@wildgrass saidHe's an Army major with combat experience, served in two wars, that's good enough for me.
The new secretary of defense under Trump's administration will be the weekend co-host of Fox and friends.
Not a joke.
He has other things in his resume but this seems like a poor choice considering that he's been a talking head with zero responsibility in leadership for the last 10 years.
@Cliff-Mashburn
Right, a MAJOR, where it goes, second lieutenant, first lieutenant, captain, major, LIGHT colonel, full colonel, then lowest general, brigadier, Major General, lieutenant general, and 4 star general. So six levels lower than the top and I don't suppose you did military duty but I did, four years and I saw what those levels did.
A major might have duty over a couple hundred dudes but that would be it, ZERO upper rank involvement so he might as well be an Uber driver for the experience needed to be the top dog in our national defense.
So tell me, what military did YOU serve in?
@Cliff-Mashburn saidImagine that, a major telling the generals what to do. They'll love it.
He's an Army major with combat experience, served in two wars, that's good enough for me.
All he had to do to get the job was retire from the army and spend 10 years on the boob tube saying whatever made trump happy.
@sonhouse saidYou were also an astronaut, correct?
@Cliff-Mashburn
Right, a MAJOR, where it goes, second lieutenant, first lieutenant, captain, major, LIGHT colonel, full colonel, then lowest general, brigadier, Major General, lieutenant general, and 4 star general. So six levels lower than the top and I don't suppose you did military duty but I did, four years and I saw what those levels did.
A major might have duty over ...[text shortened]... ience needed to be the top dog in our national defense.
So tell me, what military did YOU serve in?
Would this be a Forum to debate things I would venture to put forward a thesis:
It can be beneficial for the secretary of defence not to have been an officer.
I would argue, that the defnese secretary has Generals on the side to take care of military matters. If the secretary does listen there is a good chance that they get very good information to act on in all things military.
The non-officer person would at least have the opportunity to look through "pet projects" and put a new frame around those.
@sonhouse saidIn fact there have been secretaries of defnce who left the Army with lower ranks before.
@Cliff-Mashburn
Right, a MAJOR, where it goes, second lieutenant, first lieutenant, captain, major, LIGHT colonel, full colonel, then lowest general, brigadier, Major General, lieutenant general, and 4 star general. So six levels lower than the top and I don't suppose you did military duty but I did, four years and I saw what those levels did.
A major might have duty over ...[text shortened]... ience needed to be the top dog in our national defense.
So tell me, what military did YOU serve in?
@Ponderable saidI would argue that it is his role as a shock jock entertainer that disqualify him for a job that requires a high level of professionalism, organization, and discretion.
Would this be a Forum to debate things I would venture to put forward a thesis:
It can be beneficial for the secretary of defence not to have been an officer.
I would argue, that the defnese secretary has Generals on the side to take care of military matters. If the secretary does listen there is a good chance that they get very good information to act on in all thin ...[text shortened]... would at least have the opportunity to look through "pet projects" and put a new frame around those.
@Lionel-Hutz saidLol a tattoo is a job qualification. Base conservatives have fallen so low.
Dude's fit, loves the troops, communication skills are 10/10, and has "Deus Vult" tattooed on his massive bicep.
The big wigs are going to melt. Hilarity shall ensue. Can't wait! π
@wildgrass
In fact I am not convinced that the nominatde guy is such a good choice.
I was just taking up the general thesis that a 4*-General would be per se a better choice than anyone who did not attain the rank.
@Ponderable saidSure, I agree. Usually job hirings rely on more than one qualification.
@wildgrass
In fact I am not convinced that the nominatde guy is such a good choice.
I was just taking up the general thesis that a 4*-General would be per se a better choice than anyone who did not attain the rank.
This guy's professional life is defined by his role in the entertainment industry, not his military career.
@wildgrass said(Shrug) Cabinet positions are flunkies of the President and his choices should be confirmed unless they are grossly incompetent or corrupt.
The new secretary of defense under Trump's administration will be the weekend co-host of Fox and friends.
Not a joke.
He has other things in his resume but this seems like a poor choice considering that he's been a talking head with zero responsibility in leadership for the last 10 years.
@no1marauder saidSo it'll be Hannity for Dept. of State, right ?
(Shrug) Cabinet positions are flunkies of the President and his choices should be confirmed unless they are grossly incompetent or corrupt.
James Dobson for HEW ...
Might be a good time to stock up yer bomb shelter. Don't forget lots of GOYA BEANS !
https://fabioparasecoli.com/beans-battles-goya-the-trumps-and-the-power-of-food/
π