First reported in December, a series of eight interim reports provided by a whistleblower reveals the Department of Defense’s participation in a longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) seroprevalence study of 29,000 military service members between May 2020 and June 2021. To avoid being released outside of DOD, each document is marked “For Official Use Only” or “Controlled Unclassified Information.”

As noted in the Gateway Pundit report, “A seroprevalence study can be a helpful indicator of the development of herd immunity, which occurs when a large portion of a population becomes immune to a disease through infection or vaccination, making it difficult to spread.”

Thanks to the whistleblower, the public is now aware that the military likely achieved herd immunity as early as June 2021, months prior to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s now-rescinded 2021 COVID-19 shot mandate. Tens of thousands of service members were negatively affected, and treating the data on military herd immunity seriously could have resulted in a decision not to impose the vaccine mandate, which unnecessarily exposed thousands to a problematic vaccine they didn’t need, while forcing many more out of the military for refusing “the jab.”

WorldNetDaily interviewed Nick Kupper, a retired Air Force veteran who experienced the COVID-19 era while in service and is now a member-elect of the Arizona House of Representatives, set to assume office on Tuesday, Jan. 13.

Long before the military’s rollout of the COVID-19 shot mandate, Kupper was familiar with tests to detect the presence of antibodies in the blood. He had already used such testing to acquire medical exemptions for a handful of vaccines required by the Air Force. “Although I was never against vaccines, I had the right amount of antibodies for some of them, so I didn’t feel the need to put something in my body if I didn’t need it,” he told WND.

Kupper suspects he may have had COVID-19 in July 2020, but admitted he was not interested in being tested for the virus at this time. Coincidentally, in the months to follow, he donated blood at a facility that also tested for COVID-19 antibodies. He had none.

However, following a short period of illness with a typical COVID symptoms like body aches in January 2021, COVID antibodies were indeed present in his blood the next time he donated in February. Donating blood in May, his blood tested positive for antibodies once again. Seeking another antibody test in July to quantify the presence of neutralizing antibodies in his blood, he discovered that he had “a ton.” A third blood test confirmed the same.

With Defense Secretary Austin’s shot mandate coming into play in August 2021, Kupper went to an immunologist to begin the process of seeking an exemption. Previously, he said, medical exemptions had only required evidence of immunity based on serologic tests or documented infection. But for the so-called COVID-19 vaccination, he was shocked to discover that he would not be provided with an exemption.

“My bosses won’t let me [grant an exemption],” Kupper was told by the immunologist. Added Kupper, “He was the one person on the entire base who’s qualified to make that decision, but he wasn’t allowed to do so.”

With that, in September 2021, he filed for a religious accommodation request. Like thousands of other service members, the request was denied and he was set to be separated. Coincidentally, on the same day he was ordered to separate from the Air Force, Kupper was given a letter of reprimand for sharing his story with Tucker Carlson . Less than a week later, due to a legal injunction for Air Force members, he was able to retire after nearly 19 years of honorable service.

In a worst-case scenario, according to the agency’s own Interim Report #8, DOD should have been made aware that both the seroprevalence rate and presence of neutralizing antibodies in service members was on a clear path to herd immunity sometime between June 2021 and November 2021. Yet the findings of the DOD’s study weren’t shared publicly until August 2023.

Kupper was not surprised, he said, considering it “par for the course of everything DOD was doing at the time.” More than that, he said, “It pisses me off.” Admittedly, he is most frustrated about “how the government, military and supposed leaders can disobey the law and refuse to right the wrongs they’ve done.”

To retrieve more information related to the Department of Defense’s SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Study, this reporter submitted a Freedom of Information Act request on Dec. 18. A case number has been assigned, but an estimated completion date has not been provided.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Chuck DeVore, a former Army lieutenant colonel and now chief national initiatives officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, highlighted this alarming trend in a piece for The Federalist. The Pentagon’s annual report to Congress paints a picture of a nation that has poured significant resources into its military while the U.S. has been focused elsewhere.

The Numbers and Strategy

China currently boasts the world’s largest navy, with plans to increase its fleet from 370 ships and submarines to 435 by 2030. Beyond sheer numbers, the report details how the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is not only expanding its reach but also refining its strategies. The PLA is heavily investing in “cognitive domain operations” (CDO), aiming at what they term “mind dominance.” This involves using information to sway public opinion and destabilize opponents without engaging in direct combat.

Psychological Warfare and Influence

The concept of CDO is described in the report as an attempt by the PLA to create conditions favorable to China, reducing both civilian and military resistance to its actions. This approach is likened to an asymmetric capability, potentially deterring U.S. or allied intervention in conflicts or shaping public perception to China’s advantage.

Economic Focus and Military Prioritization

DeVore critiques U.S. military spending, noting that $5.4 trillion was spent on the war on terror and nation-building efforts, which he argues distracted from addressing the growing Chinese threat. He urges a reallocation of Pentagon resources to bolster naval strength, nuclear deterrence, missile defense, and logistics, especially in light of the incoming Trump administration.

Looking Forward

This military expansion comes at a time when China is also accused of engaging in espionage, with recent reports of Chinese cyber operations targeting U.S. telecom companies. The strategic implications of this build-up are significant, not just for regional stability but for global security dynamics.

The warning from DeVore and the analysis within the Pentagon report suggest that the world is witnessing a military expansion that could reshape global power structures, reminiscent of historical precedents where unchecked military growth led to widespread conflict.

As this situation unfolds, it will be crucial for U.S. policymakers to adapt strategies to counterbalance this rising force, ensuring that competition does not escalate into conflict, while maintaining open lines of communication with China.

Article and video summary generated with the assistance of AI.

The $895.2 billion Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, as House Resolution 5009 is formally known, pushes back the retirement of the F-15E Strike Eagles at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. Job savings and direct economic benefit to Wayne County is 520 jobs.

The Senate last week favored the bill 85-14 and the House of Representatives a week earlier sent it forward 281-140. Three of the nays were North Carolina Democratic Reps. Deborah Ross, Valerie Foushee and Alma Adams.

For the measure from North Carolina were Republican Sens. Thom Tillis and Ted Budd; Democratic Reps. Don Davis, Kathy Manning, Wiley Nickel and Jeff Jackson; and Republican Reps. Dr. Greg Murphy, Virginia Foxx, David Rouzer, Dan Bishop, Richard Hudson, Patrick McHenry and Chuck Edwards.

Hudson is the representative of the world’s largest military base, the Army’s Fort Liberty that was previously known as Fort Bragg and touches six counties in the Sandhills. Seymour Johnson is in Davis’ district.

Junior enlisted servicemembers are slated for a 14.5% pay raise; it’s 4.5% for all other servicemembers. Access to child care for the 63,700 children of North Carolina military families is also part of the bill.

The Air Force was going to take away 26 of the aircraft next year from the 335th Fighter Squadron.

Eight military construction projects in North Carolina are authorized, spending $296 million.

The defense spending plan authorizes supporting $41 million to construct a Combat Arms Training & Maintenance Complex at Seymour Johnson, famed home to the 4th Fighter Wing.

At Marine Corps Air Base Cherry Point, the bill authorizes $53.52 million for an aircraft maintenance hangar, $50 million for the F-35 Sustainment Center, and $20.02 million for the composite repair facility.

The bill provides $47 million in military construction projects at Fort Liberty, including a Special Operations Forces Arms Room Addition and Special Operations Forces Operations Facilities. It also prevents cuts to the Special Operations Forces troops. The base is home to the 82nd Airborne, Special Operations Forces, and known colloquially as the place getting “the 911 call” of presidents.

At MCAS Camp Lejeune, there is authorization of $57 million for the Special Operations Forces Information Maneuver Facility, and for $27.5 million for the Special Operations Forces Armory.

There is language included restricting the Pentagon’s TRICARE health insurance plan covering costs for gender dysphoria treatments for children of service members under age 18. New Defense Department positions related to diversity, equity and inclusion are also prohibited, according to the bill language.

In Biden’s message on the measure Monday, he objected to the gender dysphoria treatment restriction. He wrote, “No service member should have to decide between their family’s health care access and their call to serve our nation.”

(Natural News)—Kratos Defense and Security has confirmed the successful first flight of its stealthy unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV), the Thanatos.

The exact date of the flight was not disclosed due to the sensitive nature of the project. The flight was conducted to validate the aircraft’s basic aerodynamic design, marking a significant milestone in the development of the highly classified stealth drone program.

Steve Fendley, president of Kratos’ Unmanned Systems Division, stated that the drone’s flight abilities have been effectively proven. The company is now shifting its focus to testing Thanatos’ integrated systems to ensure it meets mission requirements.

“We’re not trying to figure out ‘Does the airplane fly?’ We’re now trying to figure out ‘Does the integrated system tick the mission box?'” Fendley said. (Related: Mysterious drones swarmed a U.S. military airbase for 17 days; officials say they don’t know who operated them.)

The Thanatos UCAV was first unveiled in November 2023 through a 3D artist’s rendering included in Kratos’ financial report. The design features a single-engine, tailless configuration with a diamond-shaped wing, blended air inlets and a recessed engine exhaust, all of which contribute to its low-observability characteristics. The aircraft’s design also lacks traditional vertical and horizontal stabilizers, reflecting Kratos’ emphasis on stealth technology.

Kratos likely to sell Thanatos to the Air Force

While the identity of the customer for the Thanatos remains undisclosed, the aircraft’s design includes both the markings for Kratos and the United States Air Force, strongly suggesting that the drone’s first operator will be the Air Force.

The company has expressed strong interest in the upcoming Increment 2 of the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program, which aims to integrate unmanned assets with Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) platforms.

The CCA program, also referred to as the “Loyal Wingman” concept, envisions unmanned aircraft operating alongside crewed fighters to enhance mission effectiveness. Fendley highlighted the potential of CCAs to augment fifth-generation fighter aircraft and offboard systems from fourth-generation aircraft, particularly in electronic warfare to improve survivability.

Kratos has prior experience developing UCAVs under the CCA program, specifically with its experimental XQ-58 Valkyrie stealth UCAV, which is currently in testing with the Air Force and the Marine Corps.

The Valkyrie, which is runway-independent and capable of launching via rockets or a trolley, has demonstrated its operational relevance during exercises like Emerald Flag in October 2024. During this mission, the Valkyrie successfully passed targeting data to Marine Corps F-35Bs, marking a significant step in closing the kill chain.

Fendley noted that the Department of Defense has increasingly prioritized runway independence, a feature that Kratos has incorporated into its UCAV designs. While it is unclear whether the Thanatos will share this capability, the company is exploring conventional takeoff and landing systems with retractable gear.

In terms of manufacturing, Kratos has designed its UCAVs with scalability in mind. A study on the feasibility of a 1,000-unit production run for the Valkyrie revealed that propulsion systems would be the primary constraint. Kratos is collaborating with GE Aerospace to develop scalable engines for future systems, including CCAs.

Watch this Dec. 17 episode of “Brighteon Broadcast News” as Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, discusses the possible use of drones with radar invisibility technology in the United States.

This video is from the Health Ranger Report channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• Mach 7 drone illustrates China’s latest leap in hypersonic technology.
• Ukraine claims to be developing “unstoppable” AI-controlled drones that can attack targets on the battlefield.
• Iran has developed a new, high-tech combat drone for Russia to use in Ukraine.
• Fully autonomous KILLER DRONES now closer to reality as rapid development of AI continues.
• Advanced swarming drones operated by U.K. defense ministry ready for deployment within months.

Sources include:

• AviationWeek.com
• TheAviationist.com
• Brighteon.com

China’s recent unveiling of a hypersonic drone has sent ripples through the global aerospace community. A video released by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) shows the MD-22, a cutting-edge unmanned aircraft, being launched from a high-altitude balloon and reaching speeds of Mach 7 before landing safely. This breakthrough marks a significant step forward in China’s quest for dominance in hypersonic technology. What exactly is this drone, and should Americans be concerned about China’s advancements?

What makes the hypersonic drone special?

The MD-22 is no ordinary drone. It operates in the “near-space” zone, a region between conventional aircraft and satellites. This gives it unparalleled flexibility and strategic capabilities. The drone can travel up to 8,000 kilometers (4,971 miles) and carry payloads of 600 kilograms (1,323 pounds), making it a formidable tool for both military and civilian applications.

One of the most impressive features of the MD-22 is its reusability. Unlike traditional hypersonic vehicles, which are often single-use, the MD-22 can land horizontally on a runway and be reused. This not only reduces costs but also opens up new possibilities for frequent and efficient testing. The drone’s ability to decelerate from hypersonic speeds to subsonic speeds for landing is a technological feat that few nations have achieved.

Another standout feature is its launch method. The drone is launched mid-air from a high-altitude balloon, eliminating the need for traditional runways. This makes it highly adaptable and capable of operating in remote or challenging environments. The combination of hypersonic speed, reusability, and flexible launch options positions the MD-22 as a game-changer in aerospace technology.

Should Americans worry?

China’s advancements in hypersonic technology are part of a broader push to lead in science and innovation. The MD-22 is just one example of China’s efforts to outpace other nations in aerospace research. While this may seem like a cause for concern, it’s important to put these developments into perspective.

First, hypersonic technology is not exclusive to China. The United States, Russia, and other nations are also investing heavily in this field. The race for hypersonic supremacy is a global competition, and while China is making strides, it’s not alone in this endeavor.

Second, hypersonic technology has both military and civilian applications. While the MD-22’s capabilities could be used for strategic purposes, it also has potential for scientific research, disaster response, and even space exploration. The ability to operate in near-space could lead to new discoveries and innovations that benefit humanity as a whole.

However, it’s undeniable that China’s rapid progress in hypersonic technology raises questions about the future of global security. As nations continue to develop advanced weapons and aerospace systems, the risk of an arms race increases. The international community must work together to ensure that these technologies are used responsibly and do not lead to conflict.

China’s hypersonic drone represents a new era in aerospace technology. Its reusability, flexible launch capabilities, and near-space operations set it apart from traditional drones and hypersonic vehicles. While the implications for global security are significant, it’s crucial to view these advancements in the broader context of international competition and collaboration.

As China continues to push the boundaries of what’s possible in aerospace, the rest of the world will need to keep pace. The MD-22 is a reminder that innovation knows no borders, and the future of aerospace technology will be shaped by the efforts of nations working together—or in competition—to achieve new heights.

Sources for this article include:

• SCMP.com
• ZeroHedge.com
• InterestingEngineering.com

(Natural News)—In recent years, the once-peaceful realm of space has become a new battleground for global superpowers, with the United States facing increasing threats from adversaries like China and Russia. The Pentagon’s recent acknowledgment of the need for “integrated space fires” – a term that signals a shift toward offensive capabilities in space – underscores the urgency of defending America’s critical assets in orbit. As the military becomes increasingly reliant on satellites for intelligence, communication and missile defense, the vulnerability of these systems has become a matter of national security.

For decades, the United States maintained a cautious stance on space warfare, wary of sparking a cosmic arms race. However, as China and Russia develop advanced anti-satellite weapons and demonstrate their willingness to use them, the Pentagon has recognized that the era of avoiding offensive space capabilities is over. General Chance Saltzman, the top general in the Space Force, recently declared that “space is a war-fighting domain,” a stark departure from the reticence of previous military leaders.

America is at risk

The threat is not hypothetical. China, in particular, has made no secret of its ambitions to dominate space and use it as a strategic advantage in conflicts on Earth. Its anti-access/area denial (A2AD) strategy, which seeks to prevent U.S. forces from operating in key regions like the South China Sea and the Indo-Pacific, relies heavily on satellite-enabled tracking and targeting. Brig. Gen. Anthony Mastalir, who leads U.S. Space Forces in the Indo-Pacific, warns that China’s space capabilities are “sufficient” to target high-value U.S. assets, including aircraft carriers and military tankers. This poses a direct challenge to America’s ability to project power and defend its allies.

Russia, too, has been actively developing anti-satellite weapons, including a ground-based direct-ascent ASAT missile that it tested in 2021. More alarming is the recent intelligence suggesting that Russia is exploring the use of nuclear-powered spacecraft for electronic warfare, potentially targeting U.S. satellites critical to military operations and civilian infrastructure. Such a capability would not only disrupt U.S. communications and intelligence gathering but also create a dangerous precedent for nuclear weapons in space, a violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.

The Pentagon’s response has been twofold: first, to build resilience in its space architecture, and second, to develop offensive capabilities to counter adversary threats. Resilience involves deploying large constellations of smaller, less expensive satellites that can absorb attacks and continue functioning. However, as General Saltzman has noted, resilience alone is not enough. “We have to build capabilities that provide our leadership offensive and defensive options,” he said, emphasizing the need for a credible deterrent.

The concept of “integrated space fires” encompasses a range of offensive capabilities, from cyberattacks on enemy satellites to directed-energy weapons that can blind or disable them. One particularly innovative idea is the deployment of “defender” satellites, which could intercept and neutralize hostile spacecraft before they can attack U.S. assets. These “Greyhounds of Space,” as they have been described, would provide a rapid and lethal response to any threat, ensuring that adversaries cannot disable critical satellites without consequence.

Leaders must proceed cautiously

The development of these capabilities is not without controversy. Critics argue that the U.S. risks escalating tensions by pursuing offensive space weapons, potentially leading to a new arms race. However, as General Saltzman pointed out, “Weapons systems aren’t inherently offensive or defensive. Is an aircraft carrier offensive or defense? Yes. Is an F-35 offensive or defense? Yes.” The nature of their use, he explained, depends on the operational decisions of military leaders.

The reality is that the United States can no longer afford to remain passive in the face of growing threats. China’s aggressive pursuit of space dominance and Russia’s development of nuclear-powered anti-satellite systems have rendered the old policy of restraint obsolete. To maintain peace and protect its interests, the U.S. must be prepared to defend itself in space.

The Space Force’s efforts to develop offensive capabilities are a necessary step in this direction. By building a robust space architecture that combines resilience with the ability to strike back, the U.S. can deter adversaries from launching attacks and ensure that space remains a domain of freedom rather than conflict. As General Saltzman concluded, “We’re still going to protect some of those [details], but broadly, from an operational concept, we are going to be ready to contest space.”

The stakes could not be higher. The future of U.S. military dominance, and indeed the security of the entire free world, depends on America’s ability to defend its assets in space. The time to act is now.

Sources include:

• FreeWestMedia.com
• ArsTechnica.com
• Medium.com

The Department of Defense is focusing on investments into fungi protein as an alternative to animal protein, after initially seeking to fund lab-grown meat earlier this year in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. Critics have pushed back on such initiatives, arguing that they are negatively affecting the military.

In November, the DOD announced that it had given 34 awards totaling over $60 million to bioindustrial firms under the Distributed Bioindustrial Manufacturing Program (DBIMP). $1.38 million was given to The Fynder Group “to plan a bioproduction facility for fungi-based proteins that can be incorporated into military ready-to-eat meals.”

The program is part of President Joe Biden’s Executive Order 14081, “Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy,” which is “aimed at bolstering America’s bioeconomic strengths while helping the Department achieve advanced defense capabilities,” according to the DOD.

The projects that were awarded funding from the DOD program “will be eligible to receive follow-on ‘build’ awards providing access to up to $100 million to construct U.S.-based bioindustrial manufacturing facilities,” the DOD announcement added. […]

— Read More: justthenews.com

Nobody is more apoplectic about it all than legacy media. Some are trying to play nice. Others are abandoning the little sanity they have left. But there are a few that are actually trying to figure out how to continue their existence under the Trump administration.

Meanwhile, transgender members of the military appear to be on their way out. We covered this and other topics, including why President Trump should NOT allow his appointees to have their backgrounds checked by the FBI, on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show.

Today’s sponsors:

• Faith-Driven Precious Metals Company: https://rumblegold.com
• Long-Term Storage Beef: https://worldviewbeef.com
• Long-Term Storage Meds: https://jasemedical.com/rucker

According to The Mirror:

Donald Trump is planning to kick all transgender members out of the US military, it has been claimed.

And the unprecedented executive order could be launched on his first day back in the White House on January 20. Experts suggest there are over 15,000 active service personnel who are transgender.

They would be given a special medical discharge, which would determine them unfit to serve in the US military, a source reportedly claims.

Trump, 78, is also expected to go one further and issue an outright ban on transgender people joining the military – at a time when many US Army branches are struggling to hit recruitment targets.

The incoming US president has slated what he claims are ‘woke’ military practices and suggested that some top brasses are often more concerned about diversity, equality and inclusion than fighting.

Reactions from conservatives on social media were cheerful:

Breaking: President Trump is planning to remove transgender individuals from serving in the United States military.

This makes sense, having people who are openly mentally ill in the military is not a good strategy. They need to be dealing with their mental illness, not… pic.twitter.com/XfVwOkl6dV

— Wall Street Mav (@WallStreetMav) November 25, 2024

Common sense alert:

President Donald Trump plans to kick transgender troops out of the US military.

Common sense coming back to our military! pic.twitter.com/skM3yect2z

— Tom Homan – Border Czar (Commentary account only) (@TomHoman_) November 24, 2024

Can President Trump remove the 'Woke' out of our military?
It's time…..Trump is considering a tra-nz ban executive order pic.twitter.com/wzioas53jQ

— Real Ben Garrison Cartoons (@GrrrGraphics) November 24, 2024

The wildest part about this story is that there are 15,000 transvestites in our military. We’ve really gone to sh-t. President Trump will fix it. pic.twitter.com/ocsXf7c3Xn

— Bad Hombre (@joma_gc) November 24, 2024

Recruitment has been way down and it’s widely believed that the “wokeness” of our military is to blame. This action by President Trump would go a long way to correcting the current unnatural nature of our fighting forces.

As I noted on Twitter, Gender Dysphoria is a mental illness and as such those suffering from it should be barred from military service. The military already disqualifies those with psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia. Until wokeness took over science, Gender Dysphoria was considered a form of schizophrenia.

Gender Dysphoria is a mental illness. It was always considered as such and has never been scientifically removed from the classification.

Wokeness made it "hate speech" to classify the ailment properly.

Removing the mentally ill from the military is a bold and righteous move by…

— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) November 25, 2024

Despite the multiple reports, this seems like a stretch to be enacted so quickly. But even if it doesn’t happen on Day One, it seems likely that Pete Hegseth, who President Trump nominated as Defense Secretary, will work through the Pentagon to make this happen.

According to a number of reports, President-elect Donald Trump will be creating a commission to review leaders in the military with the assumption that many of the top brass will be fired.

Trump will be using a “warrior board” of retired officers, The Hill reported, to review our current crop of three- and four-star officers and will weed out the ones the commission disapproves of.

That’s not all.

Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth—an Army veteran who has been awarded two Bronze Stars, and who served in Iraq and Afghanistan—said in past interviews that it’s necessary to remove “woke” senior military officials who have left the U.S. armed forces in a sorry state.

“First of all, you’ve got to fire [the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] and obviously you’ve got to bring in a new secretary of defense, but any general that was involved—general, admiral, whatever—that was involved in any of the DEI woke s—, has got to go,” Hegseth said in an early November interview on “The Shawn Ryan Show” podcast. DEI is shorthand for diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Pete Hegseth is ready for day one as Defense Secretary.

'All the woke Generals must be fired immediately.'pic.twitter.com/ai9cqoImj4

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) November 13, 2024

Trump and Hegseth—the author of “The War on Warriors: Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free” and “Modern Warriors: Real Stories from Real Heroes”—clearly intend to shake up the military at the top.

The Left, however, isn’t taking it well.

Legacy media is reporting on that development as if it’s some kind of ominous sign that Trump will “politicize” the military. They are even calling it a “purge.”

One left-wing podcaster, Fred Wellman, who includes “democracy advocate” in his X bio, even posted that removing generals is “truly fascist.”

This is truly fascist. The idea is they'll review and fire generals is chilling beyond measure and will damage our military for a generation. You don't make generals overnight. It takes decades. The good ones will leave early instead of waiting to be destroyed. (gift)…

— Fred Wellman (@FPWellman) November 12, 2024

Ah, yes, civilian control of the military, so fascist.

For a quick history lesson, a president’s removal of generals and other high-ranking military leaders—especially after years of relative “peace”—has often been a significant boon, not a hindrance, to the military.

Peacetime militaries—and I only use that phrase loosely to refer to our own era of near-constant, low-level asymmetrical conflicts—frequently calcify. Leaders who successfully navigate the bureaucratic treadmill to make it to the top ranks in those times are frequently not the best wartime leaders.

Militaries need to be shaken up from time to time.

In the War of 1812, many American military officers were holdovers from the American Revolution. Many had grown old and ineffective. The crucible of war allowed junior commanders like Winfield Scott to emerge as a brilliant young general who would prove instrumental in that war and future conflicts.

In the Civil War, there was a tremendous shake-up of the senior ranks on both sides.

Marginal officers like Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, who was almost entirely overlooked at the Virginia Military Institute, proved himself to be one of the most astoundingly gifted military commanders once he had a chance to prove himself in battle.

Abraham Lincoln suffered through far too many mediocrities at the top before finding war winners like Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman. Almost none of the top commanders at the beginning of the war ended up in the same place by the war’s end.

Right now, the United States clearly needs a shake-up at the Pentagon in the worst way.

The world is in turmoil, thanks in no small part to the Biden administration, and we are closer to seeing an actual peer-to-peer conflict than perhaps at any point since World War II.

Yet, many on the Left are hyperventilating about the move. Why? It’s a pretty good sign that they know they’ve made serious inroads into military institutions that are historically traditional and conservative. They don’t want to lose their grip on the military, just as they fear losing control of any other institution they dominate.

The primary issue, beyond typical military calcification, is that our current military leadership appears to be filled with those who have floated to the top amid the general woke-ification of American society and government.

It’s not Trump who will be “politicizing” the military; it’s the military itself that has been politicized. DEI, critical race theory, and other radical ideologies have been force-fed into military institutions, and the Biden administration was only too happy to accelerate that transformation.

They justified DEI by saying that it would create a better, more cohesive military and deepen the pool of recruits. That was the same unproven, bogus argument corporate America made when it went whole hog on “diversity” to the point of climbing aboard the discrimination bandwagon.

But much like the corporate DEI push—which proved a financial liability, rather than a boon—the military DEI advocacy has failed to “succeed” by even the most basic measures.

Nearly every branch of the military now faces a historic recruitment crisis, not to mention a surge in worrisome incidents that suggest a decline in competence and warfighting capability.

To make matters worse—and this is why Trump’s shake-up is almost certainly necessary—the military has failed to hold anyone at the top accountable for notable failures on the international stage.

Those failures have significantly weakened this country’s prestige and credibility abroad.

Most notably was the shambolic withdrawal from Afghanistan. After that failure, nobody at the top got fired. The Biden administration and the military moved on, as if nothing had happened.

If we can’t handle our business against the Taliban, isn’t it worth questioning our ability to counter far greater potential adversaries, such as China?

To underscore the notion that the military has lost all accountability at the top, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin disappeared for nearly a week early this year to take care of a health issue before notifying the president.

If these are the sorts of “invaluable” leaders we may lose if Trump gets his way, it’s hard not to see the president-to-be’s “warrior board” as a net positive. This country should expect a lot better of its military.

This seems like an important moment for a “democratic” correction to a military that has seen a sharp decline in public trust.

Under Biden, the buck stopped nowhere. With Trump, maybe more capable leaders will have a chance to rise to the top and get our military back to focusing on preparedness and defending the American people.