A US military veteran has issued a blunt warning: the “warrior ethos” championed by Donald Trump and his allies may be dangerously misguided. As tensions rise following Trump’s war with Iran, critics say the rhetoric coming from the White House risks undermining what truly makes the American military effective.

Historian and former serviceman Myke Cole argues that the real strength of the US Armed Forces lies not in aggression or bravado — but in restraint, discipline and professionalism. His intervention comes as Trump and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth continue to push a campaign to purge what they describe as “wokeness” from the military.

Since returning to power, Trump has backed a more hard-line image of military strength. Hegseth has repeatedly promoted the idea of a “warrior ethos,” presenting it as the opposite of a so-called “woke” armed force. But Cole says this framing fundamentally misunderstands military culture. He insists the true “warrior ethos” is grounded in calm judgment and careful use of force.

“Humble, quiet, just doing a job — quiet professionals understand that violence is risky and costly, and use it only as a last resort,” Cole wrote. He added that bragging, threats and posturing are actively discouraged within military ranks.

According to Cole, this mindset is not accidental. It is designed to filter out reckless individuals and maintain discipline across the force. He says the culture helps ensure only those capable of handling extreme responsibility remain in service. It also underpins morale and cohesion — factors he describes as essential to operational success.

Cole warns that abandoning this tradition could have serious consequences. He claims current leadership is discarding the very principles that have long made the US military effective.

“Voices from across the military tout humble, dignified professionalism as essential to morale,” he wrote. He added that confidence within the ranks depends heavily on leadership reflecting those values.

Instead, Cole argues, a different tone is emerging from the top. He says the Trump administration has replaced the “quiet professional” model with what he calls a more aggressive and confrontational approach.

“Our armed forces are now helmed by a secretary of defense whose ideology has directly framed American military power in the term of a ‘crusade,’” Cole warned.

He pointed to Hegseth’s personal symbolism, including a Jerusalem cross tattoo and a Latin phrase reading “Deus Vult” — both historically linked to the Crusades. Cole said such imagery has no place in modern military leadership.

He also highlighted Trump’s own language as a cause for concern. The president has previously threatened to “bomb them into the Stone Ages,” remarks Cole suggests could imply targeting civilian infrastructure. Such actions, he warned, could potentially be interpreted as violations of international law.

The criticism does not stop there. Cole also pointed to Trump’s controversial suggestion of renaming the Department of Defense as the “Department of War.” He described the move as part of a broader shift toward aggressive posturing.

Comments from Hegseth have also drawn scrutiny. Cole singled out the defence secretary’s phrase “maximum lethality, not tepid legality” as an example of troubling rhetoric. For Cole, the issue is not just language — but what it signals about priorities and decision-making at the highest levels.

What MAGA gets painfully wrong about US military strength

Both Trump and Tiny Petie are the opposite of warriors. They are both cowardly pigs raining down terror upon women and children. King Henry V was a warrior, leading his troops out into battle. The Goomba just sits behind a big old desk, collecting billions in corrupt money, and pretends that he's patriotic and brave. Show us some sacrifice, you big lump of crap, by sending your sons onto the front lines.

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Show us some sacrifice, you big lump of crap, by sending your sons onto the front lines.

He cannot do that as they need to stay at home with daddy and get the latest stock market leaks to increase their millions

1 hour ago, scottiejohn said:

He cannot do that as they need to stay at home with daddy and get the latest stock market leaks to increase their millions

Not only that but they are buying drone companies that are guaranteed Pentagon contracts, the family is allowed to engage in crypto assets in their own name, and countless other acts of corruption that any other president would be impeached for. Without question Trump is the most corrupt president in history, likely by 100 fold. He is a pig.

First of all many seem to pretend not being aware, that it is Israel that very craftily drew in America into their war in the Gulf.

13 minutes ago, SingAPorn said:

First of all many seem to pretend not being aware, that it is Israel that very craftily drew in America into their war in the Gulf.

They led an idiot in.

He was warned apparently that the Iranians might close the Strait of Hormuz, he was warned Iran might attack the Gulf States.

But the fool went blithely ahead.

If he has any decency he would resign but of course he doesn't.

Impeach him Americans.

Big mistake of America to bring in Pakistan to attempt a reopening of the Strait.

Switzerland would have been a better choice such as Geneva that has large experience on internation historic summits. If Trump wanted to go down on history, Geneva would have been a far better place to be connected with Trump then Pakistan,

Also not to forget that it is Switzerland that has been representing the USA in Iran for the last 40 or 50 years.

Let's see if Trump is smart enough to understand ? or not ?

29 minutes ago, SingAPorn said:

Big mistake of America to bring in Pakistan to attempt a reopening of the Strait.

Switzerland would have been a better choice such as Geneva that has large experience on internation historic summits. If Trump wanted to go down on history, Geneva would have been a far better place to be connected with Trump then Pakistan,

Also not to forget that it is Switzerland that has been representing the USA in Iran for the last 40 or 50 years.

Let's see if Trump is smart enough to understand ? or not ?

Well, IMHO Trump and smart are not even close! unless one uses the phrase he lacks any smarts except if there is a corrupt way to make some more money!

11 hours ago, SingAPorn said:

First of all many seem to pretend not being aware, that it is Israel that very craftily drew in America into their war in the Gulf.

A simplistic opinion motivated by your own bias against Israel. It ignores the influence of the Gulf Arab nations, particularly Saudi Arabia and UAE who have been urging direct action against Iran for years. Saudi Arabia has been open about its intent to acquire nuclear arms if Iran is allowed to continue with its nuclear weapons development.

7 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

The Iranians were going to close the strait at some point because they have been trying to impose tolls on international shipping for years.

That is a literal lie. Over the years, Iran might have waxed and waned about closing the Straits, largely as a result of Saddam Hussein invading them, using Arab money and Western munitions. But the idea of monetizing that policy is an entirely 2026 idea.

First it was nukes. Then ‘regional stability.’ Then ‘supporting democratic forces inside Iran.’ Now it’s ‘they were going to shut Hormuz and charge tolls anyway.’

The justification doesn’t just shift — it mutates every time the last one falls apart.

If this was really about democracy, why are we now talking about shipping lanes? If Hormuz was the real threat, why did that only become the excuse after it was closed?

That’s not strategy. That’s retrofitting a rationale to a war that already happened.

I grant you, you are one of the more subtle of the MAGA acolytes here, but you are still MAGA.

22 hours ago, bannork said:

Historian and former serviceman Myke Cole argues that the real strength of the US Armed Forces lies not in aggression or bravado — but in restraint, discipline and professionalism.

The real strength of the US Armed Forces lies in the lie that they are a force of good in the world. They are not - they are a force of colonial power projection and unending chaos in my humble opinion.

If you are posting what you believe to be factual statement, provide sources and attributions. Unsourced statements posing as facts will be removed.

7 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

A simplistic opinion motivated by your own bias against Israel. It ignores the influence of the Gulf Arab nations, particularly Saudi Arabia and UAE who have been urging direct action against Iran for years. Saudi Arabia has been open about its intent to acquire nuclear arms if Iran is allowed to continue with its nuclear weapons development.

Your "opinion" is also simplistic. Prior to 2025, the Gulf States wanted negotiation with Iran, but lets not forget, they funded Iraq's invasion of Iran.

In 1975, the Shah humiliated the Arab world, through the Algiers Agreement, where Iraq conceded part of th Shatt Al Arab waterway. In 1979, the Shah, while out of the country, was overthrown, and Iraq set about purging its military of Royalists. The Arabs took advantage of this chaos by launching an invasion, which quickly went tits up, evidenced by Saddam resorting to missile attacks on cities and the deployment of chemical munitions.

The Gulf Arabs largely funded this war; Saudi Arabia gave Saddam $25 billion. The first Gulf War arose because Kuwait decided to call its chips in, and started extracting oil from Iraqi fields. The Iraqis retorted "we saved your skin", war of words, with Kuwait ultimately making a poor choice.

Since then, the Gulf states mostly followed a policy of containment, not confrontation. The the Saudis and Emiratees started sponsoring proxy wars all over the place. Gulf Arab money funded ISIS, I suspect partly because of philosophical sympathy (don't forget, the Saudi government thinks its perfectly fine to chop up journalists, like that was a civilized policy), partly because they, like in 1979, wanted to play at proxy wars (the Gulf states were part of the coalition that fought Israel in 1973, but notably didn't really contribute any forces, so I guess that was a case of shed loads of cash, and getting some other poor bugger to do the dying for them in an effective proxy war against Israel. These countries for years funded the PLO, when it was still hijacking airlines and cruise ships). That extended more recently, in Yemen, which for 70 years, has been the playground for proxy wars. Gulf Arab money appeared in Libya, post Gaddafi, as they tried to back one faction or the other.

Peak proxy war was in 2015-2019, when Saudi Arabia became more brqzenly involved in Yemen, along with the UAE. That ended in 2019, when Iran hit Abqaiq. Suddenly Saudi Arabia was all for talks. From 2020-2023, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been pursuing a policy of de-escalation, brokered by China. Its only since Trump Part 2, they have changed their stance, just like 1973, 1979, 1990, 2003. Thee countries are not honest borkers. They are despotic states, with motivations quite unlike Western nations.

Western democracies, even Trump, have, to some extent, the interests of their people at heart, the electorate. Not the Arab states. They are all despots. They rule through a combination of fear (all have them have finger nail pulling, testicle burning, water boarding secret police) and bribery. They fear Iran not because Iran will take over those states (there is an 800 year reason why that wouldn't), but they fear that Iran will inspire a grassroots opposition in their countries. And being a political opponant in Saudi Arabia is no fun; they chop off heads, in market squares.

On the one hand, they are cowards when it comes down to it, so I wouldn't characterised Saudi Arabia and the UAE as always being hawkish. And what if they are? I'd say <deleted> 'em. They are part of the problem. If the world (the West) acts against Iran, its because its the interests of the West, not because its what the House of Saud wants us to do.

And for all your characterisation as Saudi Arabia as beating the drums to war the loudest, it was Saudi Arabia, predictably, who were the first, within 48 hours, of calling for the Americans to end the blockade and do a deal. They're cowards.

Saudi Arabia will get nukes, whether or not Iran gets them. They have their own reactors, own source of Uranium, and also blocking IAEA inspections. The Saud's primacy in the Muslim world is as guardians of Mecca. They still fancy having Jerusalem.

23 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

That is a literal lie. Over the years, Iran might have waxed and waned about closing the Straits, largely as a result of Saddam Hussein invading them, using Arab money and Western munitions. But the idea of monetizing that policy is an entirely 2026 idea.

First it was nukes. Then ‘regional stability.’ Then ‘supporting democratic forces inside Iran.’ Now it’s ‘they were going to shut Hormuz and charge tolls anyway.’

The justification doesn’t just shift — it mutates every time the last one falls apart.

If this was really about democracy, why are we now talking about shipping lanes? If Hormuz was the real threat, why did that only become the excuse after it was closed?

That’s not strategy. That’s retrofitting a rationale to a war that already happened.

I grant you, you are one of the more subtle of the MAGA acolytes here, but you are still MAGA.

You are inconsistent in your dismissal of the Iranian threats as a lie. First you admit that iran had made threats over the years to close the Strait of Hormuz, then you deny the Iranian attempts at extortion. Yes, an attempt at formal tolls are new in respect to their formality. That's because Iran now has the means to collect the tolls. Cryptocurrency makes it easy. Ever hear of the tanker wars of 1981-1988? Iraq was allegedly collecting protection money from cargo vessels in order that they not be attacked. It wasn't particularly successful, but the Iranians tried. However, the more current evidence is that the Houthis, the Iranian proxy were charging safe passage fees starting in 2024. The UN offered a conservative estimate that $180 million of fees/annum were collected. This was in effect a trial run for the Iranians.

It is astounding that you are pulling out all stops to support Iran. Labeling me MAGA doesn't change what iran had been planning.

22 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Your "opinion" is also simplistic. Prior to 2025, the Gulf States wanted negotiation with Iran, but lets not forget, they funded Iraq's invasion of Iran.

In 1975, the Shah humiliated the Arab world, through the Algiers Agreement, where Iraq conceded part of th Shatt Al Arab waterway. In 1979, the Shah, while out of the country, was overthrown, and Iraq set about purging its military of Royalists. The Arabs took advantage of this chaos by launching an invasion, which quickly went tits up, evidenced by Saddam resorting to missile attacks on cities and the deployment of chemical munitions.

The Gulf Arabs largely funded this war; Saudi Arabia gave Saddam $25 billion. The first Gulf War arose because Kuwait decided to call its chips in, and started extracting oil from Iraqi fields. The Iraqis retorted "we saved your skin", war of words, with Kuwait ultimately making a poor choice.

Since then, the Gulf states mostly followed a policy of containment, not confrontation. The the Saudis and Emiratees started sponsoring proxy wars all over the place. Gulf Arab money funded ISIS, I suspect partly because of philosophical sympathy (don't forget, the Saudi government thinks its perfectly fine to chop up journalists, like that was a civilized policy), partly because they, like in 1979, wanted to play at proxy wars (the Gulf states were part of the coalition that fought Israel in 1973, but notably didn't really contribute any forces, so I guess that was a case of shed loads of cash, and getting some other poor bugger to do the dying for them in an effective proxy war against Israel. These countries for years funded the PLO, when it was still hijacking airlines and cruise ships). That extended more recently, in Yemen, which for 70 years, has been the playground for proxy wars. Gulf Arab money appeared in Libya, post Gaddafi, as they tried to back one faction or the other.

Peak proxy war was in 2015-2019, when Saudi Arabia became more brqzenly involved in Yemen, along with the UAE. That ended in 2019, when Iran hit Abqaiq. Suddenly Saudi Arabia was all for talks. From 2020-2023, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been pursuing a policy of de-escalation, brokered by China. Its only since Trump Part 2, they have changed their stance, just like 1973, 1979, 1990, 2003. Thee countries are not honest borkers. They are despotic states, with motivations quite unlike Western nations.

Western democracies, even Trump, have, to some extent, the interests of their people at heart, the electorate. Not the Arab states. They are all despots. They rule through a combination of fear (all have them have finger nail pulling, testicle burning, water boarding secret police) and bribery. They fear Iran not because Iran will take over those states (there is an 800 year reason why that wouldn't), but they fear that Iran will inspire a grassroots opposition in their countries. And being a political opponant in Saudi Arabia is no fun; they chop off heads, in market squares.

On the one hand, they are cowards when it comes down to it, so I wouldn't characterised Saudi Arabia and the UAE as always being hawkish. And what if they are? I'd say <deleted> 'em. They are part of the problem. If the world (the West) acts against Iran, its because its the interests of the West, not because its what the House of Saud wants us to do.

And for all your characterisation as Saudi Arabia as beating the drums to war the loudest, it was Saudi Arabia, predictably, who were the first, within 48 hours, of calling for the Americans to end the blockade and do a deal. They're cowards.

Saudi Arabia will get nukes, whether or not Iran gets them. They have their own reactors, own source of Uranium, and also blocking IAEA inspections. The Saud's primacy in the Muslim world is as guardians of Mecca. They still fancy having Jerusalem.

Your dismissal of the Saudis as cowards is typical of the European colonial mindset. The Saudis were able to throw out the Ottoman Empire. It was the British who begged Sharif Hussein bin Ali, and his sons, Faisal and Abdullah, to undertake a revolt against Turks. The brave and tough Arab militia captured the Port of Aqaba and liberated Damascus, not the British nor the French. The Saudis are a cultured and educated people. You better not let the forum arab fetishists see what you wrote. They will be most upset.

23 hours ago, connda said:

The real strength of the US Armed Forces lies in the lie that they are a force of good in the world. They are not - they are a force of colonial power projection and unending chaos in my humble opinion.

You deal with your own colonial legacy before you start lecturing others.

19 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

You deal with your own colonial legacy before you start lecturing others.

It is too late to correct legacy situations, but it is NOT too late to stop TRUMP's idiotic current actions!

38 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Your dismissal of the Saudis as cowards is typical of the European colonial mindset. The Saudis were able to throw out the Ottoman Empire. It was the British who begged Sharif Hussein bin Ali, and his sons, Faisal and Abdullah, to undertake a revolt against Turks. The brave and tough Arab militia captured the Port of Aqaba and liberated Damascus, not the British nor the French. The Saudis are a cultured and educated people. You better not let the forum arab fetishists see what you wrote. They will be most upset.

The Australian Light Horse captured Damascus, supported by Arab irregulars subsequently.

The Saudis are so cultured they chop up journalists they don't like, and have beheaded over 300 people a year in 2024 and 2025. They are so educated they need foreign contractors to run all their modern weapons systems. 77% of their workforce are foreign nationals.

When are you going to admit Trump made a massive miscalculation, with ramifications for economies all round the globe? A war launched without Congress approval, and without consulting anyone, except the instigator Israel.

4 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Your dismissal of the Saudis as cowards is typical of the European colonial mindset. The Saudis were able to throw out the Ottoman Empire. It was the British who begged Sharif Hussein bin Ali, and his sons, Faisal and Abdullah, to undertake a revolt against Turks. The brave and tough Arab militia captured the Port of Aqaba and liberated Damascus, not the British nor the French. The Saudis are a cultured and educated people. You better not let the forum arab fetishists see what you wrote. They will be most upset.

Bet you worked for the arabs before you retired. Your mindset is typical of an immigrant into North America, a cast off, a reject from the old world

You celebrate people who behead people in the street, marry off children., eat with their hands. You deny MAGA, but you are one.

Hegseth quoting Pulp Fiction , written by Quentin Tarantino. Hilarious and stupid.

12 minutes ago, bannork said:

Hegseth quoting Pulp Fiction , written by Quentin Tarantino. Hilarious and stupid.

And Trump declared a truce between Israel and Lebanon to start at 5 pm. But Israel hadn't voted on it yet. What a bunch of winners in this cabinet.

On 4/14/2026 at 4:12 PM, spidermike007 said:

Both Trump and Tiny Petie are the opposite of warriors. They are both cowardly pigs raining down terror upon women and children. King Henry V was a warrior, leading his troops out into battle. The Goomba just sits behind a big old desk, collecting billions in corrupt money, and pretends that he's patriotic and brave. Show us some sacrifice, you big lump of crap, by sending your sons onto the front lines.

I heard they inherited his bone spurs...

22 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Bet you worked for the arabs before you retired. Your mindset is typical of an immigrant into North America, a cast off, a reject from the old world

You celebrate people who behead people in the street, marry off children., eat with their hands. You deny MAGA, but you are one.

Ya ever eat fried chicken, or watermelon?

On 4/15/2026 at 2:59 PM, Roadsternut said:

Your "opinion" is also simplistic. Prior to 2025, the Gulf States wanted negotiation with Iran, but lets not forget, they funded Iraq's invasion of Iran.

In 1975, the Shah humiliated the Arab world, through the Algiers Agreement, where Iraq conceded part of th Shatt Al Arab waterway. In 1979, the Shah, while out of the country, was overthrown, and Iraq set about purging its military of Royalists. The Arabs took advantage of this chaos by launching an invasion, which quickly went tits up, evidenced by Saddam resorting to missile attacks on cities and the deployment of chemical munitions.

The Gulf Arabs largely funded this war; Saudi Arabia gave Saddam $25 billion. The first Gulf War arose because Kuwait decided to call its chips in, and started extracting oil from Iraqi fields. The Iraqis retorted "we saved your skin", war of words, with Kuwait ultimately making a poor choice.

Since then, the Gulf states mostly followed a policy of containment, not confrontation. The the Saudis and Emiratees started sponsoring proxy wars all over the place. Gulf Arab money funded ISIS, I suspect partly because of philosophical sympathy (don't forget, the Saudi government thinks its perfectly fine to chop up journalists, like that was a civilized policy), partly because they, like in 1979, wanted to play at proxy wars (the Gulf states were part of the coalition that fought Israel in 1973, but notably didn't really contribute any forces, so I guess that was a case of shed loads of cash, and getting some other poor bugger to do the dying for them in an effective proxy war against Israel. These countries for years funded the PLO, when it was still hijacking airlines and cruise ships). That extended more recently, in Yemen, which for 70 years, has been the playground for proxy wars. Gulf Arab money appeared in Libya, post Gaddafi, as they tried to back one faction or the other.

Peak proxy war was in 2015-2019, when Saudi Arabia became more brqzenly involved in Yemen, along with the UAE. That ended in 2019, when Iran hit Abqaiq. Suddenly Saudi Arabia was all for talks. From 2020-2023, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been pursuing a policy of de-escalation, brokered by China. Its only since Trump Part 2, they have changed their stance, just like 1973, 1979, 1990, 2003. Thee countries are not honest borkers. They are despotic states, with motivations quite unlike Western nations.

Western democracies, even Trump, have, to some extent, the interests of their people at heart, the electorate. Not the Arab states. They are all despots. They rule through a combination of fear (all have them have finger nail pulling, testicle burning, water boarding secret police) and bribery. They fear Iran not because Iran will take over those states (there is an 800 year reason why that wouldn't), but they fear that Iran will inspire a grassroots opposition in their countries. And being a political opponant in Saudi Arabia is no fun; they chop off heads, in market squares.

On the one hand, they are cowards when it comes down to it, so I wouldn't characterised Saudi Arabia and the UAE as always being hawkish. And what if they are? I'd say <deleted> 'em. They are part of the problem. If the world (the West) acts against Iran, its because its the interests of the West, not because its what the House of Saud wants us to do.

And for all your characterisation as Saudi Arabia as beating the drums to war the loudest, it was Saudi Arabia, predictably, who were the first, within 48 hours, of calling for the Americans to end the blockade and do a deal. They're cowards.

Saudi Arabia will get nukes, whether or not Iran gets them. They have their own reactors, own source of Uranium, and also blocking IAEA inspections. The Saud's primacy in the Muslim world is as guardians of Mecca. They still fancy having Jerusalem.

When is Trump next going to leave the country? We can hope!

On 4/14/2026 at 7:12 PM, SingAPorn said:

First of all many seem to pretend not being aware, that it is Israel that very craftily drew in America into their war in the Gulf.

This is so obvious.

How could any man, woman, or child not be aware this late in the game?

1 hour ago, GammaGlobulin said:

This is so obvious.

How could any man, woman, or child not be aware this late in the game?

..politcs...