K2-HMFIC said:

---

You could have had Chris Miller or Robert OBrien and achieved the same effect without being utterly unprepared for the building.

---

Then you run for president and you choose who you want at sec def. Till then, President Trump is clear on who he wants and the election last week was clear what the people wanted.

Quote:

---

Hegseth coming into this role is like taking a guy who's CLS qualified and expecting him to perform brain surgery.

---

Your analogy actually would work, if it further presupposes that the previous brain surgeons had been merely lobotomizing their patients for the previous 30+ years.

K2-HMFIC said:

---

You could have had Chris Miller or Robert OBrien and achieved the same effect without being utterly unprepared for the building.

---

100% your opinion.

Our founding fathers never intended the folks who run our government to be there forever. This is much more in alignment with what they envisioned.

Of all Trump's picks, this IMO is one of his weakest ones.

The SECDEF plays a very high-impact role in some very high-stakes crisis management situations that sometimes come with very short timelines to act. If there is a single cabinet position that demands relevant experience, in this case in the upper echelons of military leadership, the SECDEF is it.

For example, he carries the backup nuclear football and the president has master override codes for the nuclear triad that he can give SECDEF in the event of a major conflict/event of if he's ever in danger or cut off from communication w/ CENTCOM. That means that the SECDEF, without the need for future approval from the President or anyone else, can be granted the unilateral authority to launch nuclear weapons or some other response against a hostile actor in a crisis situation. The understanding one needs of our military capabilities, strategies, and tactics (as well as that of our adversaries) to handle that responsibility is immensely important.

There have probably been a lot of underqualified folks in the position throughout history, I'm not saying he's the first. I'm just left wishing for someone a bit more experienced and frankly qualified for the role.

I'm not attacking the platform he's pushing in terms of preparedness, anti-woke, etc. He just seems underprepared for what the role hopefully never has to manage but could during his tenure.

I'm not attacking him as a person by any stretch, just putting my concern out there.

I agree, I think there was a lot more people qualified but only Trump and those close to him know his plans. Trump may rely on advise from the joint chiefs over Pete for national security issues. Pete is highly educated and as long as he surrounds himself with people who make up for his weaknesses I am fine with the pick. But yeah it is a big gamble in my opinion

Yeah, that's great an all but doesn't alleviate the concern. If anything, it makes it worse to say it's okay that the person is unqualified but will have others around him to advise him. In this position more than any other in the cabinet, tacit experience is mandatory.

Here's another one. SECDEF is one of the points of contact that our military/country maintains direct lines of communication with our enemies/adversaries/allies' counterparts. Having someone inexperienced/underprepared in that role makes those interactions less effective. That creates a more risk-prone environment where our allies are less effective than they otherwise would be and our adversaries lack confidence in who they are speaking with on our side. It also increases the chances of a miscommunication or delay in decision making when time is of the essence.

Real life examples... If China moves on Taiwan, NK strikes SK, or a missile from Russia enters Estonian airspace things are going to move lightning fast and people are going to look to the SECDEF for answers. These aren't even the most high-risk environments but the SECDEF must be prepared to advise the President of his options, the plans at his disposal, and the positioning of his counterparts in our alliances simultaneously. Without an existing network of colleagues, a lot of experience, and an instinct built over years of command and control experience, he's a liability. Combine with that Trump's lack of experience in those areas and we're dealing with a system lacking in the efficiency required to get an optimal result.

Again, I'm sure he's a fine person but he's not qualified for the role and putting him there increases the probability of a strategic blunder. That will get people killed.

Quote:

---

Hegseth coming into this role is like taking a guy who's CLS qualified and expecting him to perform brain surgery.

---

You're proving my point. Hegseth's mandate will be to wield a katana, not a scalpel. The brain (or perhaps ass) tumor is so large that it's going to require more drastic methods of intervention.

You're not a Trump guy and I get that, but he won. In the 1980s the establishment Republicans sniped and backstabbed Reagan for his radical ideas. Bush called his policies voodoo economics and Don Regan grumbled behind his bosses' back. Reagan certainly made mistakes (e.g. Simpson-Mazoli) but overall those who said, "Let Reagan be Reagan," were right. Let Trump be Trump.

Quote:

---

Again…Trump is getting torched in the Burbs. This does not bode well in a general.

His ceiling is 40-45%…

---

Those who have repeatedly underestimated the man probably don't have a better grasp on the assessment of his nominees.

For those of you crowing that Hegseth's Bronze Stars qualify him...

Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation than Pete Hegseth, having been awarded the Silver Star in the Iraq invasion.

I do not think a commendation qualifies a man for this job - just pointing out that someone as unqualified as Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation that Pete Hegseth.

fc2112 said:

---

For those of you crowing that Hegseth's Bronze Stars qualify him...

Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation than Pete Hegseth, having been awarded the Silver Star in the Iraq invasion.

I do not think a commendation qualifies a man for this job - just pointing out that someone as unqualified as Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation that Pete Hegseth.

---

I can't find anything that shows Hegseth got a bronze star for valor so his 2 bronze starts could have been for doing paperwork well. Happens all the time that another officer puts in an officer for a bronze star for office duty.

The odd thing is that Austin's Silver Star was for doing his job, like literally. His combat action badge (CAB) was backdated, I don't feel like looking but it was likely during that same time since he got his Silver Star. Austin missed the first Gulf War, he was in college so not his fault, and his rank was too high for a lot of action ribbons.

In the end it doesn't do any good to compare medals since a lot can be taken out of context and how they received them as officers.

Quote:

---

Austin coordinated airstrikes, indirect fire, and ground forces' maneuvers to drive through the Iraqis' defensive lines, according to his award narrative, which also credits him for making sure that soldiers had all the supporting fires they needed during the bitter ground combat at Najaf.

"After 5 intense days of fighting, thousands of enemy lay dead, hundreds of technical vehicles strewn across the battlefield, and the division poised for an attack into Karbala," the narrative says. "BG Austin orchestrated hundreds of Close Air Support sorties, simultaneously controlled several units in contact while clearing fires for multiple artillery barrages and missile strikes. His ability to see the enemy, see the Division, and see the terrain, while issuing concise guidance was instrumental to the success of the Division."

---

No one, but especially the President of the US, is above having his decisions questioned by those that elected him.

Trump is prioritizing a certain aspect of the job that he believes most suits his agenda, and he's won the right via election to do so. He's also to a degree prioritizing staunch loyalty above material competence for the role and doing so across many of his cabinet appointments. Both are his prerogative, but it's within reason to question that line of decision-making and it is Congress' job to do that in the confirmation process. I think a lot of folks are questioning whether that priority, as well as the person he's chosen to undertake it, is a good decision given the entirety of what the job entails.

Congress will do their job and if they get confirmed, then him serving in that role is part of Trump's mandate and we will all reap the benefits or consequences of such. The process exists for a reason and now is the time that everyone, supporters and not, get to question these appointments. Getting elected and even having a mandate does not put a President above being questioned by the electorate and Congress.

Your opinion on why he nominated him is based completely on assumptions, and a left-wing narrative being propagated by the democrat controlled media.

I never said decisions can't be questioned. I simply said that posters acting like they know the requirements for the role better than the person who literally makes the decision on what he wants in the role, are full of themselves.

Lathspell said:

---

Based on everything I've read and listened to, as well as the fact Trump nominated him, I feel good about the pick.

Too many people on this thread keep accusing others of not knowing what the job entails. Yet, the man who was the literal Commander in Chief of the United States Military for 4 years is the one who nominated this man. I would venture to assume Donald Trump has a better understanding about what he needs in that position than anyone posting on TexAgs.

---

Except that fc216969 guy, apparently

Justice Beaver said:

---

Lathspell said:

---

Based on everything I've read and listened to, as well as the fact Trump nominated him, I feel good about the pick.

Too many people on this thread keep accusing others of not knowing what the job entails. Yet, the man who was the literal Commander in Chief of the United States Military for 4 years is the one who nominated this man. I would venture to assume Donald Trump has a better understanding about what he needs in that position than anyone posting on TexAgs.

---

Except that fc216969 guy, apparently

---

Don't forget K2-HMFIC

fc2112 said:

---

For those of you crowing that Hegseth's Bronze Stars qualify him...

Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation than Pete Hegseth, having been awarded the Silver Star in the Iraq invasion.

---

Thanks for proving the point. Lloyd Austin is a degenerate and unfit to serve the country.

fc2112 said:

---

For those of you crowing that Hegseth's Bronze Stars qualify him...

Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation than Pete Hegseth, having been awarded the Silver Star in the Iraq invasion.

I do not think a commendation qualifies a man for this job - just pointing out that someone as unqualified as Lloyd Austin has a higher commendation that Pete Hegseth.

---

[url] https://www.instagram.com/reel/C96DI93saLv/?igsh=bG5nZXc1Y3lnbXFy[/url]

Fwiw Mike Glover likes the choice


He breaks down point by point questions he has and why he thinks he'll be a good secdef

His main point of him being an outsider that does not have the taint of military politics on him is a big plus

For those that don't know Mike Glover is a retired Green Beret, Special Missions Unit, CIA contractor that led the team to track down the guys responsible for Benghazi. He knows his stuff

I didn't say that. Previous posters did.

pic.twitter.com/rwrCwBhDBt

— Four Stroke Engineer™ 🇺🇸 🇵🇭👨‍🦽 (@4StrokeEngineer) November 15, 2024

Bob Knights Paper Hands said:

---

pic.twitter.com/rwrCwBhDBt

— Four Stroke Engineer™ 🇺🇸 🇵🇭👨‍🦽 (@4StrokeEngineer) November 15, 2024

---

Quit? Get fired? Potayto, Potahto. Just different ways to say what is going to happen either way.

txags92 said:

---

Bob Knights Paper Hands said:

---

pic.twitter.com/rwrCwBhDBt

— Four Stroke Engineer™ 🇺🇸 🇵🇭👨‍🦽 (@4StrokeEngineer) November 15, 2024

---

Quit? Get fired? Potayto, Potahto. Just different ways to say what is going to happen either way.

---

Quitting is way less paperwork win win

Bob Knights Paper Hands said:

---

pic.twitter.com/rwrCwBhDBt

— Four Stroke Engineer™ 🇺🇸 🇵🇭👨‍🦽 (@4StrokeEngineer) November 15, 2024

---

Bob Knights Paper Hands said:

---

pic.twitter.com/rwrCwBhDBt

— Four Stroke Engineer™ 🇺🇸 🇵🇭👨‍🦽 (@4StrokeEngineer) November 15, 2024

---

ODEI gonna get DOGE'd anyway

Yep. If war is necessary the most humane and best way to go about it is to turn the death machine on full blast and end it as quickly as possible. If that is our stance we will have less wars. It will be unthinkable to attack a nation with that mindset.

Eso si, Que es said:

---

wtmartinaggie said:

---

Of all Trump's picks, this IMO is one of his weakest ones.

The SECDEF plays a very high-impact role in some very high-stakes crisis management situations that sometimes come with very short timelines to act. If there is a single cabinet position that demands relevant experience, in this case in the upper echelons of military leadership, the SECDEF is it.

For example, he carries the backup nuclear football and the president has master override codes for the nuclear triad that he can give SECDEF in the event of a major conflict/event of if he's ever in danger or cut off from communication w/ CENTCOM. That means that the SECDEF, without the need for future approval from the President or anyone else, can be granted the unilateral authority to launch nuclear weapons or some other response against a hostile actor in a crisis situation. The understanding one needs of our military capabilities, strategies, and tactics (as well as that of our adversaries) to handle that responsibility is immensely important.

There have probably been a lot of underqualified folks in the position throughout history, I'm not saying he's the first. I'm just left wishing for someone a bit more experienced and frankly qualified for the role.

I'm not attacking the platform he's pushing in terms of preparedness, anti-woke, etc. He just seems underprepared for what the role hopefully never has to manage but could during his tenure.

I'm not attacking him as a person by any stretch, just putting my concern out there.

---

Trumps doctrine is peace through strength. Hegseth has repeatedly said the most humane war is an expedient war and the US does not have the stomach to stack enemy bodies and end a war quickly, letting them drag on and increase the suffering.

If you are China or N Korea, do you really want to attack the US being led by Trump with SECDEF who says stack bodies?

That is peace through strength. If you come at me, my military will not F around. My generals are focused on proficiency and my SECDEF will turn them loose on you

---

Can I inject this straight into my veins?

F*** leftists and what they think of Trump's picks. Who cares if they want to portray Hegseth as a weekend Fox anchor. Listen to the man speak, read his book. If I wasn't so damn old I would enlist and serve in his military.

Trump was elected because people are tired of an out of control government run by people that despise us and think they are our betters. They have no sense of service to the American people and to the Constitution. Putting the same old retreads in office will not change a damn thing. I fully support all the new blood. It's long past due.

Bob Knights Paper Hands said:

---

pic.twitter.com/rwrCwBhDBt

— Four Stroke Engineer™ 🇺🇸 🇵🇭👨‍🦽 (@4StrokeEngineer) November 15, 2024

---

How many severance packages does that save the U.S. tax payers?

They just mentioned this on Fox News

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4992450-hegseth-involved-in-2017-sexual-assault-allegation-investigation-police/

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

They just mentioned this on Fox News

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4992450-hegseth-involved-in-2017-sexual-assault-allegation-investigation-police/

---

Swamp gonna swamp. Never ever ever underestimate the deep state.

Anyone interested in sort of learning about him without reading his book might check out the Shawn Ryan podcast with him which came out a couple days after the election (no hints as to his future nomination).



Excellent discussion, as always with Shawn. (I haven't finished it yet.)