Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention, the agency most responsible for our national security.

Generals are morons and don’t know what’s going on. Trump figured that out in term 1.

He’s right to choose a lower rank, and it’s a big FU to the Pentacon

That’s ok, that’s all that matters in the end. Sticking it to the other half

National Security affects everyone equally. I want someone who knows what they are doing up there for the safety of both democrats and republicans. Terrorists don’t care who you voted for, we are all Americans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get he wants to own the libs but can we not play around with national security? There isn’t a single republican general around to take this job?

Generals are perfumed princes. They are basically politicians. That’s it .

It's the Secretary of defense. If it's always a general or other top rank in that position, maybe it's important to have a skilled politician that also achieved a top rank in that role.

Well, I am a vet who would rather be led by the guy with a CIB. Period.

Literally, you are likely more qualified than this guy.

What’s your military experience?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s a MAJOR???? Are you kidding me? Is that correct? ZERO credibility for this position.

Can you help us out? Here major a lower rank?

Is Major a lower rank?

Last guy was a 4 star general. A major is qualified to get his coffee, schedule his travel, take him to the airport, and keep his calendar.

Are you military? Are you Infantry? Do you have an EIB and CIB? Did you deploy?

4 star generals have what’s called an “exec”, and they are majors and Lt Cols. But you know that, right?

If you knew anything about command, you’d know that credibility matters and a major in the guard has NONE with the JCS.

Ok, REMF. We get it, you see uniforms in DC and think you are some kind of expert.

CIB, game set match.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get he wants to own the libs but can we not play around with national security? There isn’t a single republican general around to take this job?

Generals are perfumed princes. They are basically politicians. That’s it .

It's the Secretary of defense. If it's always a general or other top rank in that position, maybe it's important to have a skilled politician that also achieved a top rank in that role.

Well, I am a vet who would rather be led by the guy with a CIB. Period.

Literally, you are likely more qualified than this guy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s a MAJOR???? Are you kidding me? Is that correct? ZERO credibility for this position.

Can you help us out? Here major a lower rank?

Is Major a lower rank?

Last guy was a 4 star general. A major is qualified to get his coffee, schedule his travel, take him to the airport, and keep his calendar.

Are you military? Are you Infantry? Do you have an EIB and CIB? Did you deploy?

4 star generals have what’s called an “exec”, and they are majors and Lt Cols. But you know that, right?

If you knew anything about command, you’d know that credibility matters and a major in the guard has NONE with the JCS.

Nobody gives a damn about 4 star generals.

Except their wives, the other 4 stars who hate them, and the syncophants (of which there are many) who kiss their asses so thoroughly that they never need to buy toilet paper.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention, the agency most responsible for our national security.

Generals are morons and don’t know what’s going on. Trump figured that out in term 1.

He’s right to choose a lower rank, and it’s a big FU to the Pentacon

That’s ok, that’s all that matters in the end. Sticking it to the other half

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention, the agency most responsible for our national security.

Generals are morons and don’t know what’s going on. Trump figured that out in term 1.

He’s right to choose a lower rank, and it’s a big FU to the Pentacon

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s a MAJOR???? Are you kidding me? Is that correct? ZERO credibility for this position.

Can you help us out? Here major a lower rank?

Is Major a lower rank?

Last guy was a 4 star general. A major is qualified to get his coffee, schedule his travel, take him to the airport, and keep his calendar.

Are you military? Are you Infantry? Do you have an EIB and CIB? Did you deploy?

4 star generals have what’s called an “exec”, and they are majors and Lt Cols. But you know that, right?

If you knew anything about command, you’d know that credibility matters and a major in the guard has NONE with the JCS.

Anonymous wrote:I am clearly not in the military; so most of the military clearly outranks him - how does that work? Does he automatically get a promotion? I thought the military had fairly strict protocol regarding hierarchy and manners - does a general still outrank him?

That’s not even close to true. The military is up or out. Major is still a high rank, it’s just that there are a number or ranks above it. The vast majority of the military are ranked lower than Major.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If its anything like Trump’s last term, this is just the first one in a long string of defense secretaries.

+1 he isn’t going to last long

It will end up being Flynn sometime next season.

Anonymous wrote:I am clearly not in the military; so most of the military clearly outranks him - how does that work? Does he automatically get a promotion? I thought the military had fairly strict protocol regarding hierarchy and manners - does a general still outrank him?

The SecDef is not a military ranked position. By law the person is to be a civilian. That said, given the complexity of the job, foreign affairs and politics we usually strive for someone with a well developed knowledge of all three who has proven themselves at high levels of leadership.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A MAJOR in the GUARD, this is a giant middle finger to the Pentagon.

Well deserved?

Hopefully 2 giant middle fingers right in their REMF faces.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get he wants to own the libs but can we not play around with national security? There isn’t a single republican general around to take this job?

Generals are perfumed princes. They are basically politicians. That’s it .

It's the Secretary of defense. If it's always a general or other top rank in that position, maybe it's important to have a skilled politician that also achieved a top rank in that role.

Why can't Trump find a high-ranking maga person for this role instead of a Fox News personality?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get he wants to own the libs but can we not play around with national security? There isn’t a single republican general around to take this job?

Generals are perfumed princes. They are basically politicians. That’s it .

It's the Secretary of defense. If it's always a general or other top rank in that position, maybe it's important to have a skilled politician that also achieved a top rank in that role.

Well, I am a vet who would rather be led by the guy with a CIB. Period.

Anonymous wrote:A MAJOR in the GUARD, this is a giant middle finger to the Pentagon.

Well deserved?