You idiot. I've linked articles on those firings more than once and that was the answer to that question. Their names are listed. Again, it's not my fault you haven't read them and remain ignorant. To be completely accurate, he fired women and minorities at a very disproportionate rate when there was no evidence of any wrongdoing or poor performance. He didn't provide justification for those firings. It's a fact these people were fired and that Hegseth failed to provide justification. It's my opinion that he fired them because they were women and minorities. It's an opinion based upon his comments and actions. You can disagree with that opinion, but it is an informed opinion. It's an opinion widely shared among senior military officers. I should have said, "in my opinion" at the end, I will admit to that mistake, but I figured most were smart enough to understand that it was my opinion based on reading the articles and my previous posts about it. I was wrong on both counts with you. You didn't read the articles or posts and aren't smart enough to understand.Hegseth has fired people solely because they're women, minorities
Who?
@aloha-hoosier this one sh#t for brains. It's not vague.
You idiot. I've linked articles on those firings more than once and that was the answer to that question. Their names are listed. Again, it's not my fault you haven't read them and remain ignorant. To be completely accurate, he fired women and minorities at a very disproportionate rate when there was no evidence of any wrongdoing or poor performance. He didn't provide justification for those firings. It's a fact these people were fired and that Hegseth failed to provide justification. It's my opinion that he fired them because they were women and minorities. It's an opinion based upon his comments and actions. You can disagree with that opinion, but it is an informed opinion. I should have said, "in my opinion" at the end, I will admit to that mistake, but I figured most were smart enough to understand that it was my opinion based on reading the articles and my previous posts about it. I was wrong on both counts with you. You didn't read the articles or posts and aren't smart enough to understand.Hegseth has fired people solely because they're women, minorities
Who?
@aloha-hoosier this one sh#t for brains. It's not vague.
We agree it is your opinion. Thanks for correcting your claim.
And you agree that my claim about you is accurate too? 😉You idiot. I've linked articles on those firings more than once and that was the answer to that question. Their names are listed. Again, it's not my fault you haven't read them and remain ignorant. To be completely accurate, he fired women and minorities at a very disproportionate rate when there was no evidence of any wrongdoing or poor performance. He didn't provide justification for those firings. It's a fact these people were fired and that Hegseth failed to provide justification. It's my opinion that he fired them because they were women and minorities. It's an opinion based upon his comments and actions. You can disagree with that opinion, but it is an informed opinion. I should have said, "in my opinion" at the end, I will admit to that mistake, but I figured most were smart enough to understand that it was my opinion based on reading the articles and my previous posts about it. I was wrong on both counts with you. You didn't read the articles or posts and aren't smart enough to understand.Hegseth has fired people solely because they're women, minorities
Who?
@aloha-hoosier this one sh#t for brains. It's not vague.
We agree it is your opinion. Thanks for correcting your claim.
And you agree that my claim about you is accurate too? 😉You idiot. I've linked articles on those firings more than once and that was the answer to that question. Their names are listed. Again, it's not my fault you haven't read them and remain ignorant. To be completely accurate, he fired women and minorities at a very disproportionate rate when there was no evidence of any wrongdoing or poor performance. He didn't provide justification for those firings. It's a fact these people were fired and that Hegseth failed to provide justification. It's my opinion that he fired them because they were women and minorities. It's an opinion based upon his comments and actions. You can disagree with that opinion, but it is an informed opinion. I should have said, "in my opinion" at the end, I will admit to that mistake, but I figured most were smart enough to understand that it was my opinion based on reading the articles and my previous posts about it. I was wrong on both counts with you. You didn't read the articles or posts and aren't smart enough to understand.Hegseth has fired people solely because they're women, minorities
Who?
@aloha-hoosier this one sh#t for brains. It's not vague.
We agree it is your opinion. Thanks for correcting your claim.
We can agree it's your opinion.
There isn't? Really? I understand you don't agree with it, but I'm not sure how you can write with a straight face "There is no government side of the story." You might want to inform yourself better.There is no government side of the story. The selection boards in each service consisting of all flag officers selected these people for promotion and forwarded the lists through the service Secretaries who endorse the lists for approval by Congress. Typically the SecDef stays completely out of the process, but he’s injected himself and has targeted mostly minorities and women for removal from the lists. He’s not provided justification for his actions and he never really does. There’s a reason the senior officers consider Hegseth an unfit clown and are hoping he’s gone sooner rather than later.Did the reporting you read offer the govt side of the story?Based on reporting, he seems to be delaying promotions based solely on gender and race.
Justifications from the Administration
The administration frames these moves as correcting prior "woke" distortions of the promotion process, not as discrimination:
- Merit and standards over quotas/"firsts": Hegseth has publicly stated that the military promoted too many leaders "for the wrong reasons — based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts." He argues diversity initiatives weakened the force and that "diversity is our strength" is a flawed premise. Actions target officers seen as tied to Biden-era DEI policies or "ideologically incompatible."
- Restoring warfighting focus: Hegseth and Trump emphasize a "laser focused" Pentagon on lethality, readiness, and meritocracy. Pre-appointment writings and speeches by Hegseth criticized "woke" culture, questioned whether some minority generals (including Brown) advanced due to race rather than pure merit, and opposed women in certain combat roles or lowered standards. Firings of prior leaders were defended as necessary because "it’s nearly impossible to change a culture with the same people [who] helped create or even benefited from that culture."
- Broader anti-DEI policy: Trump administration executive actions and Pentagon task forces ("Restoring America's Fighting Force") explicitly aimed to abolish DEI offices, viewing them as promoting "systemic racism" or discrimination against merit. This includes ending race/gender-based goals in promotions, admissions, etc. Hegseth created structures to enforce this, arguing it returns the military to color-blind, performance-based decisions.
These rationales appear in Hegseth's books/speeches, Pentagon statements, and aligned reporting (e.g., Fox News coverage of the task force). The administration has not framed the specific blocked promotions as "firing minorities and women" but as vetoing selections influenced by prior identity-focused policies. Officials often note that most senior leadership remains or becomes majority white male under these changes, which they attribute to correcting imbalances rather than bias.
These rationales appear in Hegseth's books/speeches, Pentagon statements, and aligned reporting (e.g., Fox News coverage of the task force). The administration has not framed the specific blocked promotions as "firing minorities and women" but as vetoing selections influenced by prior identity-focused policies. Officials often note that most senior leadership remains or becomes majority white male under these changes, which they attribute to correcting imbalances rather than bias.
Without saying so, it appears this means that they are assuming the advancements of minorities and women were based not on merit but on DEI/woke shit and that they continue to be so. I'd like to see some evidence to back that up.
Do you seriously consider those self serving statements as valid justification? They’re nonsensical without any evidence whatsoever that these were related to DEI. It’s pure bullshit.There isn't? Really? I understand you don't agree with it, but I'm not sure how you can write with a straight face "There is no government side of the story." You might want to inform yourself better.There is no government side of the story. The selection boards in each service consisting of all flag officers selected these people for promotion and forwarded the lists through the service Secretaries who endorse the lists for approval by Congress. Typically the SecDef stays completely out of the process, but he’s injected himself and has targeted mostly minorities and women for removal from the lists. He’s not provided justification for his actions and he never really does. There’s a reason the senior officers consider Hegseth an unfit clown and are hoping he’s gone sooner rather than later.Did the reporting you read offer the govt side of the story?Based on reporting, he seems to be delaying promotions based solely on gender and race.
Justifications from the Administration
The administration frames these moves as correcting prior "woke" distortions of the promotion process, not as discrimination:
- Merit and standards over quotas/"firsts": Hegseth has publicly stated that the military promoted too many leaders "for the wrong reasons — based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts." He argues diversity initiatives weakened the force and that "diversity is our strength" is a flawed premise. Actions target officers seen as tied to Biden-era DEI policies or "ideologically incompatible."
- Restoring warfighting focus: Hegseth and Trump emphasize a "laser focused" Pentagon on lethality, readiness, and meritocracy. Pre-appointment writings and speeches by Hegseth criticized "woke" culture, questioned whether some minority generals (including Brown) advanced due to race rather than pure merit, and opposed women in certain combat roles or lowered standards. Firings of prior leaders were defended as necessary because "it’s nearly impossible to change a culture with the same people [who] helped create or even benefited from that culture."
- Broader anti-DEI policy: Trump administration executive actions and Pentagon task forces ("Restoring America's Fighting Force") explicitly aimed to abolish DEI offices, viewing them as promoting "systemic racism" or discrimination against merit. This includes ending race/gender-based goals in promotions, admissions, etc. Hegseth created structures to enforce this, arguing it returns the military to color-blind, performance-based decisions.
These rationales appear in Hegseth's books/speeches, Pentagon statements, and aligned reporting (e.g., Fox News coverage of the task force). The administration has not framed the specific blocked promotions as "firing minorities and women" but as vetoing selections influenced by prior identity-focused policies. Officials often note that most senior leadership remains or becomes majority white male under these changes, which they attribute to correcting imbalances rather than bias.
These rationales appear in Hegseth's books/speeches, Pentagon statements, and aligned reporting (e.g., Fox News coverage of the task force). The administration has not framed the specific blocked promotions as "firing minorities and women" but as vetoing selections influenced by prior identity-focused policies. Officials often note that most senior leadership remains or becomes majority white male under these changes, which they attribute to correcting imbalances rather than bias.
Without saying so, it appears this means that they are assuming the advancements of minorities and women were based not on merit but on DEI/woke shit and that they continue to be so. I'd like to see some evidence to back that up.
Most of his firings have been White Guys?
Valid? Where did I ask for valid? I asked for what their side of the story was. Stop disingenuously moving the goal posts.Do you seriously consider those self serving statements as valid justification? They’re nonsensical without any evidence whatsoever that these were related to DEI. It’s pure bullshit.There isn't? Really? I understand you don't agree with it, but I'm not sure how you can write with a straight face "There is no government side of the story." You might want to inform yourself better.There is no government side of the story. The selection boards in each service consisting of all flag officers selected these people for promotion and forwarded the lists through the service Secretaries who endorse the lists for approval by Congress. Typically the SecDef stays completely out of the process, but he’s injected himself and has targeted mostly minorities and women for removal from the lists. He’s not provided justification for his actions and he never really does. There’s a reason the senior officers consider Hegseth an unfit clown and are hoping he’s gone sooner rather than later.Did the reporting you read offer the govt side of the story?Based on reporting, he seems to be delaying promotions based solely on gender and race.
Justifications from the Administration
The administration frames these moves as correcting prior "woke" distortions of the promotion process, not as discrimination:
- Merit and standards over quotas/"firsts": Hegseth has publicly stated that the military promoted too many leaders "for the wrong reasons — based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts." He argues diversity initiatives weakened the force and that "diversity is our strength" is a flawed premise. Actions target officers seen as tied to Biden-era DEI policies or "ideologically incompatible."
- Restoring warfighting focus: Hegseth and Trump emphasize a "laser focused" Pentagon on lethality, readiness, and meritocracy. Pre-appointment writings and speeches by Hegseth criticized "woke" culture, questioned whether some minority generals (including Brown) advanced due to race rather than pure merit, and opposed women in certain combat roles or lowered standards. Firings of prior leaders were defended as necessary because "it’s nearly impossible to change a culture with the same people [who] helped create or even benefited from that culture."
- Broader anti-DEI policy: Trump administration executive actions and Pentagon task forces ("Restoring America's Fighting Force") explicitly aimed to abolish DEI offices, viewing them as promoting "systemic racism" or discrimination against merit. This includes ending race/gender-based goals in promotions, admissions, etc. Hegseth created structures to enforce this, arguing it returns the military to color-blind, performance-based decisions.
These rationales appear in Hegseth's books/speeches, Pentagon statements, and aligned reporting (e.g., Fox News coverage of the task force). The administration has not framed the specific blocked promotions as "firing minorities and women" but as vetoing selections influenced by prior identity-focused policies. Officials often note that most senior leadership remains or becomes majority white male under these changes, which they attribute to correcting imbalances rather than bias.
That's a good question. I assume he didn't fire or stop the advancement of every woman or minority, but I don't know the answer to that. I'd guess the govt is probably right that women and minorities are more likely to hold woke views of how the military should operate, though.These rationales appear in Hegseth's books/speeches, Pentagon statements, and aligned reporting (e.g., Fox News coverage of the task force). The administration has not framed the specific blocked promotions as "firing minorities and women" but as vetoing selections influenced by prior identity-focused policies. Officials often note that most senior leadership remains or becomes majority white male under these changes, which they attribute to correcting imbalances rather than bias.
Without saying so, it appears this means that they are assuming the advancements of minorities and women were based not on merit but on DEI/woke shit and that they continue to be so. I'd like to see some evidence to back that up.
I think he would be justified (legally and for me, probably policy-wise, too) in stopping promotion or firing in the right context people holding DEI/anti-racist/woke views and championing them in the military. But I think the notion that if one was promoted due to affirmative action (which obviously has occurred in the past in the military) then that means one must necessarily hold woke views of how the military should be run or how to act in their work roles is a very weak claim.
I think he would be justified (legally and for me, probably policy-wise, too) in stopping promotion or firing in the right context people holding DEI/anti-racist/woke views and championing them in the military. But I think the notion that if one was promoted due to affirmative action (which obviously has occurred in the past in the military) that means one must necessarily hold woke views of how the military should be run or how to act in their work roles is a very weak claim.
Man, that's one slippery slope you're on there.
What substantial difference might there be between "championing them [DEI views] in the military" vs., say, proselytizing ones Christian (or Jewish or Hindu or Muslim) views in the military?
Valid? Where did I ask for valid? I asked for what their side of the story was. Stop disingenuously moving the goal posts.
I've not moved goal posts even once. Not sure what you're talking about.
Keep in mind that when an officer is forced to retire (fired) they aren't really free to give their side of it. It's the way it is. Not even McArthur did that.
Keep in mind that when an officer is forced to retire (fired) they aren't really free to give their side of it. It's the way it is. Not even McArthur did that.
Just curious, what would/could happen if Gen. George were to come out swinging and call out everybody involved?
I'm not claiming it's easy to distinguish. But what about Nazis--want them in the military? I do like your grouping woke together with other religious groups, though. Very apt.I think he would be justified (legally and for me, probably policy-wise, too) in stopping promotion or firing in the right context people holding DEI/anti-racist/woke views and championing them in the military. But I think the notion that if one was promoted due to affirmative action (which obviously has occurred in the past in the military) that means one must necessarily hold woke views of how the military should be run or how to act in their work roles is a very weak claim.
Man, that's one slippery slope you're on there.
What substantial difference might there be between "championing them [DEI views] in the military" vs., say, proselytizing ones Christian (or Jewish or Hindu or Muslim) views in the military?
You're well aware of what I'm talking about. The government had an explanation for why DOD did what it did. You said they didn't. You were wrong. Then, you tried to move the goalposts to say their story wasn't "valid."Valid? Where did I ask for valid? I asked for what their side of the story was. Stop disingenuously moving the goal posts.
I've not moved goal posts even once. Not sure what you're talking about.
Keep in mind that when an officer is forced to retire (fired) they aren't really free to give their side of it. It's the way it is. Not even McArthur did that.
It's OK to just write the words: I was wrong. Or "sorry, that wasn't right" if need be. It won't kill you.
Your last sentence is irrelevant to the issue I asked about. You flatly stated people had been fired solely because of their race or sex. Ohioguy said "it has been reported" that is true. But as suspected, that's disputed.