Hegseth: Liberation Day for America’s Warriors
A reaffirmation rather than a revelation.
As noted in previous posts, newly christened Secretary of War Pete Hegseth called every general or admiral in a command position and their senior enlisted advisors to Marine Corps Base Quantico for unspecified reasons last week. He addressed them in a location familiar to me, Warner Auditorium in the building where I work when it’s not occupied by VIP visitors.
While the base was closed for the last two days for security reasons, I was able to listen to most of the speech via a live stream. The whole 48-minute, 31-second video is available at war.gov.
Stars and Stripes (“Hegseth addresses top commanders at Quantico, puts focus on warfighting: ‘The era of the Department of Defense is over’“):
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth jumped into his roughly 45-minute speech Tuesday morning to the top military brass after being introduced by Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“Good morning, and welcome to the War Department because the era of the Department of Defense is over,” Hegseth told hundreds of generals and admirals gathered at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Northern Virginia.
[…]
“Today is another liberation day, the liberation of America’s warriors,” Hegseth said. “You are not politically correct and don’t necessarily always belong in polite society. We are purpose built.”
[…]
Hegseth, a 45-year-old Army National Guard veteran and former Fox News host, did not stand behind the podium on stage. He walked around the stage draped by a giant American flag behind him, along with flags of military branches.
Since taking charge of the Pentagon in January, Hegseth has ordered reviews of physical fitness, body composition and grooming, reverting back to the base names of Fort Benning and Fort Bragg, and restoring the “warrior ethos.”
Hegseth said the U.S. military has promoted too many leaders for the wrong reasons based on race, gender quotas and “historic firsts.”
“Political leaders set the wrong heading, and we lost our way. We became the Woke Department but not anymore,” the secretary said.
He said he is loosening disciplinary rules and weakening hazing protections.
Hegseth said he was ordering a review of “the department’s definitions of so-called toxic leadership, bullying and hazing to empower leaders to enforce standards without fear of retribution or second guessing.”
The secretary told the top military brass that 10 directives would arrive in the inboxes of commands Tuesday. Some of the initiatives include adding combat field tests for combat arms units, every member of the joint force including four-star generals must take a physical test twice a year and meet height and weight requirements.
“Frankly, it’s tiring to look out at combat formations, or really any formation, and see fat troops. Likewise, it’s completely unacceptable to see fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon,” Hegseth said.
The secretary said the Pentagon is empowering drill sergeants to instill “healthy fear in recruits.”
“Yes, they can shark attack. They can toss bunks. They can swear and yes, they can put their hands on recruits,” Hegseth said. “This does not mean they can be reckless or violate the law, but they can use tried and true methods to motivate new recruits to make them warriors.”
The Pentagon has been thinking about bringing back shark attacks after the Army decided to move away from the practice in 2020. Hegseth shared a story in August that he was considering allowing Army drill sergeants to swarm on trainees and shout in their faces again. Pentagon spokeswoman Kingsley Wilson told reporters last month “shark attacks are going to be something” Hegseth looks to reinstate.
The directives would include “gender-neutral” or “male-level” standards for physical fitness.
It is not about preventing women from serving, Hegseth said.
“But when it comes to any job that requires physical power to perform in combat, those physical standards must be high and gender neutral,” he said. “If women can make it excellent, if not, it is what it is. If that means no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it. That is not the intent, but it could be the result.”
The event initially raised concerns that Hegseth was gathering the group to inform them of mass firings or layoffs. The secretary in May signed a memo to reduce the total number of generals and admirals by 20%.
[…]
“If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign,” Hegseth said. “We should thank you for your service. But I suspect I know the overwhelming majority of you feel the opposite.”
The secretary continued that “these words make your heart full.”
“You love the War Department because you love what you do. You are hereby liberated to be an apolitical, hard charging, no nonsense, constitutional leader,” Hegseth added.
Given how much controversy the hastily-called gathering created, this is likely to raise more questions. Since the event was lived-streamed, it’s not obvious why it was necesary for hundreds of senior leaders and their staffs to travel to Quantico on short notice. Perhaps Hegseth simply believed that this would galvanize their attention.
Fears of loyalty oaths and the like were unfounded. The closest we came was the above-quoted line, “If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign.” However, generals and admirals follow the lawful orders of the elected commander-in-chief and the presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed Secretary. There’s not likely to be much pushback.
The emphasis on fitness and grooming standards is usually the province of enlisted leaders rather than the highest levels of the Pentagon. But this was simply an emphasis of a message Hegseth has been sending since he was nominated for the post.
Similarly, I don’t believe I’ve ever heard a general officer, much less a Defense Secretary, getting into the details of how basic training is run. I’m not aware of any evidence that eliminating “shark attacks” has hindered lethality. And swearing at recruits was already verboten when my late father was a basic training first sergeant circa 1980, roughly the time Hegseth was born.
Still, I suspect many in the audience welcomed the broader message: military leaders should be focusing on training for combat and maintaining vehicles and equipment. To the extent there’s a sense standards have been lowered to achieve diversity goals, particularly the integration of women into ground combat roles, being clear that combat readiness is the only goal that matters will be reassuring.
Killing medical waivers for beards is an obvious attempt to reduce the number of Black soldiers. Requiring women to match male physical standards is an obvious attempt to reduce the number of women. Paired with ICE’s intimidation of Hispanics, as well as the expelling of trans soldiers, and you see the true nature of this: they want an overwhelmingly White, straight, male force because an overwhelmingly White, Straight, male force is much more likely to obey illegal orders to oppress fellow Americans.
That’s what this is. That’s what the shift to ‘homeland defense’ (from whom, Canadians?) is about. Trump does not want a military that will stand up to him as happened in his first term. Every aspect of government must be personally loyal to Trump, and that is more likely if you remove Black, Brown, female, trans and gay.
So, no, James, this is not an innocuous event. This is your Army being systematically destroyed to be reborn along third world lines – an Army meant to oppress and not defend.
I texted the following reaction to a friend: “He [Hegseth] is a weird combo of frat boy, dorm room philosopher, and Call of Duty gamer.”
To which the friend replied, “he becomes the Voltron of stupidity.”
Indeed.
@Michael Reynolds:
Agreed.
@Michael Reynolds: While there’s clearly a White/Christian Nationalist aspect to the administration (and they’re certainly made no secret of their antipathy to transgender folks, which was a major theme of the 2024 campaign), I honestly think the beard thing, despite its clearly disparate impact on Black soldiers, though, is purely about aesthetics. (Trump’s speech, which I don’t even think I can comment on, had long sections about how modern ships and weapons aren’t beautiful like the old timey ones and how his is “a very aesthetic person.”)
Otherwise, I’m just assessing the event itself and, especially, why it was necessary to call in hundreds of people for it. While I missed the first couple of minutes, there was just nothing new in anything I heard or have seen reported. (Less true of Trump’s speech, which I’ll defer to others to cover.) Indeed, there’s little here that wasn’t in his book and Senate testimony.
It is all a focus on what people look like, not what they can do. Very Trump like. I could cite a dozen skillsets that don’t require fox hole physical fitness but are actually required for combat (think drone operator at Nellis AFB or aircraft mechanic or bomb assembler. So ignorant.
@Michael Reynolds:
@Steven L. Taylor:
It has been years since the military has met its recruitment requirements and it was willing to accept anyone who met minimum physical and educational standards plus gave a variety of incentives to recruits. Now they are going to cut the pool of prospective recruits and somehow meet the military’s needs?
@Michael Reynolds: Wait a minute! High male physical standards certainly gives an advantage to black guys. Every sport is dominated by black guys, football, basketball, track, boxing, etc. Following this call for physical masculinity means the Pentagon will be full of Jalen Hurts or Lebron James type of people. An occasional Manning maybe, but even Ole Miss has a qboc (quarterback of color) these days.
He seems to me like a guy in front of audience made up of people whose jobs he has never done, will never do, and probably could never have qualified to do, telling them how to do those jobs.
And in the process focusing on meaningless cosmetic details.
I mean, this is an example of Alec Baldwin’s “ABC” speech from Glengarry Glen Ross, except Baldwin’s character at least was a successful salesman.
Well, I think we can say that this is evidence against the idea that they are plotting some kind of takeover with military assistance.
Who would be so stupid as to scold and alienate the people they were counting on to help them?
Ya gonna hold the Commander in Chief to those fitness, weight etc…standards? POTUS is obese.
Biden spoke of a cabinet that looks like America.
Hesgthe and El Taco want a military that looks down on Americans.
I don’t know who this poster is, but she’s got it dead right: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:eik4clq3pw3yevaiytbsiw5y/post/3m22mv6cpxs27
@James Joyner:
A desire for an overwhelmingly White, straight, male force and a thing being purely about aesthetics are not mutually exclusive. A overwhelmingly White, straight, male force will not be one where primarily merit or physical prowess determine success and advancement.
Article glossing over this:
This may be the most disgusting thing I’ve ever heard uttered by a member of our government.
@James Joyner:
As with Roberts saying judges just call balls and strikes, without promising to call them fairly, Trump failed to mention that while aesthetics are very important to him, he has terrible taste. For which see the gold geegaws on the walls of the Oval Office.
@ptfe: The funny thing is that the whole thing is a red herring. As I tell my students when they complain about being constrained by ROE, is that they’re purpose-built for a given conflict. Damn straight we have tight rules in a counterinsurgency fight whose end state requires cooperation from the civilian population. We would have considerably more latitude in any conceivable full-on war with China.
What @Sleeping Dog said.
Complaining about overweight troops (and admirals & generals), changing performance standards to push out women (~17% of our armed forces), and reducing the number of Black troops (~21% of our armed forces are Black), with recruiting numbers already unmet…sure.
This whole thing seems destined to become a huge problem.
“We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military.”
Just Trump being Trump?
While Hegseth, and many Americans, masturbate to images of White, Viking American soldiers who stand seven feet tall, let’s look at some our recent enemies. Germans? Yep, White and tall. We fought them on the ground for less than 2 years and won.
We fought the much smaller, much more poorly-equipped and much less White, Japanese in ground combat for twice as long. And we won with our muscles and tallness by incinerating their cities. Those tiny little Asian folks fought on even when reduced to cannibalism.
We fought the non-White Koreans and Chinese and after 3 years, fought them to a draw.
We fought the small and Brownish Vietnamese for about 8 years and lost.
We fought wiry, Brown, ill-equipped Afghans for 20 years and lost.
We did however manage to beat Granada and Iraq. So. . . Yeah.
When I wrote FRONT LINES which imagined a gender-integrated US military in WW2, I wanted to stay grounded. After all, women are smaller, and they are less physically strong. So I took a look at Audie Murphy who fought in WW2 and won a few medals including,
Medal of Honor
Distinguished Service Cross
Silver Star (2)
Legion of Merit
Bronze Star Medal (2, 1 “V” device)
Purple Heart (3)
Legion of Honour (France)
Croix de Guerre with silver star (France)
Croix de Guerre with palm (3, France)
Croix de Guerre with palm (Belgium)
Murphy was White, but he was also 5’5″ tall, weighed 110 pounds, and had been rejected by the Marines and the Navy as too small. He would tower over the average American woman by . . . a whole inch. He was both shorter and lighter than Angelina Jolie. As it happens, I’ve been hugged by Ms. Jolie, and she did not feel particularly muscular. Gal Gadot would have crushed Murphy like a bug.
As so many disappointed women throughout time have said with a mix of pity and sincerity, “Size isn’t everything.”
@Jen:
Not to forget, the thousands of troops that are not citizens, but here on green cards and various other papers.
@Michael Reynolds: Virginia Hall was such an important spy in WWII that the CIA has a training facility named after her…she was not only a woman (gasp) but was disabled (missing a leg). The very reason she was able to get away with so much while working with the French Resistance is that everyone overlooked her, thinking there was no way she was the spy.
The problem with having soldiers and spies who look like they are right out of central casting is that they, well, *look like they are right out of central casting.*
From my martial arts career, I know several women who are highly skilled and could shred me any time they felt like it. Fortunately, they wanted to teach me, not shred me.
More than one of them, though, has a story or two about encounters with guys kind of like Hegseth, who just couldn’t comprehend that they were getting owned by a woman. These guys would not tap out, and then sit on the sidelines moaning about the pain they were in. Not really getting the picture because they are so caught up in a trope I can only call “muscle always wins”.
Napoleon, in contrast, said, “In war, the moral[e] is to the physical as three is to one”.
Yes, fitness and strength matter. The women I reference above were fit, and reasonably strong. Technique, spirit, capability, courage are multipliers. And not small ones.
@James Joyner: “I honestly think the beard thing, despite its clearly disparate impact on Black soldiers, though, is purely about aesthetics.”
Is Pete Hegseth the most closeted man in the history of the military? The subtext of the speech was “I only want soldiers I can jerk off to.”
@wr: It reminds me of the Ted Cruz attack on Army recruitment ads. He was extolling the homoerotic Russian ads.
BTW, expect over the next few days similar arguments from a bunch of people who never served and don’t have a clue about our DoD.
@Michael Reynolds:
From Americans, obviously.
And I would hope that none of the high command does the “honorable thing” and resigns, as there will likely be better opportunities to do the honorable thing.
@Assad K: Along with the rest of it, coming dangerously close to a declaration of martial law.
@James Joyner:
White Supremacy is based on aesthetics*.
Anyway, our nation’s military was greatest when they had handlebar mustaches and mutton chops. None of this woke “fighting for other people’s freedoms” like WW2.
*: aesthetics and the sad realization that most of the great art in America was either produced by Black people, or heavily inspired by Black people, and that White Culture is a paper thin facade to cover the loss of Italian, Irish, German, Norwegian and English cultures, and that if we accept Black and Brown people as Real Americans it reveals that there is no there there, just an empty spot where a culture should be.
Even the most quintessential moment of Real American culture — the inbred kid in Deliverance sitting on the porch playing “Dueling Banjos” shows that dependence — the banjo is an African instrument. Updated a little, but an African instrument.
I guess we have Johnny Appleseed and Tom Bunyan or something.
(American culture is wide and varied, but White Culture…. Eww)
It’s a quibble, but I don’t think it is fair to say that the fears of loyalty oaths was unfounded. It was wrong but unfounded means (at least to me) that there was never a legitimate reason to believe something would happen.
Being afraid of monsters under the bed is unfounded, since no under-bed monsters exist in reality. There was a definite non-zero chance that loyalty oaths would be a part of the event today, and it could still happen. The chances were (and are) small, but the concern is not unfounded. To suggest that they were unfounded is to be dismissive in the same way that people have dismissed fears of any number of awful things Trump has actually then done, and makes it easier for future awful things to come as a surprise