CAPTAIN US Navy. 30 years of service. How about you slick?
Any ideas?
- Thread starter UrHuckleberry
- Start date
No they were too busy breaking the military down to do that. We did get dozens of hours of listening to mandatory training trans policies though.
Hey, Shipmate! Not one of you but just trying to relate. Sodomy , Rum and the Lash and all that... too much for a simple ground pounder.
Hi Whit! TBH i think 05 is successful.. O6 takes a bit of luck in additon to being good.
Yes the number of officers is regulated by law T10 USC. See link below.
reductions are different than increases.
Travel costs? Meh. one time. IF the secwar thinks its important, then it is.
don't care abouth any butthurt GOs. hope that they self select out
so, now that information about the Hegseth MTG is coming out, how close were everybody's "guestimates" about the reason for bringing everyone together
It's even dumber than I could imagine. Didn't see Pete's part, just the synopsis but holy **** on Trump's tired monologue about woke, stolen election and Democrats bad. Unbelievable.
Edit to add that he has a beautiful signature and Biden's is terrible, especially the one not written by auto-pen where he pardoned his son....oh and he loves the warships he sees in old black and white movies, he really loves them .
Last edited:
Honestly, seems like something that should've been a memo
Looks like I was off.
Didnt think that they would bring everyone in for a pep talk. Obviously it was one possibility but a pep talk is something that i think could have been done via secure VTC and a memo unless there is a whole additional non-public portion providing additional reason.
Doesn't sounding there were any arrests, forced loyalty pledges or firings either. So that should make everyone feel better.
there is a hierarchy of "sincerity" when putting out information/getting things done...1. send out letter/memo (easily read and ignored) 2. make a phone call (listen ) : 3. look them in the eye and tell them (can get immediate facial/body language response)
To me, bringing in everybody, does 2 things. ...lets everyone know you're serious and second, provides the opportunity for senior level commanders to meet face to face to discuss similar success/needs.
I'm sure there are positive arguments favoring a memo, zoom call all the way to no meeting. Everyone will come to their own conclusion.
Yeah I'm not the one making the call. It is what it is. Feels similar to the military parade, just grandstanding. But I'm admittedly biased, so maybe others disagree. Not really a surprise.
Should they be brought in in person to hear a political, anti-democrat speech?
Commanders have all calls routinely in the military at the lower level. Not saying face to face is not good. Maybe, a little more advance notice would have been appropriate and respectful. But the Boss says he wants a meeting, he's getting a meeting. I am curious if being the end of the fiscal year is just a coincidence.
Between the two of them, it sounded like an anti-Democrat indoctrination rally, which was probably offensive to the Democrats in the crowd and probably the Republicans too. Are they planning to purge the military of everyone left of center?
Absolutely. Happens all the time. Sometimes you sit there wondering the whole time who in the hell did or did not do what to bring it on. Lol.
Good catch on the fiscal year end. I think you are on point. Probably had enough unobligated $$ to make it happen. Also had a likely government shutdown and CR to contend with.
This is the clownish moron that some of you idiots think is fit to be leader of the free world. Just an absolute embarrassment.
just my opinion, but when it comes to trump, Adam kinzinger is not a person I would quote.
I didn't watch Trump's speech to the military leaders so I'm not the person to critique. But kinzinger was an air force officer, pilot. Don't know if he was ever shot at. However, I do know that Kinzinger is a flat out Trump hater. I don't know why he would feel the need to speak out on this. But I do think that 1-4 star generals, and most senior enlisted leaders don't need to be lectured on creating/living a warrior ethos. And I'm sure some would resent being spoken to like that from someone who never served. (Trump not Hegseth)
It's up to commanders to make sure that officers and soldiers are physically fit. If we have to depend on the secretary of war to call out overweight troops we might have a bigger problem
I commend the logic and validity of your points. But do you honestly think that had anything to do with them calling the in-person meeting? Lol. You know it didn't. This was theater, like all their ridiculous ********.
Trust me, I know exactly how maga feels about Kinzinger but in a normal world, people would value his courage in putting his job on the line to do the right thing and I can't think of anything more courageous than standing up to a corrupt President who tried to overturn our election with pathological lies and violence. Plus, he has a unique perspective because he served in Congress and the military so he should get to be heard as well and I'm happy to make sure that he is. He is a good guy who went against a bad guy and should be valued by anyone with a moral compass.
ned doesn't understand why a man who served his country with honor and had death threats made against him and his family by Trump's minions because he had the bravery and integrity to call out Trump's 2020 election lies and J6 criminality would feel the need to weigh in on Trump's abject buffoonery in front of a room full of generals.
does ned have a sub-70 IQ or is he just a partisan hack masquerading as a moderate?
does ned have a sub-70 IQ or is he just a partisan hack masquerading as a moderate?
being totally honest, I have no idea why they called an in person meeting. In my opinion, someone obviously felt an in person meeting was better than strictly memos. I can't second guess their reasoning because I don't know their reasoning.
I can say from experience (2 combat infantry divisions in my career) that physical fitness is a mandatory part of daily experience. Now, we only had to take 1 PT test annually and in subsequent staff assignments you were basically on your own for PT. Fairly, most officers take it up on themselves to do some form of daily PT> In fact, many might not know that under the Pentagon exists the POAC (Pentagon Officer Athletic club) with full gym, lap swimming pool indoor track full weights and machines. It's not unusual to see officers running from the Pentagon over to DC during lunch hours.
But as you become more senior in rank, there has been a fall off of PT standards. And there probably are fat generals and admirals in the Pentagon. But, a lot of these are never going to see combat again. They're staff officers for the duration of their careers
Now having said all that..Senior officers and enlisted are a proud lot. They take their jobs and responsibilities seriously and they, for the most part, are people who "stay within the lines". If the Secretary puts out a written order for beards, PT, weight standards...that order is followed. Or that officer disregarding would/will find himself out of a job, and likely out of a career. So in actuality, the same thing could have been accomplished in other ways. Senior people feel that they have earned their position because of their performance. IMO you leave a bad taste when you recall them for an in person meeting where you tell them they're not doing their jobs. I know it wouldn't sit well with me.
Lt. General Mark Hertling was interviewed on TV this morning, and he noted that the President has something called a "Commanders Conference" twice every year, to which all 3 and 4 star generals are invited and expected to attend. If this is the case, it seems to me that Trump and Hegseth could have used one of these conferences to make their speeches about "fat" generals, DEI and "wokeness" in the military, grooming standards for generals, and unleashing our military from "stupid" and "overbearing" rules of military engagement." (Great. He's encouraging the commission of war crimes.)
As lame as Hegseth's speech was, Cheeto's was even more pathetic:
The president rambled about tariffs, the Nobel Peace Prize, his contempt for Democrats, his contempt for independent news organizations, the paper stock at the White House, how impressed he is with his own signature, his belief that his 2020 election defeat was “rigged,” his desire to add Canada to the United States, Joe Biden and the autopen, and his affection for the “Gulf of America” label.
Trump capped it all off by expressing his eagerness to use military force against Americans:
"San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places. And we’re going to straighten them out one by one. And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room,” he told military leaders. “That’s a war, too. It’s a war from within. I told Pete we should use some of these cities as training grounds for our military.”
Last edited:
you might not believe this, but I agree with you. And if you read one of my posts in another thread. IMO I imagine quite a few generals/senior enlisted would be put off by being told they weren't doing their jobs.
Who listens to Trump's speeches? They're rambling, unstructured and not totally accurate. What fascinates me is that given ALL of his speeches fall into that category, some pundits seem surprised when the next speech is rambling, unstructured, and not totally accurate. (and generally very similar to the last one)
But, he's not Kamala Harris!
The problem is, he said a lot of crazy sh*t during his campaign that he's acted on so you have to pay attention to his word slop. For many, they'd say he gave the game away with his ending, which is what we've all been secretly fearing for a while now. He's attempting to blur the line between protecting and defending the Constitution and protecting and defending him, so he'll expect them to ask how high when he asks them to jump to do his corrupt bidding. I'm sure of it.
Bear posted it above.
"Trump capped it all off by expressing his eagerness to use military force against Americans:"
"San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places. And we’re going to straighten them out one by one. And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room,” he told military leaders. “That’s a war, too. It’s a war from within. I told Pete we should use some of these cities as training grounds for our military.”
That is a bit chilling but, frankly, hard to credit. The Trumpistas have admittedly done a raft of dumb things, but trying to discern the opinions of senior military leaders from facial recognition "data" (if you can call it data), strikes me as wildly unreliable. Moreover, it looked to me like virtually all of the military leaders in the audience adopted pretty much the same expression: a flat and stoic look that frequently focused on their feet rather than on the speaker. This attempt strikes me as the equivalent of trying to determine battle strategy by "reading the auspices" (i.e., bird entrails).