Hegseth Confirmed
-
The philandering gets more ink but the bigger reason to oppose him is he’s a weekend talk show host with no experience running an organization.
If he fails, which he may well not, it’ll be because the bureaucracy eats him alive.
@jon-nyc said in Hegseth Confirmed:
The philandering gets more ink but the bigger reason to oppose him is he’s a weekend talk show host with no experience running an organization.
If he fails, which he may well not, it’ll be because the bureaucracy eats him alive.
Was Lloyd Austin a failure or a success, or did he just occupy the position? If Hegseth lasts, then failure or success will be in the eye of the beholder.
-
-
I suppose that partly depends on what the expectations are when he’s selected. Austin wasn’t selected to ‘disrupt and dismantle’ the bureaucracy. Hegseth was, so I’m told.
@jon-nyc He'll get some culture war stuff done, and that'll be enough to satisfy that requirement for success. If he lasts, if he isn't fired by Trump and doesn't resign, then I don't anticipate any situation where there will be an objective measure of failure or success. Which is why I have trouble with the notion that the job is super difficult. There is not any easy way to measure how well this difficult job has been accomplished. Sometimes history judges, such as with McNamara, who even judged himself.
-
Again it still seems to me that it needs to be judged against the expectations of the president. If the expectations are ‘keep the seat warm and don’t fuck anything up’ that’s one thing. If it’s ’dismantle the bureaucracy’ or ‘build out 18 carrier groups armed with 100k drones each’ that’s another.
-
There won't be a measurable definition of "dismantling the bureaucracy", but people will be able to hand wave claims to have done so. Even the DEI removal, already accomplished, can be considered that. Hegseth won't be standing in the way of DOGE as it does things that might be framed as "dismantling the bureaucracy" by making the information systems more efficient, I mean on the off chance that that happens. I do not anticipate any objective measures here.
-
Something Hegseth said in his hearings that stuck with me...
" We won World War 2 with seven four-star generals. Today, we have forty-four. "
@Jolly said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Something Hegseth said in his hearings that stuck with me...
" We won World War 2 with seven four-star generals. Today, we have forty-four. "
Our military today has become much much larger and complicated than the days of Hitler. Look only at it's current budget to see that it is critically important to place a person of great experience in dealing with a trillion dollar budget and making critical decisions toward keeping this country safe from harm. Is it not clear for all to see that Trump decided by himself that such a person would not serve as the best option when said person holds the Constitution as paramount in all decision making, over subservience to the king? Trump is attempting to remove each and every guardrail that exists this second time around. The first time is what we can all call a practice game. Much has been learned from that exhibition and now the real game starts. For him to win this game, he needs an unfettered lane of opportunity to unilaterally see his plans through. So many guardrails exist today that will quickly be dismantled with the current crew of applicants for Cabinet positions. This one disturbs me over any of the others, except maybe for Patel at FBI.
-
McConnell:
"The most consequential cabinet official in any Administration is the Secretary of Defense. In the face of the gravest threats to US national security interests since World War II, this position is even more important today...Mr. Hegseth has failed, as yet, to demonstrate that he will pass this test. But as he assumes office, the consequences of failure are as high as they have ever been," his statement continued. "The United States faces coordinated aggression from adversaries bent on shattering the order underpinning American security and prosperity. In public comments and testimony before the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Hegseth did not reckon with this reality."
-
I wonder how Elbridge Colby would have fared in a confirmation vote. I heard him on Tucker a few months ago and was impressed. Tucker thought he might get the secretary of defense nomination. As it is, Trump nominated Colby for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, which is a top advisory position to secretary of defense. Hegseth will have good and competent advisors, should he choose to use them.
-
@Jolly said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Something Hegseth said in his hearings that stuck with me...
" We won World War 2 with seven four-star generals. Today, we have forty-four. "
Our military today has become much much larger and complicated than the days of Hitler. Look only at it's current budget to see that it is critically important to place a person of great experience in dealing with a trillion dollar budget and making critical decisions toward keeping this country safe from harm. Is it not clear for all to see that Trump decided by himself that such a person would not serve as the best option when said person holds the Constitution as paramount in all decision making, over subservience to the king? Trump is attempting to remove each and every guardrail that exists this second time around. The first time is what we can all call a practice game. Much has been learned from that exhibition and now the real game starts. For him to win this game, he needs an unfettered lane of opportunity to unilaterally see his plans through. So many guardrails exist today that will quickly be dismantled with the current crew of applicants for Cabinet positions. This one disturbs me over any of the others, except maybe for Patel at FBI.
@NobodySock said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Our military today has become much much larger and complicated than the days of Hitler.
The American military today has 1.3 million active duty personnel.
In WW2, the American had 16 million active duty personnel. 11,200,000 in the Army ( includes Army Air Corps), 4,200,000 in the Navy, and 660,000 in the Marine Corps.
The American military had 300,000 aircraft at the end of WW2. The U.S. today has 13,232 aircraft, counting both fixed and rotary wing assets.
During WW2, Americans built over 88,000 tanks. This does not count a little over 10,000 tank destroyers.
The Navy had 6,000 commissioned vessels. Today they have 470.
In WW2, the United States concurrently fought in Italy, Burma-China, Western Europe, and the South Pacific. An active, shooting war.
More complicated today? I think not.
Larger? Bwahahahaha!
-
@NobodySock said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Our military today has become much much larger and complicated than the days of Hitler.
The American military today has 1.3 million active duty personnel.
In WW2, the American had 16 million active duty personnel. 11,200,000 in the Army ( includes Army Air Corps), 4,200,000 in the Navy, and 660,000 in the Marine Corps.
The American military had 300,000 aircraft at the end of WW2. The U.S. today has 13,232 aircraft, counting both fixed and rotary wing assets.
During WW2, Americans built over 88,000 tanks. This does not count a little over 10,000 tank destroyers.
The Navy had 6,000 commissioned vessels. Today they have 470.
In WW2, the United States concurrently fought in Italy, Burma-China, Western Europe, and the South Pacific. An active, shooting war.
More complicated today? I think not.
Larger? Bwahahahaha!
@Jolly said in Hegseth Confirmed:
@NobodySock said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Our military today has become much much larger and complicated than the days of Hitler.
The American military today has 1.3 million active duty personnel.
In WW2, the American had 16 million active duty personnel. 11,200,000 in the Army ( includes Army Air Corps), 4,200,000 in the Navy, and 660,000 in the Marine Corps.
The American military had 300,000 aircraft at the end of WW2. The U.S. today has 13,232 aircraft, counting both fixed and rotary wing assets.
During WW2, Americans built over 88,000 tanks. This does not count a little over 10,000 tank destroyers.
The Navy had 6,000 commissioned vessels. Today they have 470.
In WW2, the United States concurrently fought in Italy, Burma-China, Western Europe, and the South Pacific. An active, shooting war.
More complicated today? I think not.
Larger? Bwahahahaha!
i do appreciate being fact checked and corrected in my notion that we are bigger today. I did not do my homework but also didn't think in terms of the buildup needed to make world war. But I will offer in my defense, that todays equipment and trained personnel have a much deeper investment of capital than the days of your with military equipment mass produced on the assembly lines throughout the nation. Today's single F22 fighter jet, I imagine costs more than 1000 mustangs put together in a rush even when considering inflation. The point being, as George has posted one of the vote no's, Mitch McConnel pretty much put it in perspective. I do hope he is surrounded by the best and that he heeds their wisdom , but there will most likely come many times in th next four years, Trump's wishes that would collide with the sage advice offered. We will see. Hell of a gamble for what? Another yes man?
-
-
There is at least one clearly defined goal which should be measurable. Recruitment. Another might be physical standards and conditioning.
-
There is at least one clearly defined goal which should be measurable. Recruitment. Another might be physical standards and conditioning.
@LuFins-Dad said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Another might be physical standards and conditioning.
You misogynist.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Another might be physical standards and conditioning.
You misogynist.
@George-K said in Hegseth Confirmed:
@LuFins-Dad said in Hegseth Confirmed:
Another might be physical standards and conditioning.
You misogynist.
So I have been told, but I don’t recall accusing Hegseth of writing teenage girl fanfic….
-
The philandering gets more ink but the bigger reason to oppose him is he’s a weekend talk show host with no experience running an organization.
If he fails, which he may well not, it’ll be because the bureaucracy eats him alive.
@jon-nyc said in Hegseth Confirmed:
bigger reason to oppose him is he’s a weekend talk show host with no experience running an organization.
If he fails, which he may well not, it’ll be because the bureaucracy eats him alive.
This. This was always my concern about him. The "ship" is so large, that no matter how much he wants to disrupt it, it will be very difficult.
I am sure that there are many silo's within the organization, and people will do what they can to protect their silo.
I hope he does succeed, but the odds may be against him.
You wouldn't bring in a middle school football coach to be the coach of the University. Of Louisiana. (I guess you could, but chances are that he would not succeed).
