training materials for West Point cadets included warnings about white privilege.

Rubio released a report detailing these same issues, which includes another example where a slide presentation for the Air Force Academy was titled, “Diversity & Inclusion: What it is, why we care, & what we can do.”

This same taxpayer-funded training warns cadets to avoid saying words like “mom” and “dad” because the language is gendered.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., spoke about the NDAA and blamed woke policies for the armed forces’ difficulties meeting recruiting goals. Even after lowering recruitment targets, the U.S. military has fallen short of its recruitment goals in recent years.

“We’ve seen under the last three and a half years of the Biden-Harris administration, it’s been hard to recruit and keep good service members, in part because of the bad woke policies, the loss of focus by this administration on what the mission is,” Scalise said at a news conference Tuesday.

With Trump and Hegseth in the executive branch and leadership like Scalise behind it, cleaning house of the Pentagon might be possible, albeit difficult.

“We start addressing that by routing out more of the woke policies over at the DOD,” Scalise continued. “Of course, that ultimately is going to get fixed when President Trump takes office next month. He talked about those things during the campaign, what he would do to restrengthen and reinvigorate our military.”

If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Hegseth would lead the largest and most complex federal agency with an annual budget of $840 billion and 3.4 million military and civilian employees.

Hegseth, 44, was an infantry officer in the Army National Guard from 2002 to 2021. He graduated from Princeton University in 2003. He was later commissioned as an infantry officer in the Army National Guard. He served in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay. He left with the rank of major, according to the Army National Guard. Hegseth earned two Bronze Stars, two Army Commendation Medals and the National Defense Service Medal with Bronze Service Star, among others.

But Hegseth faces scrutiny over a 2017 sexual encounter in which a woman told police the former Fox News anchor blocked the door of a hotel room in California and sexually assaulted her. Hegseth has denied the allegation and said that the encounter was consensual. The woman reported the allegations to local police. Hegseth was never charged with a crime. He reached an undisclosed settlement with the woman in 2023.

Continue Reading

Trending

X