Pete Hegseth has ‘lost respect of generals’
BY Herschel Smith
3 weeks, 6 days ago
Pete Hegseth is said to have lost the respect of his senior officers after an “embarrassing” speech in which he railed against “fat troops” and the state of the US armed forces.
[ … ]
Now, a report quoting senior military officers who attended the speech said they thought it was “embarrassing” and a “waste of time”.
“If he ever had us, he lost us,” one currently serving Army general told The Washington Times.
Oh my.
Oh dear.
Whatever shall we do? The perfumed princes don’t like Pete.
After all, our ruling class is so stelar.
On November 11, 2025 at 10:13 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:
Embarrassing to whom?
I suspect what really riles the guys with the scrambled eggs on their covers and stars and gold braid on their uniforms is that Hegseth’s remarks cut too close to the bone of truth for their comfort.
And criticism from a former enlisted man? Who does he think he is, anyway? And of course, the inevitable fact that since he is now a civilian, what could Hegseth possibly know that would benefit the armed forces?
French Premier Georges Clemenceau once said, “War is too important to be left to the generals” …. and he was right!
On November 12, 2025 at 5:24 am, john tebone said:
in my mind-
further proof usa/fusa beyong redemption.
prepare accordingly
On November 12, 2025 at 8:14 pm, anon said:
I don’t believe Pete was enlisted. He was commisioned after graduating college and was promoted eventually to Major in the National Guard.
I do agree with you, the generals in question probably took Hegseth’s comments personally, as many of them likely don’t meet his physical and appearance (weight) standards.
On November 13, 2025 at 1:59 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@Anon
Thanks for the correction, much appreciated.
On November 13, 2025 at 4:32 pm, Steady Steve said:
Looks like some of these senior officers need to be shown the door with a “less than honorable” discharge in hand. These are supposed to be warriors but it seems the most fighting they have done is over the bar bill at the 19th hole.
On November 13, 2025 at 10:00 pm, john s allison said:
When was the last time a flag ranker resigned over policy disagreements with the civilian leadership and THEN went public?
On November 14, 2025 at 12:27 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Steady Steve
Re: “Looks like some of these senior officers need to be shown the door with a “less than honorable” discharge in hand. These are supposed to be warriors but it seems the most fighting they have done is over the bar bill at the 19th hole.”
Your comments are entirely apt and correct.
General/Flag officers are, by definition, political since no member of the armed forces can ascend to that rank without the “advise and consent” of Congress.
As far as warriors go, as the old saying goes, “Warriors interfere with the smooth running of the peace-time military…” Genuine, hard-knuckles war-fighter types like Patton or Chesty Puller or any other warrior-officer you care to name, makes the members of the permanent bureaucracy in the DOD/Pentagon nervous. Indeed, the mardarins therein do their best to avoid them.
This phenomenon explains why so many exemplary O-6’s – colonels and USN/USCG captains – make the jump to flag rank, and fewer yet of the genuine warriors do. It is why Colonel John Boyd, USAF, never made general; though brilliant and a high-performer, he made too many enemies on his way up. Not because of his lack of qualifications, but because he did the worst thing you can do to the arm-chair generals ~ he showed them up as the pretenders and mediocrities they were.
There are, of course, those rare officers who are both brilliant tacticians and leaders in the field and in combat and who are also gifted staff officers… Maxwell Taylor in the old days comes to mind, but they are rare. Most brass excel in one area or the other.
The basic problem with the officer corps in the U.S. military and in particular the general-flag ranks, is that the system is set up to weed out non-conformists, original thinkers, contrarians, and risk-takers by the time they make the middle grades, and it really selects against them when it comes to elevation to general-flag rank. Colonel Douglas MacGregor, U.S. Army (retired) has done a lot of excellent work on how our officer selection-training ought to be reformed.
But right now, the system rewards ticket-punchers, guys who excel at playing the sorts of games that win promotions in Washington, D.C. – but if anything, it disincentivizes from staying in uniform precisely the kind of men our nation ought to want as combat leaders.
General Mark Miley is a great example of a “general” who has betrayed his oath, and his duty to the nation. His actions vis-a-vis unsanctioned communications with the PRC completely outside the chain of command amount to black-letter treason in my view. Why the President and the Secretary of Defense haven’t dropped the hammer on him, I don’t know – because if anyone deserves being made an example of, it is that guy. He ought to be making small rocks out of big ones at Gitmo or someplace, for life!
On November 14, 2025 at 5:40 pm, 91B40 said:
Whatever happened to the chain-of-command? The correct response to the SECWAR from these subordinates is, “Yes, Sir!”
Can’t do that? Resign.
On November 14, 2025 at 11:53 pm, Arnie said:
Reminds me of a conversation with a friend when he said his son was in line to become a
general and abruptly resigned. When he asked his son “Why?” his son just said to him
“Because I don’t want to be one of those people.”
On November 16, 2025 at 10:59 am, Paul B said:
Find a wall. Line them up against it and the straff them with Moses Browns creation. That should fix the problem.