Transcription
Military leaders who have been summoned from command posts all around the world by Pete Hegseth to hear his one-hour long take on, quote, "warrior ethos" is, if you can believe it, sounding even more weird by the hour.
Yesterday, Donald Trump told NBC News that he will not be attending the meeting. Trump said this, quote, "It's really just a very nice meeting talking about how well we're doing militarily, talking about being in great shape, talking about a lot of good, positive things. It's just a good message. We have some great people coming in and it's just an esprit de corps. You know the expression esprit de corps, that's all it's about. We're talking about what we're doing, what they're doing and how we're doing." Exactly what one would want the person with the nuclear launch codes to say about the reason he summoned every military leader to a meeting in one room.
The Washington Post is reporting that the event will cost millions of dollars, that it raises military security concerns, and that it runs the risk of leaving top military leaders stranded. Quote, "It is estimated that flying, lodging and transporting all the military leaders, some of whom will be traveling from the Mid East, Europe and the Indo-Pacific, will cost millions. The event has also raised security concerns about having all the top leadership in one place, particularly given that Tuesday is the end of the fiscal year and if the government shuts down, it could leave key personnel stranded from their units."
Joining our coverage, retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Mark Hertling. Claire still with us, General Hertling, tell me how you're thinking about this and what I mean.
I think people understand that of all members of the government and of our society, the military is literally structured up the chain of command. And so if someone they must come. But how would you feel if you were in your family or halfway around the world and you were summoned to a meeting about esprit de corps?
Yeah. Nicole, it's it's a tough question. What I'd say is, first of all, you know, I put myself in the position. I take myself back a couple of years when I was still wearing the uniform and say, how would I approach this? And what I'd say is those military leaders, the 800 or so, not only the one stars through four stars from all over the world, but also their senior enlisted advisors and probably parts of their teams, and their security details are going to be descending on Washington. I put myself in that kind of situation and say, what would I be thinking? And I would have to adapt because this thing has changed so many times over the last couple of days.
The first time that Secretary Hegseth announced it, it was going to be about the warrior ethos. And the warrior ethos, when it's defined and you know about it, it's a part of the oath to the Constitution, the values and kratos of the various services, and something called the warrior ethos, which consists of four parts. I won't go into that now. So okay, we can talk about that. It seems a little bit bizarre to have so many people coming into a room for the secretary to be talking about something like that, but then it evolved a little bit more when the Pentagon said the real plans were for, in fact, a leak from the Pentagon said it's about getting horses into the stables and whipping them into shape. That's very condescending and a little bit diabolical in my terms.
And then over the weekend, on Saturday, the President said, "Yeah, okay. If you're going to have everybody here, I want to talk to them, too." It turned from a one-hour meeting that seemed a little bit bizarre to probably multiple hours. If you're going to have the President talking, based on what we've seen in terms of how he speaks to various audiences.
So going back to your question of how would I feel? I would feel this would be especially if I was coming from Europe or the Indo-Pacific region, I would be saying it's a long run for a short slide, as they say in baseball. You know, a couple of almost a day on the road to get to a place where we're going to hear people talk to us. And it has it seems to have nothing to do with national security strategy or the status of the force. If it's about esprit de corps. You know.
I.
I hate to put this in stark terms, but many people say the U.S. military is the best in the world. We have very good esprit de corps.
So I'm.
Not sure what is going to go on. It's a big question. I don't know how I would have prepared for it if I was still wearing the uniform, other than to say I got to keep a stoic approach and a poker face when I go into this auditorium at Quantico.
How heavily is it weighing on the men and women of the military and their families that whether the federal agents roaming the streets of American cities are are actually military, they all look to the military, they all look to the American people. And any tourists in these big cities like soldiers. And again, whether or not the plans to bomb us and obliterate fishing boats off Venezuela without evidence that they're actually drug carriers is happening in the name of the military. I mean, what they're doing under Trump and Hegseth is one bucket of things. What Trump and Hegseth are allowing people to see as militarized operations is another. How is that weighing on the military?
Well, you know, I listened to your last half hour, Nicole, and it was excellent in terms of the various commentary from different people. But I'll tell you, as a person who wore the cloth of our country for 40 years, you know, all I could think back on is the number of lessons I've received on why we do the things, the way we do them. In the period leading up to the Revolutionary War, colonists objected to the kinds of things you were talking about over the last half hour: the arbitrary arrest, the confinement without trial, and the use of general warrants, which were called writs of assistance at the time. So they put them into our Constitution, and they're called different things under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendment. But getting again, back to your question there, this all the actions are troublesome because talking about using, as the President said, full force in Portland, Oregon, is contrary to what the military believes. That's not what we do. We do not use full force against our fellow citizens unless there's some type of insurrection like there was during the Civil War. Full force is for the police department.
And to get more into your question, what I'm most concerned about is I see the films of these different cities where ICE agents and federal agents and police officers really have a militarized approach using MRAP vehicles and, and kitted up with helmets and, and, and armored vests and using long rifles. That to me, when you talk about bringing the military into the streets of the city, most citizens don't know the difference between these people and those kind of