Jump to content

Pete Hegseth-Sec Def Nominee


sqwakvfr

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, nattaya09 said:

Yeah...an inexperienced SecDef might do something stupid like letting a CCP spy balloon take a liesurely flight over the entire US collecting data before shooting it down over the ocean.....or by creating the worst recruitment crisis in years by trying to force DEI buIIshlt into an agency whose sole purpose is to kill and blow things up. Or even something really....really stupid, like overseeing a botched troop withdrawal that unnecessarily leaves 13 US troops dead and $$billions in functioning military hardware abandoned to terrorists.

Since you are clearly not up to speed on matters of intelligence or intelligence itself, I'll explain what an experienced SecDef might do if a CCP spy balloon took a leisurely flight over the entire US....

 

Such a SecDef would know that there is nothing such a balloon could gather that they couldn't get from a Google search. No harm done. The SecDef would also know that capturing such a balloon would reveal the capabilities of Chinese spy tech. Oh, and by monitoring the balloon during its path, the telemetry or how it might send any data to receiving stations, plus where those stations might be, would also be gained.

 

It appears the balloon was a rogue operation by an idiot general in the PLA, and his stupidity was the US' gain.

 

Now about the Afghanistan withdrawal.....Biden had to deal with a 20 year war with $hundreds of billions of equipment delivered over those two decades, and do it AFTER his predecessor had not only set the timetable for withdrawal, but had also released 5000 Taliban prisoners being held by the US and Afghanistan govt. Many of those prisoners now run the country, while others were battle-hardened jihadis. The withdrawal had to happen with those 5000 not only free, but angry and out for retribution, such as engaging in suicide bomb attacks.

 

Had Biden/Austin done what critics bark about---such as withdrawing 20 years of equipment, how many more soldiers would you have been willing to sacrifice for that? Do you think the Taliban would have just sat back and not taking pot shots at soldiers and contractors gathering and shipping gear back to the US?

 

The withdrawal involved not only US troops and contractors, but also Afghanis who had assisted the US throughout the 20 year war. I guess you would have abandoned them and let the Taliban slaughter all of them and their families.

 

If you had ever served in a war zone or in Afghanistan, you would know that it is impossible to defend against every type of attack. Troops are exposed simply because the mission requires it.

 

Remember the soldiers killed in Mali while 47 was 45? Whose fault was that?  Also, do you considerate it appropriate for a President, when speaking with the spouse of one of the dead, telling her to "get over it; he knew the risks"? How about the soldiers injured when Iran sent missiles to a base near Irbil in Iraq during 45's term, especially when he claimed 'no harm done', when in fact many were seriously injured? That attack was a response to 45's order to take out Gen Suleimani.

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sqwakvfr said:

Actually the CEO of a large Defense Contractor would have relevant experience to run the DOD.  A good chunk of the annual defense  budget ($800 Billion) is spent on contracts to the various defense contractors.  Awarding  of contracts is a big part of the business of the DOD.  The DOD is run like a business. Government does not make anything.  What they need is actually purchased from companies.  The extent of Hegseth's leadership experience is an army platoon leader.  At best he was in charge of 30 to 50 soldiers.  If confirmed he would lead an agency with close to 2 million military, civilian and contractors.   Scaling up be an understatement.  Yes, the DOD needs change but I doubt Hegseth is the right man for the job. But with the Republicans in charge of the senate he might get confirmed.  

Actually, the problem is that the DoD is NOT run like a business. There is little oversight and almost no accountability.  And nobody gets fired for debacles like the Afghanistan withdrawl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member





×
×
  • Create New...