Regarding today’s news about the Joint Chiefs —
Side note. There are eight members of the joint chiefs. the chair is black. the CNO (navy) is a woman. the other six are white guys. chair and the cno got fired tonight.
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm.bsky.social) February 21, 2025 at 9:34 PM
Sometimes things really are what they seem to be. Hegseth had been badmouthing the head of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, as a DEI hire.
Obviously Trump wants the military to be personally loyal to him so that he can use the military to put down all opposition. I question whether he can replace enough officers quickly enough, though. No matter who Trump puts in the Pentagon there are likely going to be a great many career officers remaining who really believe in duty, honor, country, and the Constitution. That can’t change overnight.
Or, at least, we can hope. This guy writes,
Everyone will look around and ask themselves if someone is getting promoted because they are the best officer or because they are loyal, so political affiliation will be something everyone pays a whole lot more attention to. To be clear, there are at least three kinds of officers in the military: those loyal to the Constitution, those who are MAGA types who believe in this shit, and, most importantly, the careerists. Those will do what it takes to get ahead, and have just been signaled that to get ahead, one has to do whatever Trump and Hegseth order.
There’s a long tradition in the U.S. military that says career officers should be so apolitical they don’t even vote. They can vote if they choose to, but many do not.
By not voting, I am walking in the boot prints of our greatest officers: George C. Marshall, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Patton, to name a few who didn’t vote while in uniform, and those of the modern era that tread the same path — David H. Petraeus, Martin Dempsey and, by all appearances, Mark A. Milley, the current Army chief of staff. Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant is an especially instructive case, because he faced the grimmest temptation to tamper with the election of 1864 during the Civil War. And yet, crucially, Grant chose not to vote.
Obviously, having Trump lackeys in charge will reduce military effectiveness, no matter how much Pete Hegseth fancies himself a “warrior.”
The Independent (UK) describes Gen. Dan ‘Razin’ Caine, the guy Trump plans to make head of the Joint Chiefs:
The president recalled Trump and Caine meeting in 2018 during a visit to Iraq during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2019.
It was then that the general told the president he believed ISIS could be defeated in one week rather than two years, as his advisers said at the time.
“‘One week? I was told two years!’” Trump recalled saying.
Trump said Caine replied: “‘We’re only hitting them from a temporary base in Syria, but if you gave us permission, we could hit them from the back, from the side, from all over, from the base you’re right on right now, sir.’” “‘They won’t know what the hell hit them.’”
Trump also recalled asking the general his name, to which the president said Caine replied, “Razin.” After Trump asked for his last name, he reportedly replied: “Caine, Razin Caine.”
Trump also claims Caine put on a signature “Make America Great Again” hat while they met in Iraq.
“‘I love you, sir. I think you’re great, sir. I’ll kill for you, sir,’” Trump said, quoting Caine.
“Then he puts on a Make America Great Again hat. You’re not allowed to do that, but they did it,” Trump added.
Caine later told aides the story of the hat wasn’t true, according to The New York Times.
So, a Trump lapdog. Not someone who will be able to tell Trump anything Trump doesn’t want to hear. The military will be compromised from the top. Let’s just hope we don’t actually have to use it much until Trump is gone.
I’m far from a Rahm Emanuel fan, but he wrote an op ed for the Washington Post that’s worth reading. It was published before last night’s Pentagon Purge, I notice. It’s more about foreign policy, but the military is connected — Trump is emulating Putin and Xi. Watch it end in an ‘own goal.’ Here’s just a bit —
This is a turn that many in Washington have yet to fully appreciate. Trump doesn’t simply hero-worship autocrats — he shares their worldview. That’s the thread that explains his quixotic statements about Greenland, Panama, Canada and the “Gulf of America.” That’s why he’s threatening tariffs on Canada, Colombia and Mexico. Trump’s team is negotiating with Russia in Saudi Arabia over Ukraine’s and Europe’s fates without our allies at the table. His behavior is consistent with China’s foreign minister telling countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations that because China is big and they are small, their voices don’t matter.
For the United States, this is a loser’s bet. First, it means giving up on the very policy that has brought credibility to our deterrence. Today, when Washington wants to impose export controls on semiconductors to prevent the Chinese military from gaining a technological advantage, our approach works because we act in concert with the South Koreans, Japanese, Taiwanese and Dutch. When the Chinese consider whether to further intimidate the Philippines, they weigh their plans against the possibility of a kinetic response from an American-led alliance that includes Japan, Australia and our European allies.
But Trump’s first steps on the world stage mean China won’t have to think twice.
There’s nothing to gain with Trump’s approach — but a lot to lose. Denmark is not going to sell us Greenland. Panama will not return the canal to the United States. Canada will not become our 51st state. And yet we’re eliminating the credibility and durability of our alliances to achieve goals that aren’t even worth pursuing.
Putin and Xi must be delighted. As Washington alienates its allies and squanders 80 years of international credibility, Trump is helping Russia and China achieve their explicit mission of replacing the United States as the world’s preeminent superpower. Moscow’s goal has long been to break up the North Atlantic alliance. Who would have thought that an American president would do its dirty work?
I don’t see Russia stepping up to preeminent superpower status, but China certainly could. Thanks to Trump.
Trump wants the military to abandon two centuries of devotion to the US Constitution and recommit to following his orders without consideration of the legality or morality of the orders. There's a problem there. Under the UCMJ, an officer has an obligation to refuse to follow an order that is illegal or immoral. So here's the predicament they are in.
An example with hypotheticals – if the USSC determines that executive order XYZ violates the Constitution and the military is called out to enforce that order with lethal force against US civilians, should Trump be deposed, they could stand trial for murder if civilians were killed by soldiers.
Second hypothetical. If the economy goes to hell, (not unlikely – we just don't know the degree) and Trump's popularity tanks, here are mass demonstrations which Trump meets with force (maybe not the military) if the GOP sees they will get their clocks cleaned in the next election, which Trump has canceled, an action the USSC has declared illegal and the states have promised to hold anyway, the GOP in Congress might impeach and convict Trump..He would no longer be president and any orders, whether he occupies the WH or not, will be null. Yes, the Joint cheifs will issue those orders but the bulk of the US military will stand down.
I do not know if the GOP in Congress or the USSC are smart enough to realize it but by their decisions we live in a country with more guns than people. An illegitimate government created by a coup could stand if it is enormously popular but it's doomed to fail if the people oppose – especially if the military won't mobilize to suppress the people standing in defense of the US Constitution.
If Trump is perceived a failure by the citizens and the military, he's toast.
That's absolutely correct. Trump has already said that he wants to use the US military on US citizens. Everyone I know with any military background expected this move. The officer corps takes the oath to the Constitution seriously, but the lower ranks are more of a mixed bag. Naturally, a dictator like Trump would start by destroying the officer corps and putting in his own sycophants. It worked for Putin. It worked for Erdogan.
When Trump said he wanted generals like Hitlers, I was hoping he'd get his wish. I think it would be wonderfully ironic if one of his generals planted a bomb under his tables. Hitler survived. Maybe Trump figured he'd survive and the attack would boost his approval ratings.
A lot of power plays are going on both nationally and internationally. The heart of the movement is a buff, though, and really silly one. The bluff is that the United States can operate in the world solo, without any level of control from other nations or international organizations with perhaps the exception of Israel.
Transactional relationships somehow are expected to remain, but without cooperation on areas of interest to the general welfare of planet earth or humanity in general.
How are we not setting ourselves up for a lose-lose situation? If they take the bluff we lose, and if they call the bluff we lose. Either way our future is bleak.
Good Luck seems to come with soft power, and soft power is being squandered. You can win in a lose-lose situation with exceptional luck. Lady Luck can never be assumed as a trusted ally. Her fickle nature is legendary. To take good luck for granted is a rookie mistake. Going solo, also an obvious blunder. To sacrifice Ukraine a gambit that assures long term failure. You lose too much position by making your defense weak. You put your future at Lady Luck's whims. Not looking moves ahead is often the fatal mistake rookies make.
Members of the SS had a V-shaped insignia on one of the upper arms of their uniform jacket that designated one as a pre-'33 party member and was very prestigious and led to favor in assignments and promotion. I have no doubt that the lawless GOP will turn the military into a mask-off neo-colonial shakedown operation and general goon squad. The red hat is just a brown shirt, so watch for the auxiliaries to be integrated into the armed forces. Just wait for the Orange Kinglet to use nuclear fire as the art of the deal (next on deck, I am sure). The Wehrmacht died by the score for the little corporal and were also apparently an independent governmental, non-political organization. The power feeeeeeeeels so good Mr Vader said to the the young Skywalker – now that is a value statement!
I've never been in the military, but I have close family members who were career army. The army, at least, and probably all of the services, have long and deep traditions and cultures among the career officers that are not going to be quickly overridden. I don't know about enlisted men, and I'm sure some officers are Trump supporters. But I think a significant portion of the officers will resist political manipulation to force them to do anything illegal or unconstitutional. I hope that's not put to the test, but we'll see what happens if it is.
For one, I'm glad that we have the most powerful military on the planet, because there are many countries around the globe that hate us and I don't want the US to be susceptible to military conquest by those global enemies. Having said that, I remain a life-long pacifist. For the sake of purely intents and purposes, (and even if it's a little polly-anna-ish), I'm glad we have a Secretary of DEFENSE and not a Secretary of War. I have an uncle who fought in WWII, was career military, and who rose to mid level in the Officer corps; he was an honorable man, and loyal to the Constitution. Ideally I would like to see that type of personal character from top to bottom throughout our military.
I do worry about our military because the current administration is massively corrupt and appears to be attempting a blitzkrieg style corruption-swamping of all federal organizations; not limited to the DOJ, Intelligence community and the Military… is is the entire government they seek to corrupt.
With corruption comes incompetence at anything other than grifting. Trump thinks the oceans will protect us from invasion. But that is mindlessly short-sighted. Modern warfare since the fall of Saigon has been an evolving mix of guerilla warfare, terrorism, and scorched-earth tactics aimed at civilian populations and infrastructure. And most of what we've seen (from all sides) has been vastly superior armed forces beating up on supposedly weakling countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Crimea, Ukraine and Gaza). Ukraine turned out to NOT be a weakling country, but the approach has been the same.
Having said all that, what I worry about more than the weakening of our armed forces is the ability of our adversaries to mess with our infrastructure through cyber, propaganda, r*atF*cking political interference, etc. with the endpoint goal of wrecking our economy. They want to topple our position as the predominant economy in the world. They don't need to roll tanks across our land to do that. They can do it with enough carefully placed moles throughout our government.