A Post-9/11 Captain’s Take on Sec. Hegseth’s Address to Military Brass

Who knew demanding a fit military focused on winning wars could be so highly triggering?

In recent months, I’ve set a goal to take 10,000 or more steps per day. I left running behind when I hung up my uniform, and am in great physical shape 12 years after my departure. My vital signs are usually good, with the exception of my blood pressure. That usually borders on prehypertensive. The 10,000 steps per day have put it at damn near perfect levels. The only thing that gets it dialed up again, now that I don’t spend much time looking around X, is looking through Substack Notes and spotting the commentary of obvious grifters, who were out in full force yesterday after President Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth addressed senior military leaders, consisting of mostly generals and admirals. On short notice, they traveled in to Marine Corps Base Quantico to receive clear guidance as to which direction the armed forces will be following as the administration looks to revamp the culture from within.

Military cultural overhauls are nothing new. My father was an Army Lieutenant Colonel of Infantry with three tours in Vietnam whose service spanned from the days preceding the Vietnam War to nearly the end of the Cold War, ending with his retirement in 1988. He told me the 1970s were a terrible time for the military as it dealt with combat fatigue, rampant drug use in the ranks, and a weak Commander in Chief, Jimmy Carter. It is the duty of the Commander in Chief and his Secretary of Defense (now War) to ensure the readiness of the fighting force and clearly transmit their intent to those down the chain of command so it may be implemented.

Cue meltdowns from the usual suspects:

Rupar’s post simply quotes Hegseth, but the rest of his content from yesterday is of the “this can’t be who we are variety.” Walsh, on the other hand, is arguably the biggest con-man in politics, so desperate to fit in with the left’s dying and fraying coalition he brags about his former Tea Party credentials and, while claiming to still be a conservative, complains about anything the administration does, no matter how trivial. Hilariously, Walsh left deep blue Illinois for South Carolina just so he could turn into a Democrat while reaping the benefits of living in a red state.

My biggest issue with Walsh isn’t that he has a different opinion, it’s that he selectively ignores anything that would conflict with his grift aimed at blue hairs and Beltway Never-Trumpers. I have offered to send him examples of Democrat-placed “Make Assassinations Great Again” stickers going up on GOP campaign signs in Tucson, and it’s been nothing but crickets. Yet here Joe is, inciting panic in the left-wing base by informing them the military is preparing to fire on U.S. Citizens.

It doesn’t get any better when you bring in the opinions of those who served, like Adam Kinzinger:

That comment is tame for Kinzinger, who usually alleges treason and the fall of the Republic when his hawkish views are challenged or when Republicans fail to sufficiently act as the doormats they’ve been for most of the 21st century.

Color commentary aside, what should we think of Secretary Hegseth’s address yesterday? Commentators are going to be biased no matter which direction their opinions come from. Pro-Trump accounts will make sure it was the greatest speech ever, and Trump haters will signal doom, as Walsh continues to do every day. I suggest the most important opinions come from the bottom of both the officer and enlisted chains of command - Captains and below, Staff Sergeants and below. They are the cogs in the machine that must implement at the troop level exactly what policies are cooked up by the water cooler in the Pentagon.

Below, you will find my Captain-level opinion of Secretary Hegseth’s address, using excerpts from his transcript:

---

From this moment forward, the only mission of the newly restored Department of War is this: warfighting, preparing for war and preparing to win, unrelenting and uncompromising in that pursuit not because we want war, no one here wants war, but it’s because we love peace.

Music to my ears. The argument to have isn’t over whether the military should be fit to fight and train for winning wars, but rather, which cases are appropriate for the use of the United States military. Post-9/11 veterans overwhelmingly feel that their patriotism was harnessed to motivate them to serve in two unwinnable conflicts waged for reasons not advertised to the public. Despite opinions on foreign policy, nearly everyone who served in those conflicts knew the purpose of the military is to fight and win the nation’s wars. Period.

Toward the end of my time in uniform, the military was beginning to spend an overwhelming amount of time on sensitivity training and directing everyone’s attention to racial or gender discrimination. What the politicians in and out of uniform fail to grasp is that the military represents a perfect cross-section of America - all races, ideologies, and socioeconomic backgrounds from every corner of the country come together in one force. It is one of the least prejudiced groups of people you’ll find anywhere, because everyone realizes they may need to be dragged out of a firefight by the body armor by someone who looks or believes differently than they do.

Hegseth realizes the focus must be on readiness of the force, not on posturing, crafting polite sounding report cards, or making sure people feel warm and fuzzy about everyone in the formation. There were officers I liked in service who I am still friends with. There were also officers I didn’t like, and who didn’t like me, that I got along with for sake of unit success. Military professionals inherently know what they’re doing without the need for virtue signaling bureaucrats to get in the way.

---

America is the strongest, but we need to get stronger and quickly. The time is now and the cause is urgent. The moment requires restoring and refocusing our defense industrial base, our shipbuilding industry and onshoring all critical components. It requires, as President Trump has done, getting our allies and partners to step up and share the burden.

A stroke of brilliance from a man who is really settling in to the role. Few consider the economic impacts of military planning and strategy, but if we get rid of our blue-collar industries and manufacturing base, then who in the hell is going to make bombs, bullets, armor, ships, and aircraft? We were able to do this on our own in World War II. Additionally, the U.S. bore the economic brunt of the post-9/11 conflicts, and only recently has the President charged coalition partners to pay their fair share in terms of money and manpower. We aren’t the world’s police.

---

Our warfighters are entitled to be led by the best and most capable leaders. That is who we need you all to be. Even then, in combat, even if you do everything right, you may still lose people because the enemy always gets a vote. We have a sacred duty to ensure that our warriors are led by the most capable and qualified combat leaders. This is one thing you and I can control, and we owe it to the force to deliver.