The ex-Fox News host railed against decades of work to diversify the all-volunteer military as he announced initiatives to effectively exclude women from combat roles and relax protections against hazing and bullying of troops
More than 800 of America’s top military leaders sat silent and showed no reaction as ex-Fox News presenter turned Pentagon boss Pete Hegseth told them he was issuing a series of new directives that will make it harder for women to serve in combat and easier for personnel to engage in hazing and bullying without repercussions during an unprecedented gathering of flag-rank officers at a Marine Corps base in Virginia on Tuesday.
The Secretary of War — a title not used by the head of the U.S. military establishment since 1947 but revived by President Donald Trump earlier this month — told the group of admirals, generals, and their senior enlisted advisers he was “ending the war on warriors” and complained that too many of their peers had been put in their roles “for the wrong reasons” including their race and gender.
Standing in front of a large American flag backdrop, he attacked by name several of the leaders’ retired peers, telling them that the department’s “compass heading” was “clear.”
“Out with the Chiarelli, the McKenzies and the Milleys and in with the Stockdales the Schwartzkopfs and the Pattons,” he said, denigrating former Army Vice Chief of Staff General Peter Chiarelli, ex-U.S. Central Command commander and Marine Corps General Kenneth McKenzie Jr, and ex-Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman and Army General Mark Milley, each of whom has been critical of Trump or his administration.
“The sooner we have the right people, the sooner we can advance the right policies,” he added.
Hegseth also groused about efforts to open up combat roles to women and initiatives to “weed out so-called toxic leaders” and blamed “foolish and reckless” politicians for having “set the wrong compass” and causing the Pentagon to lose its way.
Hegseth, an Iraq War veteran who attained the rank of Major in the Army National Guard but became a critic of the Pentagon’s efforts to open up military service to women, racial minorities and LGBT+ persons, said the War Department must “restore a ruthless, dispassionate and common sense application of standards” that are “uniform, gender neutral and high.”
He told the assembled leaders he was issuing a directive to ensure that “every designated Combat Arms” role across all branches “returns to the highest male standard only,” all but reversing a 2015 directive from then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter to open all combat roles to women.
“If you do not meet the male level physical standards for combat positions ... it's time for a new position or a new profession,” he said. “If women can make it excellent. If not, it is what it is. If that means no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it.”
The War Secretary also claimed — without offering evidence — that the Pentagon had lowered standards “to hit racial quotas as well” and said the revised standards he was promulgating are based on what he called the “1990 test,” which compares today’s standards to those in 1990, a time when women were barred from combat roles and LGBT+ persons were banned from serving.
“The 1990s test is simple. What were the military standards in 1990 and if they have changed, tell me why was it a necessary change based on the evolving landscape of combat, or was the change due to a softening, weakening or gender based pursuit of other priorities? 1990s seems to be as good a place to start as any,” he said.
He can claim anything, but Ukraine's constitution doesn't allow elections during war. America's does.
In the backdrop of this, does that even remotely matter?
It only matters insofar as the courts uphold that; and even if they do, Courts have no enforcement arm to ensure adherence.
This will ultimately rest on how much individual states or these military generals want to unilaterally push back.
Seems like a big flaw in the Constitution, given that the public now has no way to remove leadership that's running a war this badly.
What? David is holding his own against Goliath, but that’s “running a war this badly”?
If that's the case, Zelensky will win in a landslide and be pronounced Kind of Judea.
When your country is being invaded by a colonizer, elections would be, at best near impossible to run free and fairly, at worst a guarantee for interference
Americans ran elections during the US Civil War in 1864. West Germany held elections in the middle of the Berlin Blockade in 1949. Give me a fucking break.
1864 isn't recent. Times have changed, it's easier to target civilians lining up to vote. There wasn't an active war on in 1949 give me a break
The process of registering and collecting votes is easier than ever.
Not when your neighbour is bombing your civilian population centers
Especially then. Modern telecommunication is vastly superior to historical methods of communication.
Not when you can target internet infrastructure
The great thing about the internet is how robust and redundant it all is.
He said the other day he doesn't want to seek another term after the war is over.
Can't blame him, I'd want out of it too if I were in his position.
He's exhausted, his job is basically begging foreigners for money and weapons, and his family has been in hiding the whole war.
Netanyahu has made similar remarks.
But when the war never ends and there's no election to campaign for, its an easy pledge to hold on to.
Easy way for the war to end, would be to have putin take his fucking invading army out of Ukraine
Would that actually end the war? Seems like Ukrainians would still want revenge.
Yeah I think the Ukrainians are just defending their homeland and way of life. I doubt they would go into russia, I don't think they are nearly as stupid as the russian government
Russians say the same thing. That's nationalism in a nutshell.
Tell it to the folks living in Kursk
Defending your homeland by invading another country is a stretch, let's be honest.
And Ukraine going into russia, because russia is actively invading is very different than if russia fully withdrew, and then Ukraine invaded unprompted.
The original Russian invasion of Ukraine was instigated by Ukrainian military launching attacks over the eastern border of the Donbas at a retreating insurgency. The Russians lined up at the border, knives out, waiting for an excuse to come charging over the line. That's been the story of these two countries since Maidan in '14. Ethnic Ukrainians and ethnic Russians at each others throats, without regard for any national line in the sand.
"Oh don't worry, the fighting will stop as soon as you surrender and leave" is as dogshit coming from the Ukrainians as it is from the Russians. It only isn't an issue for Ukraine because they're the ones losing territory. But they're not going to stop fighting until they've finished carving out their respective ethnic enclaves and mining a new demilitarized zone in between. It's the same story we saw with the Korean peninsula and nearly what happened in Vietnam and Japan. It's currently what's shaking out in the newly Christened "South Sudan".
Is that the current talking point? It's so hard to keep up.
If you're the aggressor you really can't complain when the people you invaded bring the fight to you.
Ukraine is in a situation where a war is either being run well, or Ukraine doesn't exit. There's no real third option. The U.S., on the other hand, could run a war badly for decades with it's wealth and geographic isolation propping it up.
Seems useful at the moment, given Russia's penchant for election interference.
Moldova just elected an EU-friendly government in a landslide, despite perpetual claims of election interference.
Poland and Romania also just put up a staunch anti-Russian nationalists.
The notion that Russia can rig elections in their favor hasn't born out over the last two years. Anti-Russia candidates are sweeping Eastern Europe.
Is Moldova at war?
And how did Moldova achieve it? By booting out the obvious traitors.
A model for America.
Does it matter?
They were the incumbent party and they grew their majority by pinning economic decline on the Russian invasion of their neighbor.
The BEP wasn't booted out. They have the second highest majority of MPs in Parliament.
:-/ Do you know anything about Moldovan politics?
Doesn't mean they haven't been trying
Which country should be holding elections, on these terms? It seems like everyone gets to claim a rival state is meddling in their politics.
Yes? All the big colonial powers love to meddle in other country's elections.
Does that mean nobody should hold elections, ever?
The current party in power can just announce "State of Exception!" and stay in power indefinitely?
Hard to say he's running the war badly considering that Ukraine still exists 3 years later when most outside observers were wondering if Ukraine would last 3 days.
Iraq still exists, 22 years later. I guess Saddam did a great job.
Since the Iraqi military was either defeated on the battlefield or surrendered and US troops pulled Saddam out of a spider hole to drag him off for trial and execution, I'd call that a bad analogy.