The smear campaign against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth continues. Remember that Hegset got 100 percent negative media coverage during the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second term.
POLITICO Magazine has published a piece by Thomas E. Ricks, the author of 10 books, the most recent of which is a political thriller set in Maine. The headline is, “What Pete Hegseth Gets Wrong About ‘Warfighting’,” but the real kicker is the subhead: “Combat? That’s actually not what we want our armed forces to do.”
Here’s the article that has a lot of thin-skinned reactionaries weeping and wailing on Twitterhttps://t.co/kwcUtKAp8O
— Thomas E. Ricks (@tomricks1) May 27, 2025
Weeping and wailing? Over what?
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is fond of talking about the need to focus on “warfighting.” He wants “lethality,” bigtime.
That sounds tough, so it plays well on Fox News.
But let me tell you why it is wrong. The more you know about military operations, the more you understand that you don’t want to focus on fighting. That gets people killed — like your kids or grandkids.
Ricks doesn’t mention any military service or combat in his X bio, so we’re not sure how much he knows about military operations.
Why? Well, as General George Patton supposedly said, “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.” The worst way to go to war is by flinging your people into combat — “warfighting,” as the tattooed and tough-talking former TV commentator puts it. You don’t do frontal assaults against an entrenched and bunkered enemy — as happened on “D- Day” — because you want to, but because you absolutely have no other choice.
Yes, force readiness is great. But the best way to win wars is by helping other countries be ready. You train them, you equip them, you supply them. You conduct joint maneuvers in peacetime with them, so everyone understands each other. Preparing our allies also makes them less susceptible to being overrun by their (and our) enemies. A lesson that the world is learning the hard way in Ukraine.
Recommended
No, it’s an article that a lot of veterans who have actually served in war find laughably stupid, amateurish, ahistorical and inept.
We’re laughing at you Ricks. https://t.co/IZab0FYj47
— Cynical Publius (@CynicalPublius) May 30, 2025
So Ricks, who has never served, is lecturing veterans that their opinions are wrong because of Ricks’s narrative?
I guess everyone racing to the bottom is all about who places second after Ricks.
— Progressing California (@ProgressingCali) May 30, 2025
Ricks is the definition of thin-skinned 🙄
— James Rockford- leave a message. (@DumbLibStuff) May 30, 2025
Ricks article is some of the dumbest shit I’ve ever read about war.🙄
— 🇺🇸OldGuy_54 (@Oldguy_54) May 30, 2025
His analysis is off track because it assumes we’re stopping training allied militaries, educating top brass, etc.
We’re not.
We are, however, not focusing on ridiculous cultural/social claptrap like climate change or DEI.
And rightly so.— Go ARMY beat NAVY 🇺🇸🇮🇱 (@GoARMY67778433) May 31, 2025
We trained and armed the Iranians. Then came the 1979 revolution. Guess who used American F-14 fighters, P-3 recon planes, and other US equipment to oppose our national interests and threaten our allies? Ricks is NOT a military or history expert.
— Homer Stinson (@HomerStinson89) May 30, 2025
We have the same amount of flag officers now as we did in WW2 where we had 10X the amount of troops. If you don’t see that as a problem, that tells me all I need to know. I’ve got empty canteens fuller than your head.
— MAGA Oracle (@MAGAOracle) May 30, 2025
“Reactionaries”
That’s a disrespectful way to characterize GWOT veterans who found your argument weak/lacking.
— Travis about the Town (@KarlMarxsux) May 30, 2025
Just trying to be accurate. Should I have said “undereducated right wing reactionaries”? Seems right but wordy.
— Thomas E. Ricks (@tomricks1) May 30, 2025
We suspect Ricks has an agenda.
This is drivel. Foreign aid and position papers? Not a serious opinion.
— Lee (Greater) (@shortmagsmle) May 29, 2025
Ah, another armchair general who just happens to have a new book coming out.
— JJ Swearingen (@SwearinEveryday) May 30, 2025
You’ve never served in the military…but you start with this?
“But let me tell you why it is wrong. The more you know about military operations, the more you understand that you don’t want to focus on fighting.”
lmao ok chief
— Matthew ‘Whiz’ Buckley (@WhizBuckleyNFH) May 30, 2025
This is laughable coming from someone who never wore the uniform. You’re wholly unqualified to offer an opinion on any of this.
— BombasticBuffoon (@BombassBuffoon) May 30, 2025
I know whenever I need an opinion on warfighting and the military I go directly to someone with zero experience in both. Great article Ricks.
— Yes, Really. (@9lbTallywacker) May 31, 2025
Of the many professional authors/journalists who profited off of our 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan, few give me more personal heartburn than Thomas Ricks.
Ricks’ book “Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq” was a platform for disgruntled generals and politicians to… https://t.co/t30Tz1Na7V
— Cynical Publius (@CynicalPublius) May 27, 2025
The post continues:
… to grind their own personal axes, and Ricks was a willing participant in their lies and half-truths. Part of the book is about the actions I was involved with in the 82nd Airborne Division, and not only did Ricks get that grossly and factually wrong, but he allowed the voice of a disgraced and relieved senior officer to be his “source” as that officer attacked the same people who relieved him.
Whenever Ricks writes on war, you can be sure he will be wrong. Never having served for a moment in his own life, he should adopt the George Costanza opposites rule to life and write the opposite of what he believes, thereby writing something true.(What makes it worse is that I’ve met the man, and he oozes dismissive arrogance to anyone in uniform who does not wear stars on his collar.)This article below is no exception. Ricks totally misses that the focus of Hegseth’s “lethality” campaign is to CHANGE THE BROKEN MINDSET AND CULTURE in the DoD. Hegseth is performing the vital task of turning our military away from a political DEI-focus and back to a culture of killing people and breaking things. Ricks sees Hegseth’s abolition of “security assistance brigades” as somehow turning our back on coalition warfare and combined training, when in reality Hegseth himself served in that capacity in OEF, learned the brutal lessons of attempting to train the untrainable, and is now restoring our focus on warfighting.
Ricks goes on to pretend that Hegseth is ignoring the industrial base and coalition operations in favor of lethality, when in reality Hegseth knows they are all one and the same.
Worst of all, Ricks—who I repeat has never worn a uniform for a second—chastises Hegseth for not planning for “real war.”You’ve never seen real war, Ricks. Pete Hegseth has. How about you pipe down and take a seat? You’re usually wrong, and your latest Politico article is no exception.
And @tomricks1 you’re gonna have to wake up pretty early in the morning to try and outmaneuver me on this. What you’re saying in that piece is categorically wrong. And I will 100% tell you why if you’re man enough to hear it. Not with emotion, but with brutal clarity.
— InfantryDort (@infantrydort) May 27, 2025
If you’re going to publish TDS-addled nonsense, POLITICO seems the place to do it.
***
twitchy.com (Article Sourced Website)
#Writers #Politico #Piece #DUI #Hire #Pete #Hegseth #People #Weeping #Wailing