The deep state is real because they have tricked you into thinking it isn't real is a circular logic argument.

If in 4 years some or all of the cases are continued against Trump then you can say I told you so.

From the reports about Hegseth, the issue wasn't just that he consumed a large amount rather it was about his behavior when he consumed alcohol.

I tried to search how many soldiers would be under the command of a major and I say anything from a few hundred to a thousand. I don't discount this experience at all but it is a bit low on the scale compared to generals/admirals who are, if I understand correctly, usually appointed to the position. This isn't a huge mark against Hegseth but there are going to be other candidates out there with more applicable military experience to choose from.

As for the pardons, I am concerned that he may be too pardon happy. He has previously defended the use of waterboarding and from reading a number of his comments he comes across as an "ends justify the means" type of person which has the risk of justifying bad things in war. He had previously defended the actions of the infamous Blackwater group involving the killing of 17 civilians.  Ultimately each pardon should be judged on its individual merits of course.

I really wish you'd stop trying to pretend you know anything at all about the military when you have zero experience.  Google is not an acceptable substitute for facts, experience and training.

Bottom line: rank, or pay grade, doesn't determine the number of people an officer is responsible for, nor what position they occupy.  Pete could have been in a billet that's allocated for a general officer if they had no actual general officers available to fill it.  That happens often, and there are few general spots available.  When you get to O7 and above, the game is more political.  One general officer retires, and they play musical chairs to fill it.  "A" retires, B is selected to take their place, c has to replace b, D replaces E, and often it's either a simultaneous promotion or a position that grooms them for promotion.  It's common for an O6 colonel fo fill in for a departing general until a replacement with the proper rank arrives.  Maybe the O6 has already been selected for promotion to O7 and is waiting for an O7 billet to open up.
*********
Congress appropriates a certain number of officer positions based on mission requirements provided by the armed services and the funds available in the budget.  Those ranks are assigned to billets, or positions, within the military units.  Think of it as a business that needs 3 accountants, 2 HR, 6 section managers and 2 administrators.  Those 13 positions have a salary cap, so the business knows if all positions are filled what the maximum cost for those employees should be.

In the military, some billets remain vacant due to budget issues, lack of qualified people to fill them, or other personnel situations.  Sometimes a unit hasn't gotten around to creating a new billet, so they might double billet a new person, meaning they share the same billet as someone else.  That has to be approved by several agencies.  Usually it's temporary until a billet is approved, someone in an existing billet leaves, or the person is promoted into a different billet.

Although each billet is assigned a pay grade (rank), that's not written in law.  Rather than ranks, let's talk pay grades since it's more universal than ranks across services.  An O3 billet in one organization might have nobody beneath them to command/supervise.  In a different org, that same O3 could be in charge of 100, 500, or more people.  Our unit was doing software development, maintenance, testing and so on.  We only had 300 people give or take, and the workforce was part military and part civilian civil servants. 

I worked in one office where we had one civilian, one enlisted, and 4 officers.  At one point I had 12 people working under me -- officer, enlisted and government civilians.  That's the nature of technical units.  The need for college educated officers and civilian equivalents was greater than most others.  Our commander was a full colonel -- O6.

Our administrative unit that handles all the personnel, mobility, etc,. was usually an O3.  However, an O2 working for me applied for that position when the incumbent was departing, and she became the 552d AWACW Squadron Commander responsible for over 2,200 personnel.  That's a big jump for a 2LT.

So, spare me what your "research" found.  Everything you posted is wrong and based on something you read online.  Those of us who actually lived it know much more than you ever will via "research" -- by that I mean "Google".

I really wish you'd stop trying to pretend you know anything at all about the military when you have zero experience.  Google is not an acceptable substitute for facts, experience and training.

Bottom line: rank, or pay grade, doesn't determine the number of people an officer is responsible for, nor what position they occupy.  Pete could have been in a billet that's allocated for a general officer if they had no actual general officers available to fill it.  That happens often, and there are few general spots available.  When you get to O7 and above, the game is more political.  One general officer retires, and they play musical chairs to fill it.  "A" retires, B is selected to take their place, c has to replace b, D replaces E, and often it's either a simultaneous promotion or a position that grooms them for promotion.  It's common for an O6 colonel fo fill in for a departing general until a replacement with the proper rank arrives.  Maybe the O6 has already been selected for promotion to O7 and is waiting for an O7 billet to open up.
*********
Congress appropriates a certain number of officer positions based on mission requirements provided by the armed services and the funds available in the budget.  Those ranks are assigned to billets, or positions, within the military units.  Think of it as a business that needs 3 accountants, 2 HR, 6 section managers and 2 administrators.  Those 13 positions have a salary cap, so the business knows if all positions are filled what the maximum cost for those employees should be.

In the military, some billets remain vacant due to budget issues, lack of qualified people to fill them, or other personnel situations.  Sometimes a unit hasn't gotten around to creating a new billet, so they might double billet a new person, meaning they share the same billet as someone else.  That has to be approved by several agencies.  Usually it's temporary until a billet is approved, someone in an existing billet leaves, or the person is promoted into a different billet.

Although each billet is assigned a pay grade (rank), that's not written in law.  Rather than ranks, let's talk pay grades since it's more universal than ranks across services.  An O3 billet in one organization might have nobody beneath them to command/supervise.  In a different org, that same O3 could be in charge of 100, 500, or more people.  Our unit was doing software development, maintenance, testing and so on.  We only had 300 people give or take, and the workforce was part military and part civilian civil servants. 

I worked in one office where we had one civilian, one enlisted, and 4 officers.  At one point I had 12 people working under me -- officer, enlisted and government civilians.  That's the nature of technical units.  The need for college educated officers and civilian equivalents was greater than most others.  Our commander was a full colonel -- O6.

Our administrative unit that handles all the personnel, mobility, etc,. was usually an O3.  However, an O2 working for me applied for that position when the incumbent was departing, and she became the 552d AWACW Squadron Commander responsible for over 2,200 personnel.  That's a big jump for a 2LT.

So, spare me what your "research" found.  Everything you posted is wrong and based on something you read online.  Those of us who actually lived it know much more than you ever will via "research" -- by that I mean "Google".

I also left out that in order to be an officer, one has to go to ROTC, OCS, or a military academy.  I left out battlefield commission as those aren't done anymore or are very rare, in case EEF wants to argue about that I left something out.

My point is that in each officers training, they teach how to lead the lower ranks.  They practice taking command for X amounts of time while in "school" for Y amount of classmates.  So this adds to Pete's management XP.

I also left out that in order to be an officer, one has to go to ROTC, OCS, or a military academy.  I left out battlefield commission as those aren't done anymore or are very rare, in case EEF wants to argue about that I left something out.

My point is that in each officers training, they teach how to lead the lower ranks.  They practice taking command for X amounts of time while in "school" for Y amount of classmates.  So this adds to Pete's management XP.

in a unit that has competent NCOs, the officers only need to know how to manage their resources, lead their men and accomplish their assigned mission.  The NCOs are the first line supervisors which any officer with experience knows you have to rely on to get anything done.  You might only have a half dozen NCOs to ensure are with the program while they ensure the rest of the unit is also with it.

There's a chain of command for a reason.  No Wing or Battalion commander is going around directly interacting with every single enlisted.  Our Wing commander had about 2K people, military and civilian, to be responsible for.  He had half a dozen deputies, one of which was my commander (we were designated a "Deputate" since we had a deputy commander in charge).  The Wing Commander also had 3 AWACS flying squadrons under him as well as the administration squadron.  Transportation, communications and security services all had deputies.

I saw our Wing commander more often jogging in the morning around our base housing than I ever saw him officially.  Also, nothing is static.  We were a wing when i arrived, then we became a division, and then a wing again.  The military loves their org charts, if only to change the names every now and them to avoid IG inspections!      I don't know the reasons for the changes.  I only know I had to change the unit patches on my BDUs to keep up with the name.

The fact that you had to google how many soldiers fall under command of a major tells me everything you don't know about officers in the military.  Even if he was a O1 (Lt.), he still has to manage, command, lead, etc...So your statement about management XP is wrong.  I would understand if he was an E4 or lower rank. Generals and admirals are not exactly "appointed". You cannot go from a major to a general/admiral.  You must obtain the rank of colonel first. Then it gets political if you're then promoted to general/adm.

Waterboarding is legal under the geneva conventions. So why wouldn't he defend it's legal use?  That's like saying "pete defends the killing of an enemy combatant who was shooting at US soldiers".  Or maybe in your opinion, for enemy interrogations, we should just ask them questions and that's it. No waterboarding, sleep deprivation, temperature control, etc...

Are you reffering to this Blackwater event

https://www.mediamatters.org/pete-hegseth/foxs-pete-hegseth-defends-blackwater-contractors-convicted-murdering-iraqi-civilians

All Pete mentions is tough calls are made in seconds and that the prosecution was political.  Feel free to post more links showing how Pete "defended" them. I've never looked into this, but just googled and clicked on the first link as I don't have time to go into full detail. So you can do it.  I psoted about Gallahager because I did follow his incident closely.

Maybe Pete knows stuff that you haven't researched yet, like Gallagher. 

Why don't you read what I posted about Eddie and lets just assume I am 100% correct and there is no additional info. Would you call Pete's support of Eddie's pardon wrong or that he's pardon happy?

I googled a number only to get the size of what a major might command, not the details. This is why I mentioned the range of numbers that a major might supervise because I was only looking at the number of people he would have to oversee. As I said I do not discount his experience as a major, I am only pointing out that his experience would have been on the small scale end in terms of people usually appointed to that position. Has there ever been a secretary of defense below the rank of general/admiral or at that mid level officer rank?

Waterboarding is legal under the geneva conventions? That is a pretty tortured interpretation of the Geneva Conventions. It isn't even something universally agreed upon. Lieutenant General Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, stated he considered waterboarding to violate the Geneva Convention.
The USA isn't exactly in the position to say it is illegal either because then they would have to go prosecute a bunch of soldiers and agents.

Assuming everything you said was correct about Eddie I wouldn't have a problem with the pardon. As I said each pardon needs to be evaluated individually.

I googled a number only to get the size of what a major might command, not the details. This is why I mentioned the range of numbers that a major might supervise because I was only looking at the number of people he would have to oversee. As I said I do not discount his experience as a major, I am only pointing out that his experience would have been on the small scale end in terms of people usually appointed to that position. Has there ever been a secretary of defense below the rank of general/admiral or at that mid level officer rank?

Waterboarding is legal under the geneva conventions? That is a pretty tortured interpretation of the Geneva Conventions. It isn't even something universally agreed upon. Lieutenant General Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, stated he considered waterboarding to violate the Geneva Convention.
The USA isn't exactly in the position to say it is illegal either because then they would have to go prosecute a bunch of soldiers and agents.

Assuming everything you said was correct about Eddie I wouldn't have a problem with the pardon. As I said each pardon needs to be evaluated individually.

Hahhhaha what a reply. Thanks (sarcasm)

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I googled a number only to get the size of what a major might command, not the details. This is why I mentioned the range of numbers that a major might supervise because I was only looking at the number of people he would have to oversee. As I said I do not discount his experience as a major, I am only pointing out that his experience would have been on the small scale end in terms of people usually appointed to that position. Has there ever been a secretary of defense below the rank of general/admiral or at that mid level officer rank?

Waterboarding is legal under the geneva conventions? That is a pretty tortured interpretation of the Geneva Conventions. It isn't even something universally agreed upon. Lieutenant General Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, stated he considered waterboarding to violate the Geneva Convention.
The USA isn't exactly in the position to say it is illegal either because then they would have to go prosecute a bunch of soldiers and agents.

Assuming everything you said was correct about Eddie I wouldn't have a problem with the pardon. As I said each pardon needs to be evaluated individually.

That's got to be one of the stupidest beliefs you've posted.

You believe that a military officer has "more experience" based on having hundred of soldiers in their unit than an officer who has maybe a dozen. "I am only pointing out that his experience would have been on the small scale end in terms of people usually appointed to that position."

in life, as well as in the military, experience comes from doing your job, not supervising others doing the job.  Does a welder get more or less experience as a supervisor or as someone actually welding different jobs day after day?  Does a warfighter get more experience going on patrols every day than his commander who sits in HQ planning those patrols?

"Has there ever been a secretary of defense below the rank of general/admiral or at that mid level officer rank?"
The military chain of command has always been lead by a civilian -- Secretary of Defense,  Likewise, the individual branches are lead by a civilian -- Sec of the AF, Sec of the Army, etc.

The very first SECDEF in 1947 was James Forrestal.  He served as a Lieutenant (O3) in the Navy in WWI.  In 1940, he was appointed Undersecretary of the Navy.  In 1944, he was appointed Secretary of the Navy.  In 1947he was appointed as the first US Secretary of Defense.

David Norquist - 2021 acting SECDEF - no military service
Mark Esper - 2019-2020 SECDEF - Army LtCol
Richard Spencer - 2019 SECDEF, Marine Captain
Patrick M. Shanahan, 2019 Acting SECDEF, no military experience
Ash Carter, 2015-2017 SECDEF, no military experience, a physicist and a former Harvard University professor of Science and International Affairs


I could continue listing them, but the information is publicly available.  This should be sufficient to show how your assumptions are all wrong, and that there is no such thing as "mid-level officer rank."  Rank doesn't give an officer experience.  Doing the job does.  There are O2s and O3s with more combat experience than most O5s and O6s.  In the AF, a pilot might fly many missions in wartime and never meet the enemy face to face, but an E2 or E3 enlisted troop could be breaking down doors, clearing IEDs, capturing terrorists and insurgents, engaging the enemy in firefights, and so on routinely in their tour of duty.

Just stop with the unsupported lecture on experience. 

We have a civilian National Security Council -- all civilians.  These are the regular attendees of the NSC:

Vice President
Secretary of State
Secretary of Defense
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of the Treasury
Attorney General
Secretary of Homeland Security
Ambassador to the United Nations
Administrator of the Agency for International Development
White House Chief of Staff
National Security Advisor

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff attends as needed, but only in an advisory role.
He/she is the highest ranking military member in the US military.

The deepstate isnt real.   But Trump will try set one up so he can rule like a dictator.  Incompetent hires are just as bad a dei.   Maga complains about dei, but then supports trumps moronic picks.   

cool story, bro...

The deepstate isnt real.   But Trump will try set one up so he can rule like a dictator.  Incompetent hires are just as bad a dei.   Maga complains about dei, but then supports trumps moronic picks.

The deepstate isnt real.   But Trump will try set one up so he can rule like a dictator.  Incompetent hires are just as bad a dei.   Maga complains about dei, but then supports trumps moronic picks.

That post is hilarious given the title of this thread!   

You're a propaganda tool for the Democrats.

Trump hasn't been sworn in, and yet he's already getting more done in a couple of months than Biden has in 4 years.

Keep trying to stir the pot.  Most of us just don't give a flying flip what you have to say.

The deepstate isnt real.   But Trump will try set one up so he can rule like a dictator.  Incompetent hires are just as bad a dei.   Maga complains about dei, but then supports trumps moronic picks.

Like how he did between 2016 and 2020 right?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

The deepstate isnt real.   But Trump will try set one up so he can rule like a dictator.  Incompetent hires are just as bad a dei.   Maga complains about dei, but then supports trumps moronic picks.

Nothing can be as bad as DEI.  Nothing.

https://images.app.goo.gl/F3VPhshKNCKPhFy18

https://www.google.com/search?q=&ictx=1&tbs=rimg:CQXrAXFbgiLBIggF6wFxW4IiwSoSCQXrAXFbgiLBEZaMOsAKugYq&udm=2

There also was that man in military uniform with a wig and lipstick.

That's got to be one of the stupidest beliefs you've posted.

You believe that a military officer has "more experience" based on having hundred of soldiers in their unit than an officer who has maybe a dozen. "I am only pointing out that his experience would have been on the small scale end in terms of people usually appointed to that position."

in life, as well as in the military, experience comes from doing your job, not supervising others doing the job.  Does a welder get more or less experience as a supervisor or as someone actually welding different jobs day after day?  Does a warfighter get more experience going on patrols every day than his commander who sits in HQ planning those patrols?

Point there is that being a good welder doesn't mean you are a good supervisor of welders. It helps of course but management is a different skillset. Maybe he can do it great but it is still a valid question to ask what experience he has to show he can manage something the size of the US military. Someone could be a great beat cop for 20 years but that wouldn't make them unquestionably qualified to lead the Department of Justice.

Point there is that being a good welder doesn't mean you are a good supervisor of welders. It helps of course but management is a different skillset. Maybe he can do it great but it is still a valid question to ask what experience he has to show he can manage something the size of the US military. Someone could be a great beat cop for 20 years but that wouldn't make them unquestionably qualified to lead the Department of Justice.

"show he can manage something the size of the US military"

You ignored the post i made on all the SECDEFs that had zero military experience.  Most also had no experience managing an organization the size of the US military.

Try addressing my posts in full as opposed to finding one sentence to argue with.

All your analogies are wasted because this nominee has proven himself in a variety of successful endeavors.

His net worth is an estimated $6M.  He's 43 years old, and he has a FOX salary of $400,000/year.

I think you're not qualified to judge anyone else especially when it involves military experience -- which is NOT a prerequisite for SECDEF.  It's a civilian position, and he has the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff to advise him.

Just stoip.

"show he can manage something the size of the US military"

You ignored the post i made on all the SECDEFs that had zero military experience.  Most also had no experience managing an organization the size of the US military.

Try addressing my posts in full as opposed to finding one sentence to argue with.

All your analogies are wasted because this nominee has proven himself in a variety of successful endeavors.

His net worth is an estimated $6M.  He's 43 years old, and he has a FOX salary of $400,000/year.

I think you're not qualified to judge anyone else especially when it involves military experience -- which is NOT a prerequisite for SECDEF.  It's a civilian position, and he has the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff to advise him.

Just stoip.

I didn't argue with your full post because you made the good point that not all secretaries of defense have military experience.

The post that seems to have triggered you was when I said he lacked management experience. So on that point, feel free to show my concern is not warranted, show me hos much large scale management experience Hegseth has and I will agree he is qualified in that aspect.

I didn't argue with your full post because you made the good point that not all secretaries of defense have military experience.

The post that seems to have triggered you was when I said he lacked management experience. So on that point, feel free to show my concern is not warranted, show me hos much large scale management experience Hegseth has and I will agree he is qualified in that aspect.

i'm glad you finally admitted that you only want to argue, and that you just ignore most of the things you agree with for the sake of being contrary.

A Secretary in the Executive Branch is not the same as a CEO who manages a corporation.  Their job is to set policy, and it's the military command structure's duty to carry out those policies.  Do you honestly think Hillary Clinton and John Carry bothered with the day-in and day-out processes of the State Department?

Do some reading on what a Secretary appointed to these national security positions do in a day.  Maybe you'll finally figure out why civilians are appointed to set national security policy and advise the President -- not to oversee operations.  They have others appointed under them to take care of those things.

https://www.defense.gov/About/office-of-the-secretary-of-defense/#:~:text=The%20secretary%20of%20defense%20oversees,principal%20defense%20policymaker%20and%20adviser.

Point there is that being a good welder doesn't mean you are a good supervisor of welders. It helps of course but management is a different skillset. Maybe he can do it great but it is still a valid question to ask what experience he has to show he can manage something the size of the US military. Someone could be a great beat cop for 20 years but that wouldn't make them unquestionably qualified to lead the Department of Justice.

You failed to understand my post about how being an officer in the military works. Either that or you're trying to move goalpost.  I'll write it again.  ALL officers take leadership courses in training.  And as  Major, he's had well more than just a handful of soldiers under his command who he had to lead. Starting from when he was an O1.  This should cover any XP that you are trying to wiggle out of.

Your example of being a cop depends on the cops 20 year rank.  Did the cop retire at a rank of brass?  Which would mean there would be other officers under their command regardless if they were in admin, traffic, narcotics, etc...All of which would cover any XP.

The US military is very big, even a general would lack XP in your eyes because generals are often branch related.  So an army general typically wouldn't command cross branch to Navy, Air Force, etc...So even they would have no XP in commanding "the size of the US military".  And even at rank of general, they have their own areas to command.  Unless you're "General of the Army", but the last time someone was a 5 star general was a few years after WW2.  ANd even then, it was theater specific. Example: McArthur was a 5 star for the pacific theater in WW2 and Eisenhower was a 5 star for Europe. So even then, no single 5 star commanded the entire Army.

What you would be asking is someone who was POTUS as they are the CIC who does command the "size of the US military".

What you would be asking is someone who was POTUS as they are the CIC who does command the "size of the US military".

That underscores the point I've been making, but which seems to mean nothing to EEF.

We have a well-defined national security structure that is made up of civilians.  Some may have military experience, even at the O7/General/Admiral level.  Over the years, it's been hit or miss as to the secretaries and their staff members having any military background whatsoever.

The military is also a highly structured organization with  each branch of service answering to their own Chief of Staff of the individual branch who answers to  then to the Joint Chief of Staff.  From that point upward, it's a civilian chain of command, with a Secretary of each branch answering to the Secretary of Defense.

Obama was Commander in Chief and had zero military service, zero experience running a large company, and zero experience running a large government organization.  His forte was getting elected to office through community activism. 

I listed several SECDEFs who had no formal military service.  Pete has plenty. He's also graduated from Princeton and has a Masters degree from Yale.  His career in the media often involves talking politics and national security issues which he's obviously very prepared to do. 

Pete is NOT a plumber being nominated for a position for which he's totally unprepared.  He's educated, experienced and successful.  He's accomplished more things in his life than Biden ever will as a career politician.

i'm glad you finally admitted that you only want to argue,

You mean like you do? No one is here because they don't like arguing.

and that you just ignore most of the things you agree with for the sake of being contrary.

Didn't say that, not sure why you have to be dishonest. Are you just happy that you were right for once?

A Secretary in the Executive Branch is not the same as a CEO who manages a corporation.  Their job is to set policy, and it's the military command structure's duty to carry out those policies.  Do you honestly think Hillary Clinton and John Carry bothered with the day-in and day-out processes of the State Department?

Do some reading on what a Secretary appointed to these national security positions do in a day.  Maybe you'll finally figure out why civilians are appointed to set national security policy and advise the President -- not to oversee operations.  They have others appointed under them to take care of those things.

Another strawman. I didn't say oversee operations. Are you telling me that the Secretary of Defense doesn't need any experience in management?

You mean like you do? No one is here because they don't like arguing.

Didn't say that, not sure why you have to be dishonest. Are you just happy that you were right for once?

Another strawman. I didn't say oversee operations. Are you telling me that the Secretary of Defense doesn't need any experience in management?

I don't like to argue, but will call out wrong info when it appears.  I prefer not to argue, but some people refuse to admit when they're wrong so threads go on and on needlessly.

"Are you telling me that the Secretary of Defense doesn't need any experience in management?" No one here is saying that. You're imaging things.

I don't like to argue, but will call out wrong info when it appears.  I prefer not to argue, but some people refuse to admit when they're wrong so threads go on and on needlessly.

"Are you telling me that the Secretary of Defense doesn't need any experience in management?" No one here is saying that. You're imaging things.

New Year's resolution:  stop trying to teach pigs how to sing.

Someone else will have to pick up the slack!