Pete Hegseth is pulling HUNDREDS of top officers from the Field to a meeting in Quantico and won't say why.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Venandi said:

  Unfortunately though you have to dive deep into the weeds to see it all in a military context and understand why the efforts to date have been problematic.

That's the bottom line on ALL public matters.

"Common sense" isn't worth a toss on such matters and yet you have people in positions of authority knowingly bringing it in to muddy things and push their own viewpoints.

Of course it was always so.  But it seems worse lately.

Thanks for your thoughtful post.

[LinkSoul60]

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yet...the border is closed...wars are being cut off at the knees...and the bonus...

Trump forces you Libbies to lie constantly. 

Not bad for 9 months eh?

What wars are being cut off at the knees?  I can think of one that he's trying to start domestically...but none he's 'cut off at the knees'.

You lost your ability to differentiate the truth from a lie when you joined the Maga cult.  

It's only 9 months but has felt like 9 years.  This presidency is not going to end well...

 

[CdnFox]

9 hours ago, Nationalist said:

You can have your own opinion, but you cant have your own truth.

Sure she can. The voices said so. 

[Nationalist]

57 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

What wars are being cut off at the knees?  I can think of one that he's trying to start domestically...but none he's 'cut off at the knees'.

You lost your ability to differentiate the truth from a lie when you joined the Maga cult.  

It's only 9 months but has felt like 9 years.  This presidency is not going to end well...

 

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/09/18/trump-7-wars/86220338007/

You've lost your ability to deal with truth.

I know you're upset about losing so badly to your nemesis but, that's what happens when your preferred side fcks up monumentally. 

[LinkSoul60]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/09/18/trump-7-wars/86220338007/

You've lost your ability to deal with truth.

I know you're upset about losing so badly to your nemesis but, that's what happens when your preferred side fcks up monumentally. 

He's done jackshit...  Help solve the Ukraine and Gaza invasions and maybe he'll get some praise.

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

He's done jackshit...  Help solve the Ukraine and Gaza invasions and maybe he'll get some praise.

At least he's trying.

Which is a Hell of a lot better than Brandon's surrender.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

He's done jackshit...  Help solve the Ukraine and Gaza invasions and maybe he'll get some praise.

Surprisingly he's winning on the economy, he's stopped iran's nuclear program. he's removed a shocking number of illegal immigrants and has substantially secured the border... and it's been 6 months. 

[LinkSoul60]

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

At least he's trying.

Which is a Hell of a lot better than Brandon's surrender.

The little orange engine that thinks he can...

[Hodad]

4 hours ago, Venandi said:

The target vs quota debate....

There's clearly a substantive difference between the two when discussed rationally but when set as a target or in the form of objectives to be met (not quotas per se) they prove difficult to achieve while maintaining existing competency standards.

The CF target of 25% women by 2026 is tough because the recruiting band I mentioned (above) typically isn't composed of 25% women; you have to go outside the band and when you do that competency (in the form of able and ready) typically becomes an issue to be overcome.

One of the difficulties here (and a hard one to address IMO) comes down to interest (the willingness factor). I know a number of athletic young ladies who would be prime candidates for a variety of military occupations, and even though they qualify as age appropriate ready and able, they simply aren't interested (or willing). I also know women who serve in the navy and "go to sea" but outside that cadre, I don't know a single (non military) women who wants to join the navy and spend 6 months of the year on a ship. It makes meeting targets within a narrow band of the population pretty challenging. 

I've had this conversation with people before and usually the missing link is recognizing the challenges that are associated with that ready / willing / able side of the equation. Finding people who meet two of the parameters is easy, all three typically isn't and it leads to the idea that we can expand the band and organically create / train (over time) the missing component(s)...  usually either ready or able (often both). A noble idea I guess but it hasn't worked out to well so far.

Very true, but in practice it only applies in presence of competencies that are not adjusted simply to achieve the diversity you (quite rightly BTW) hope to achieve. 

In short, I'm guessing you think I'm attacking the idea... and I'm actually not. I'm suggesting that the implementation has been largely dysfunctional for a variety of reasons. 

All of this could be a 50 page thread but I'll try to summarize the challenge with a simple question: How many young fit women of your acquaintance (and I mean all of them) actually aspire to join the infantry and become paratroopers? I don't know any but I've heard of a few that we lost to policing due to recruiting / training delays. 

That's the first thing I'd be fixing and that's a huge challenge due to manning levels. Balancing recruiting, retention and operational tempo is a critical factor in all of this and that equation is way out of balance. I haven't looked at female attrition in a while but I'd hazard to guess that still poses a similar challenge to recruiting... it makes something as simple as maintaining the status quo more difficult than many would think.

All IMO of course.

 

Diversity is a self-fulfilling prophecy. A chicken and egg. No organization is going to attract a diverse talent pool until they model themselves as a organization that values a diverse talent pool. Can women and minorities get hired? Will they be respected? Can they build their careers? Can they see themselves as leaders there? Are there role models? -- That inclusive culture is the one the US military has been building for decades, so that they can attract and recruit from the broader talent pool--to expand the pool of what you call "willing." And Hegseth has destroyed most of that progress in just a few months.

If you were a person of color or a woman, would Pete Hegseth's vision of the military be more or less attractive? He's firing eminently qualified people of color and women for no performance reason whatsoever. He apparently wants to fire "fat generals and admirals" for no performance reason whatsoever. He wants to purge service members at every rank for ideological differences rather than performance reasons.

None of this is merit. He's not taking issue with the way they perform their duties or achieve success metrics. He simply doesn't like the way they look, they way they sound, or the way he thinks they think. His goal is clearly not meritocracy, and it's been made abundantly clear that for anyone other than straight, white males who share Hegseth's politics (and desired body type, apparently) the US military is now a hostile work environment and not a viable career.

You'll see the effects of that in both talent acquisition and talent retention. Some of that may be offset by increased interest from "kill 'em all" white males who were only avoiding military service because there were "too many" people of color and women. But even if it were 100% offset in numbers, that clearly represents a transition to a less mentally fit military which becomes more important every day as technology shifts the value of physical engagement. And more to the point, is that the character of military people we really want defending America? Or should our military be a reflection of our people and our values?  -- Obviously I think it should, but the current leadership has a VERY different view of what America is and should be. 

 

[Hodad]

28 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

At least he's trying.

Which is a Hell of a lot better than Brandon's surrender.

You're still "confused" about Afghanistan, I see. Which is literally Trump's surrender. The Trump admin literally signed that agreement (excluding the Afghan government) and the literally withdrew all but a pittance of US forces, surrendering the country back to the Taliban.

You're welcome to think that was a great decision handled very well (it wasn't) but you can't pretend that he didn't do it. Jeebus.

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

The little orange engine that thinks he can...

The Llittle orange engine who is actually.

Economists are now beginning to predict strong third and forth quarters. 

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You're still "confused" about Afghanistan, I see. Which is literally Trump's surrender.

Lie to yourself all you like. 
Trump negotiated a deal.  IT was Brandon's job to execute the deal and make changes where necessary . 

we now know Biden was already mentally compromised that that point and did nothing when the taliban broke the deal and instead surrendered. 

That's 100 percent on Biden

[Venandi]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Some of that may be offset by increased interest from "kill 'em all" white males who were only avoiding military service because there were "too many" people of color and women.

Guess you joined a different military.

I don't know any of those folks personally and the ones Ive seen in passing (or heard about) didn't last long... they're dangerous and no one wants to work with them.

As to fitness, I guess the question is whether senior leaders and field commanders should be subject to the same fitness standard as the troops they lead... that standard is adjusted for age across the board and by the time people reach senior command appointments it isn't terribly taxing or asking too much IMO.

Maybe a return to leadership by example is past due.  

Apparently levels of obesity in the CF are now higher than comparable age/gender categories in the civilian world. Some will attribute that to widening of the recruitment band and having to run "fat farms" during OJT (while awaiting training) as a result... whether that's actually the reason for it or not I don't know.

It's not that I don't care but I'm retired now and (thankfully) it isn't my problem. A bunch of smart HRM types and capable, conscientious senior officers have tackled this stuff in the past with modest (and IMO limited) success. Stick around long enough and you get to watch the see-saw swing in both directions.

Your thoughts and comments aren't as original as you may think, it's all been done before. We turfed any number of talented folks back in the BMI days for obesity, it's hardly a new concept. I can't help but wonder how much of it is TDS related as there wasn't so much as a peep about this stuff back in the day. As I recall there was no shortage of kind hearted liberals telling people to lose weight or get another job. Sort of like that covid "you had a choice thing" but different.

 

 

Edited October 2, 2025 by Venandi

[gatomontes99]

49 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You're still "confused" about Afghanistan, I see. Which is literally Trump's surrender. The Trump admin literally signed that agreement (excluding the Afghan government) and the literally withdrew all but a pittance of US forces, surrendering the country back to the Taliban.

You're welcome to think that was a great decision handled very well (it wasn't) but you can't pretend that he didn't do it. Jeebus.

You shouldn't listen to PMSNBC.

There was an agreement to withdraw. However, there were stipulations and targeted actions that had to happen. Those had not been met and the surrender of the airbase and abandonment of the equipment was not part of the plan. 

You are conflating the goal with the execution. 

[Venandi]

56 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You're still "confused" about Afghanistan, I see.

Oh my goodness... that withdrawal will be studied by future generations as a stirling example of how not do it.

Miss Richardson's kindergarten class could have come up with a better plan. When it comes to firing fat Generals that might be a good place to start. 

[Hodad]

26 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

You shouldn't listen to PMSNBC.

There was an agreement to withdraw. However, there were stipulations and targeted actions that had to happen. Those had not been met and the surrender of the airbase and abandonment of the equipment was not part of the plan. 

You are conflating the goal with the execution. 

Stipulations which WERE NOT met, yet Trump still withdrew 90% of the Troops. The only thing left in Afghanistan by the time Biden took office was a token force guarding the final withdrawal. If surrendering the airbase and equipment were not part of the plan, Trump should have either stopped the Taliban from retaking the country or left enough troops to defend against the Taliban. 

Edited October 2, 2025 by Hodad

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said:

The little orange engine that thinks he can...

Yes Trump thinks.

Brandon...not so much.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

You're still "confused" about Afghanistan, I see. Which is literally Trump's surrender. The Trump admin literally signed that agreement (excluding the Afghan government) and the literally withdrew all but a pittance of US forces, surrendering the country back to the Taliban.

You're welcome to think that was a great decision handled very well (it wasn't) but you can't pretend that he didn't do it. Jeebus.

Lol...so weak.

Brandon surrendered and got 13 US soldiers killed. I see you dont care about that.

Meh...Libbies...

[Hodad]

8 minutes ago, Venandi said:

Oh my goodness... that withdrawal will be studied by future generations as a stirling example of how not do it.

Miss Richardson's kindergarten class could have come up with a better plan. When it comes to firing fat Generals that might be a good place to start. 

For sure. Starting with don't turn your back on the allied government and don't hand the country back to terrorists. And if you do either of those things, don't be surprised when terrorists take a cheap shot at your withdrawing forces. 

I don't necessarily think Trump wanted more attacks on US forces after Biden took office, but he sure created a scenario in which that would be inevitable. And Biden couldn't come up with a way to prevent it. 

[Hodad]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Lol...so weak.

Brandon surrendered and got 13 US soldiers killed. I see you dont care about that.

Meh...Libbies...

No, dumb fark, Trump "surrendered." In writing. He made the deal with the Taliban. He pulled the troops. He just couldn't get the last 10% of the withdrawal completed (as he promised) and left Biden holding the bag for the messy part. 

You are trying to sell a fictional narrative that is literally the exact opposite of reality--and the opposite of recorded history that anyone can look up. 

 

 

[Legato]

15 minutes ago, Hodad said:

No, dumb fark, Trump "surrendered." In writing. He made the deal with the Taliban. He pulled the troops. He just couldn't get the last 10% of the withdrawal completed (as he promised) and left Biden holding the bag for the messy part. 

You are trying to sell a fictional narrative that is literally the exact opposite of reality--and the opposite of recorded history that anyone can look up. 

 

 

The Biden-Harris administration was determined to withdraw from Afghanistan, with or without the Doha Agreement and no matter the cost. Accordingly, they ignored the conditions in the Doha Agreement, pleas of the Afghan government, and the objections by our NATO allies, deciding to unilaterally withdraw from the country.

The Biden-Harris administration prioritized the optics of the withdrawal over the security of U.S. personnel on the ground. For that reason, they failed to plan for all contingencies, including a noncombatant emergency evacuation (NEO) and refused to order a NEO until after the Taliban had already entered Kabul.

The Biden-Harris administration’s failure to prepare for a NEO and order a timely NEO created an unsafe environment at HKIA, exposing U.S. Defense Department and State Department personnel to lethal threats and emotional harm. As a result, 13 U.S. servicemembers were murdered by a terrorist attack on August 26, 2021. It was the deadliest day for the U.S. military in Afghanistan since 2012.

In the aftermath of the withdrawal, U.S. national security was degraded as Afghanistan once again became a haven for terrorists, including al Qaeda and ISIS-K. America’s credibility on the world stage was severely damaged after we abandoned Afghan allies to Taliban reprisal killings — the people of Afghanistan we had promised to protect. And the moral injury to America’s veterans and those still serving remains a stain on this administration’s legacy.

The Biden-Harris administration misled and, in some instances, directly lied to the American people at every stage of the withdrawal, from before the go-to-zero order until today. This coverup included mid-level administration officials all the way up to the Oval Office. And as this investigation reveals, the National Security Council and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan were of the source of the majority of that misinformation campaign.

https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/getting-answers-on-afghanistan-withdrawal

[Nationalist]

18 minutes ago, Hodad said:

No, dumb fark, Trump "surrendered." In writing. He made the deal with the Taliban. He pulled the troops. He just couldn't get the last 10% of the withdrawal completed (as he promised) and left Biden holding the bag for the messy part. 

You are trying to sell a fictional narrative that is literally the exact opposite of reality--and the opposite of recorded history that anyone can look up. 

 

 

Lol...nice try but the whole world watched Brandon's surrender and complete incompetence. 

From what I remember, the absent minded dope was even advised not to do what he insisted on. What a failure.

It would be comical had it not cost so many US lives.

[gatomontes99]

30 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Stipulations which WERE NOT met, yet Trump still withdrew 90% of the Troops. The only thing left in Afghanistan by the time Biden took office was a token force guarding the final withdrawal. If surrendering the airbase and equipment were not part of the plan, Trump should have either stopped the Taliban from retaking the country or left enough troops to defend against the Taliban. 

He did. The base didn't fall until Biden wothdrew.

[Hodad]

38 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Lol...nice try but the whole world watched Brandon's surrender and complete incompetence. 

From what I remember, the absent minded dope was even advised not to do what he insisted on. What a failure.

It would be comical had it not cost so many US lives.

No, dummy, the whole world saw this.

 

Yeah, that's Mike Pompeo of the Trump administration making the "surrender" deal with the terrorist regime who welcomed al-Qaeda after the 9/11 attacks. 

Then they proceeded to withdraw 90% of the troops as the Taliban reconquered Afghanistan. None of which was remotely a surprise. It played out exactly as most experts predicted at the time of signing. Trump just didn't care. It was a campaign tactic and he knows people of your ilk wouldn't hold him accountable for playing politics. 

 

Edited October 2, 2025 by Hodad

[Hodad]

37 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

He did. The base didn't fall until Biden wothdrew.

Your sentence is backward. Biden withdrew the troops just before the base would have fallen.

Trump left just 2,500 Troops in the country. 2,500. Think about that. 2,500 trying to secure Bagram against a Taliban force of 60K fighters. That's obviously not a tenable situation. The military leadership told Biden point blank that they wouldn't be able to hold the base. So they left. 

The only other option was to re-invade, and nobody wanted that. So they left. It's tragic that 13 died as they tried to leave. And maybe there are scenarios in which 13 are not lost. But it's idiocy to criticize his "surrender,"  because it cost 13 lives when trying to hold the base would have cost 2,500. You're clearly as eager to play politics with Troops lives as Trump is. Shame on you.

[gatomontes99]

13 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Your sentence is backward. Biden withdrew the troops just before the base would have fallen.

Bullshit. It was a set date. They had a press release weeks before. They didnt run away in the face of evil. They left and evil replaced them.

Quote

"Our investigation reveals the Biden-Harris administration had the information and opportunity to take necessary steps to plan for the inevitable collapse of the Afghan government, so we could safely evacuate U.S. personnel, American citizens, green card holders, and our brave Afghan allies. At each step of the way, however, the administration picked optics over security. 

https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/news/press-releases/chairman-mccaul-releases-historic-comprehensive-report-biden-harris-administration-s-afghanistan-withdrawal

 

And...

Quote

Biden delayed the May 1 withdrawal date that he inherited. But ultimately his administration pushed ahead with a plan to withdraw by Aug. 31, despite obvious signs that the Taliban wasn’t complying with the agreement and had a stated goal to create an “Islamic government” in Afghanistan after the U.S. left, even if it meant it had to “continue our war to achieve our goal.”

Biden assured Americans last month that a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan was “not inevitable,” and denied that U.S. intelligence assessed that the Afghan government would likely collapse. But it did — and quickly.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/timeline-of-u-s-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/

You are just making shit up and hoping your fantasy world can gas light me.