Post New

The Silence of the Generals

Here’s the thing, and you know it in your bones: that speech was insane. Not “politician riffing” insane. Not “grandpa got a little too stoked on Adderall” insane.

It was the kind of rambling, aggrieved, slack-jawed performance you get when a man has fused his ego to a teleprompter and still can’t find the plot. Donald Trump shuffled out, tried to grunt his way through a “speech” that was really just a slurry of “Sir” stories, self-fellation, and absurd lies… and then inevitably fell back into the only narrative he’s truly capable of sustaining: grievance, fantasy, and the endless autobiographical fan fiction where he alone is hero, martyr, and field marshal.

And the room knew it.

This wasn’t the county GOP Lincoln Dinner; this was a forced assembly of America’s senior military leadership, men and women who manage more complexity before breakfast than Trump, Pete Hegseth, and their entire MAGA cosplay corps could comprehend in a lifetime.

They lead in real danger, in real time, in real space, against real adversaries. They run multivariate operations across the globe that would leave the weekend cable-host-turned-pretend-Patton drooling into his third morning cocktail. Instead, they had to sit for two hours and watch Hegseth try to swing his rhetorical broadsword before Trump wandered onstage and word-vomited all over the carpet.

The silence was deafening. The smatterings of polite applause? Mercy claps from Hegseth and Trump’s staffers. You could feel the oxygen getting sucked out of the room as the Commander-in-Chief proved what all of the Flag officers in the room knew already: he is utterly unqualifed, mentally unfit, and below the standard of leadership they’d expect from a green 2nd LT.

Let’s start with Pete. His speech was the cinematic trailer for an ’80s straight-to-VHS war flick: sweaty machismo, fantasy heroics, and the intellectual depth of a shot glass. His theory of the military: fewer adults, more door-kickers; less infrastructure, more chest-thumping. More worries about haircuts and beards than about military personnel and their missions.

In reality, the tooth only bites because the tail is vast, disciplined, and maddeningly detailed. For every SEAL who breaches a door, there’s an orchestra behind him: intel, logistics, medical, legal, comms, training cycles, family services, and a bureaucracy that—yes—can be trimmed, but cannot be wished away without amputating capability.

Hegseth wants to turn basic training into a contact sport and calls that readiness. It’s juvenile. It’s performative. And his little homily about drill sergeants “putting hands on” recruits was…let’s call it awkwardly eager. Warfighting isn’t a fetish club. It’s a trade that requires discipline, law, and the boring, blessed grind of preparation.

He’s a dangerous clown…but still a clown. The danger lies in the job title and the proximity to a president who seeks loyalists, not leaders; performers, not professionals.

Trump’s performance was pure Trump: the greatest hits album no one asked for. Patton, MacArthur, Bradley, names he can remember because he saw them in movie portrayals or History Channel docs. He knows only a wax museum of heroes invoked by a man who “learned” naval warfare from Victory at Sea reruns.

For younger readers: think Chauncey Gardiner from Being There. “I like television.” That’s your Commander-in-Chief’s historical method.

He droned through the vendettas: Biden, “the woke left,” Democrats, governors, cities he hates, the perennial “enemy within.” He painted Portland and Chicago as war zones worse than Afghanistan.

Sure, Don.

Let’s see you walk ten blocks in Kabul and ten blocks in Chicago and we’ll compare notes. The man is obsessed with proving that America is weak and at war with itself, then insisting only he can save it.

He sees the military not as an institution bound by law and tradition but as a personal guard to be pointed inward at domestic political foes. He has said the quiet part out loud so many times it’s deafening.

Here’s what matters: every foreign adversary watched that speech and laughed. If you’re Xi Jinping, you saw an unserious man, a Cabinet of courtiers, and a military leadership forced to watch the king lurch around the throne room, muttering to ghosts. You saw a country’s military leadership deeply divided…and the divider-in-chief gloating about it.

The lack of real applause wasn’t a production glitch; it was a temperature check. Those were not roaring ovations. For Trump, a man who needs crowds like a shark needs blood, that quiet had to sting. For Hegseth, it had to land like a brick. The fantasy of “I summoned the warfighters and they all swooned” died right there, under the fluorescents of that auditorium at Quantico.

Trump dipped back to the prompter at times, and you could hear the speechwriter’s syntax trying to herd the cats. Those brief islands of coherence only made the rest of the glossolalia more obvious. He is not all there.

And yes, I know the screaming match this invites. Spare me. We’re beyond “he’s just riffing.” You could see the diminished bandwidth, the greatest-hits autopilot, the repetition that comforts a failing narrator. The man who once ran rings around the media with shamelessness alone now struggles to keep his story straight for five minutes.

He still holds the title. He still holds the levers. That’s the bad news.

There is a bedrock in American civil-military life: the military is apolitical, bound by law, and obligated to refuse illegal orders.

That’s not a “norm.”

That’s not “ guidelines.”

That’s the Constitution. Presidents ask; the law decides. If the President says, “Nuke Buffalo,” the legal machinery isn’t supposed to say, “Let’s talk targeting options.” It’s supposed to say, “No.”

Trump’s entire project is to blur that line, to make the uniform a loyalty test, the chain of command a personal chain. He wants a fascist military: not jackboots and banners (though he wouldn’t mind the banners), but a force that treats the president’s domestic enemies as the nation’s enemies. When he says “the enemy within,” read your 1930s German history. The slippery slope here is greased with words like that.

Could he succeed? Not today.

The upper echelons, including the four-star and most three-star generals, grew up in a culture older than Trumpism. They understand the law. They understand the tradition.

But Trump and Hegseth aren’t targeting the top alone. They’re cultivating a generation, brigadiers and below, who’ve marinated in MAGA’s authoritarian aesthetics and might mistake obedience for patriotism.

The test isn’t theoretical.

He will ask for illegal things. He will push the boundaries. He will demand “full force” against Portland, or Detroit, or whichever city he’s hate-watching that week. Airstrikes? Drones? Don’t laugh. He won’t use the words. He’ll use the vibe. He’ll seek to make the unimaginable administratively inevitable.

The question after today is simple: how many in that room looked left and right and wondered, “Who follows the illegal order?”

Trump doesn’t understand strategy, acquisition, alliances, or the grotesque arithmetic of logistics.

He thinks you can resurrect battleships because they looked cool in a documentary. He imagines that cruelty is a substitute for capability; that America only loses when we fail to be mean enough.

It’s Colonel Kurtz cosplay: the horror, the horror, as a political program. This is the country that hammered Nazi Germany to dust, firebombed Tokyo, and used nuclear weapons twice; cruelty is not our missing ingredient. What makes us formidable is not theatrical violence; it’s the sober alignment of law, power, logistics, and purpose.

Without that, you don’t get “lethality.” You get body counts without victory.

Dragging every senior flag officer into a ballroom to feed the President’s fragile ego and Hegseth’s cable-news brand isn’t just dumb; it’s expensive, operationally disruptive, and corrosive to the very culture that keeps our warfighters lethal and lawful. It says, “The point of all this is me.” It says, “Institutions exist to flatter the leader.” That’s Putinism, not patriotism.

Trump has always needed an internal war. The wall never got built, but the fortress in his head is tall and wide, and it requires a constant siege to justify itself. The “enemy within” line isn’t accidental. It’s the thesis. So are the stories “Sir Stories” where unnamed generals cry, where battlefield legends nod approvingly at his genius, where the tough men of history whisper, “At last…a real leader.”

They’re fiction, as you know.

The tragedy is that the spectacle is the point. The White House is now a performance venue dedicated to keeping one man’s self-image upright. That’s how you get this fiasco: no State Department sanity check, no National Security Council scrub, no sense that maybe, just maybe, when you address the entire senior leadership of the American military, you should…perhaps…prepare something worthy of the moment.

Instead, we got the usual rambling trash-talk with the chilling subtext: “Obey.”

There’s a sliver of hope in that silence.

Power hates quiet. Cults need chanting, cheering, the crowd hoarse and eager. Trump didn’t get his roar. He didn’t get the mass ritual of allegiance he wanted. That matters.

Stephen Schmidt

Damn, that was well written. Long, but necessary.

BTW, what's the source for this? I see Stephen Schmidt, but I'm finding it at Rick Wilson's https://therickwilson.substack.com/p/the-friday-br...

Though I don't have access and can't read to the end where he might attribute it to Stephen Schmidt.

Here's the link to the article.
https://therickwilson.substack.com/p/the-friday-br...

I don't think Stephen Schmidt had anything to do with it. The byline is Rick Wilson.

g0-

My apologies. It WAS Rick Wilson. My bad.

Say what you like about Hegseth, he did actually serve. His Bronze Stars are participation medals for paper shuffling, but, apparently, the vehicle he was riding in was hit by a dud RPG on one occasion. So, he is more qualified that Stay Puft.

Steve....HBTT

So, he is more qualified that Stay Puft.

Like Chauncey, or perhaps Forrest Gump, he happened to be in the right place at the right time to be able to claim “combat experience”.

But is that more combat experience than Trump has?

After all, avoiding the ravages of VD was his own “personal Vietnam”. And avoiding the ravages of VD was a deadlier battle than avoiding the ravages of the VC.

At least that was the testimony of one of “his” imaginary generals.

Say what you like about Hegseth, he did actually serve.

I’m quite sure that the overwhelming majority of U.S. soldiers serve with honor and with loyalty to our country and Constitution.

However, that in no way, shape, or form qualifies them to run the Department of Defense.

But is that more combat experience than Trump has?

Sarcasm recognized.

I am looking at overall experience with how the military works, and, yes, he did get shot at. When he volunteered for infantry duty in Iraq, as far as I know, he was not guaranteed a paper shuffling job.

As offered before, there were parts of what he said that I can agree with, like PQ standards. The life of everyone in a squad depends on the ability of everyone else in the squad. No matter how brave and determined someone is, if they are too undersize or understrength, they can't do the job as well as others, and becomes a drag on the squad. It isn't just in a rifle squad either. Things can suddenly go wrong on a ship, like hitting a mine, and you need to be able to help an injured shipmate out of a flooding compartment.

Stay Puft is an entirely different conversation.

Steve....HBTT

However, that in no way, shape, or form qualifies them to run the Department of Defense.

Dick Cheney, SecDef from 89-93 was a draft evader, said he had more important things to do. He worked the student draft deferment as long as he could. Then he got married, because they didn't draft married men. When they started drafting married men, he had a kid, because they didn't draft married men who had dependent children.

Besides, as is evident from the other appointments of this regime, Hegseth is willing and eager to push the regime's agenda.

Steve...HBTT

avoiding the ravages of VD was his own “personal Vietnam”

VD won that war over and over again. We have been seeing the results for decades.

"No matter how brave and determined someone is, if they are too undersize or understrength, they can't do the job as well as others, and becomes a drag on the squad."

lol, I know some female cross country ski racers that I'd put my money on, in absolutely any type of physical contest with anybody that posts on this board.
And in the 20-35 age bracket, I know of female XC skiers on the US National team that could beat the crap out of most all of the military men in their age bracket ( I didn't say all ) in strength and endurance tests. I've watched videos of women like Jessie Diggans working out, they are doin pullups with big-ole metal plates strapped to their belt, because regular pullups are too easy for them. Ever do any pullups ? They will test every part of your body/core strength.

I've watched vid's of these same women do uphill sprint repeats on seriously steep
terrain in New Hampshire and Vermont. I'd luv to see the big ole male weightlifter in the
same age group try matching up with them on those lung busters. Odds are very high that the men would tap out. These women ( and the men on the US National team ) go on 20+ mile
runs in the mountains, in very steep and unrelenting terrain.

I see women in the xc ski races I do, probably early 30's or late 20's, that look to be about 160 lbs, that are really strong looking. I would not want to get in an altercation with them, they would be the furthest thing from being a pushover. Maybe women like these
would have a hard time doing a fireman's carry of a 230 pound male in a combat zone, but plenty of males would have a problem with that as well.

I would not discount all women from doing physical tasks. Things have changed since we
were young, and girls were brainwashed with the idea that it's not feminine to be strong.
Not saying all women are up to the task, but I'd bet that all men aren't, either.

I wonder if there was something that Hegseth and Trump overlooked in this gathering of our highest military officers.

By bringing them together, it gave them the opportunity to speak with each other face to face outside of the meeting room. Same for their staff personnel who made the trip.

They could talk off the record and privately, with no record of those conversations. They could trade notes on the event and do a bit of war gaming of various scenarios that won’t be in the more formalized training.

Things like: what orders would you consider to be illegal and refuse? How would you refuse? Would you resign or identify the order as illegal and remain in your post? Who in your staff and direct reports might follow an illegal order? What communications channels can we use? Can we trade some code words or phrases?

This could easily be an event that strengthens the senior military leadership’s resolve to follow the law and not civilian leadership when illegal orders come down.

—Peter <== possibly engaging in a little looking through rose colored glasses.

By bringing them together, it gave them the opportunity to speak with each other face to face outside of the meeting room. Same for their staff personnel who made the trip.


Necessary conversations.

lol, I know some female cross country ski racers that I'd put my money on, in absolutely any type of physical contest with anybody that posts on this board.

If they can perform, that's fine. What Hegseth was saying was that everyone has to be PQ, by the same male standard. No fatties. No weaklings. No "short tee" for women.

The policy he stated was much more blatant wrt "DEI". In practice, every officer who approves a promotion for anyone other than a white man, can expect to be called in by his superior to justify promoting that person, over a white man, and these inquiries will probably reflect on that officer's fitness report. But, if he promotes a white man, and a woman or POC complains, their complaint will be brushed off with "he wants to be a DEI hire". Path of least resistance will be to promote only white men.

Steve

Path of least resistance will be to promote only white men.

What rank was Colin Powell?

What rank was Colin Powell?

That was before Hegseth.

>>What rank was Colin Powell?<<

That was before Hegseth.

Exactly. There was one sort of US military, up to July 26, 1948, a different sort of military from that date to September 30, 2025, and a different sort of military from September 30, to now. Powell had the good fortune to serve during that 1948-2025 era.

Steve

Summation:

Promoting white men will get you promoted, and if you're in the up and out part, you will want to be promoted. We'll have all white male officers.

It's a shame, because everyone has met that woman who can kick your ass across the football field, and also met the short slight women who are like adult kids - in fact I've often wondered if the attraction to little adult cuties is similar to pedo attraction.

You can stick me in a fox hole with that woman who can kick my ass, and let the little cutie fly the helicopter. Ether one can tend wounds in the hospital.

I was against supporting gender affirming health care when I thought it was $300,000, but when I found out how cheap the hormones, etc., were, and then the Operations are just ~$20,000, I changed my mind. Now I support gender affirming care. Help someone early on the cheap? OK by me.

I was against supporting gender affirming health care when I thought it was $300,000, but when I found out how cheap the hormones, etc., were, and then the Operations are just ~$20,000, I changed my mind. Now I support gender affirming care.

Thing is, a non-trivial portion of the base is composed of religious nutters who have some pretty extreme ideas about gender roles and procreation.

Steve

Help someone early on the cheap? OK by me. - Lapsdoy

-----------------

Starting too early is not help.

Help someone early on the cheap? OK by me. - Lapsdoy

-----------------

Starting too early is not help.

I've met a few trans, and had an old friend in his late 50s/60s start transitioning. Every single one of them knew early on they were different, and they know much more now than previously. Early on, they go through a lot of questioning and testing because they are looking for gender confusion, and then start hormones.

Surgical regret
The rate of regret following gender-affirming surgery (GAS) is consistently reported as very low, often less than 1%.

~A 2021 systematic review of 27 studies found the pooled prevalence of regret after GAS was 1% among 7,928 patients.
~A 2024 review found a pooled prevalence of 1.94%, with lower rates for transmasculine surgeries (0.8%) than for transfeminine surgeries (4.0%).
~The regret rate for GAS is substantially lower than for many other common medical procedures.

I realize that's the mantra on the right, but it isn't out of any real concern for a trans - most MAGA would say - fuck trans, let them pay for it.

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.