The New Defense Secretary

Highlights from an interview with The Economist:

I think his book was a key reason for the pick. He’ll be an antidote to all of the woke nonsense that rose during the Obama administration.

18 thoughts on “The New Defense Secretary”

  1. I really like the “Warrior Board” concept to thin out the overabundance of 3 and 4 star generals and admirals. Plus root out the woke BS.

    1. One of the stories floating around about why the generals hated Trump so much is that he brought in a bunch of trigger pullers and asked them what is really going on and they contradicted what the generals had been telling the President

  2. I’d like to hear Hegseth’s take on the Navy. We have some real crucial decisions that need to be made about our blue water Navy right now, during the Trump administration. Any failure here will have severe ramifications for peace in the Pacific as early as the end of this decade (possibly sooner if we ignore it).

    1. Yes, we have big problems. Some of these problems are relatively cheap and easy to solve but procurement of our super cool ships is a tough one.

  3. Shawn Ryan show is excellent if y’all aren’t aware of it.

    Can’t watch all of them but the clips are good and some episodes are worth the time sink.

    1. Totally agree. I particularly liked the interview with the WW2 Marine who used a flamethrower on Suribachi and Iwo Jima. Amazing that he survived that at all.

    1. Bolton, like quite a few others, is a disgruntled former employee. I was, once upon a time, something of an admirer of the man. But his tenure in the first Trump administration was unimpressive. He opposed winding down the Afghan War or any other on-going U.S. military “hot” engagement and was no help at all in countering the damage Obama had done to the U.S. military. His current opinions are unworthy of attention.

  4. Hegseth’s military credentials are fine. And yes eliminating DEI, re-instating a warrior ethos, etc. is required. But SecDef requires much more than an understanding of the military, and an expunging of stupidity.

    It requires knowledge and ability to create and fight for budgets; an understanding of the worldwide situation from a strategic standpoint; the ability to generate an overall military strategic plan, working with congress (like it or not); dealing with personalities etc.

    Does Hegseth have these skills? If not how is he going to get them? Does he have the ability to understand all of this? I don’t mean that as an insult…not everyone does. I probably do not.

    This appointment worries me. But hopefully my worries are for naught.

    1. Pretty clearly, the incumbent SecDef has not only utterly failed to do what Hegseth proposes but entirely lacks all of your checklist virtues as well. So Hegseth is, at worst, a significant improvement vs. a bleak certainty.

      It is not, in any case, true that one can make a clean distinction between clearly and obviously restoring the fighting capability of the U.S. armed forces and matters such as strategic vision. The enemies of the U.S., for example, will be far more deterred from undertaking freelance mischief if the U.S. military becomes demonstrably more capable. Strength and capability are strategies in their own rights.

      Perhaps your mind would rest more easily if you were to read SecDef-designate Hegseth’s book. It’s definitely now on my must-read list.

  5. “It is not, in any case, true that one can make a clean distinction between clearly and obviously restoring the fighting capability of the U.S. armed forces and matters such as strategic vision. ”

    I can.

    Strategic vision includes knowing where to base ships planes and people, and where to not base them. And how many. It includes knowing what you need to obtain an objective – and build a strategic list of achievable objectives – i.e. war plans. It includes knowing which partners you can trust and which you cannot trust, militarily. It includes making plans based upon present force levels and what you intend to acquire in the next two years. And it includes making the strategic vision argument in order to win the budget battle to get those things in order to achieve your strategic vision. There are many other examples.

    I agree with you: your moves are limited if you have ship drivers who cannot avoid crashing into other ships, or maintenance that doesn’t happen or soldiers with daisies in the barrels of their guns.

    But I accept that Hegseth can make those sorts of changes and so, yes, I agree he’s an improvement. But he has to be able to do the entire job. It’s the political and strategic pieces that I’m talking about and all the positive discussion I’ve read about Hegseth doesn’t mention any experience along those lines.

    1. “But he has to be able to do the entire job.”

      A common misconception. The real reason Elon Musk is the best manager in the world is that he hires the best managers in the world, and then still goes into work every day (or lives there). No one is good enough to do everything. But some people are good enough to hire those that can.

      If you hire a politician, all of their hiring choices are based on politics. If you hire a non-politician, you have at least a 50-50 chance that hiring is based on merit. If you hire a responsible conservative that actually believes the job is critical you have a 99% chance that hiring will be based on merit.

      I think I’ll give the guy a chance and see how he does.

      1. Well I hope you are correct. I hope Hegseth has that managerial skill. I see nothing that says he has it and it’s one of my stated issues. But I see nothing that says he does not have it.

        So we’ll see. I reserve my approval until I see him in action.

  6. I worked for USN (as a yard-bird) during the build-up to the 600 ship Navy, and when the battleships were taken out of mothballs (crew was recruited out of the Yards). I wonder now what’s left of all the hulls, vs. what’s gone to the breaker yards.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *