Commentary

‘You have written countless words in your blog castigating Gen. Mark Milley in the past few years, and upon his retirement as Chairman of the Joint Chief’s of Staff, you nominated him to be your October Fool’s Day recognition, why do you continue to berate him?’ you might ask.

It’s simple. In my small way, I will continue to tell the story of this general who is credited by a fawning media for saving America from a “Hitler-like” authoritarian (Trump) who threatened every democratic norm and who would have literally shredded the U.S. Constitution if not for Milley’s heroic resistance.

During his retirement ceremony, Milley said, “This is the last time you will hear from me in uniform.”  I suspect he will be out there with his anti-Trump rhetoric frequently between now and Election Day.  And I’ll be here to respond.

The latest drivel came in Jeffrey Goldberg’s piece, “The Patriot: How General Mark Milley Protected the Constitution from Donald Trump,” in the leftist Atlantic Monthly.

In Goldberg’s 6,000-word profile, Milley is “a safe sturdy, and sober bulwark of institutional norms,” while Trump’s “erratic, wrecking-ball style of disruptive leadership beckoned death and destruction practically every minute of every day.”

I learned of the Goldberg piece in a review of it, “Who the hell does Mark Milley think he is?” written by Blaze Media Opinion and Analysis Editor Ben Boychuck, who also used his column to challenge Goldberg’s words and those of Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who unbelievably compared Milley to Gen. George Patton.

Trump supporters will recall how the campaigning Donald Trump oft-repeated his goal of “keeping the U.S. out of reckless, unnecessary wars overseas.”  Remember how he was sure to start a nuclear war with North Korea over his provocative tweets about its leader?  He was the furthest thing from a warmonger, yet Milley is credited with keeping us out of wars.

I vividly remember, preparing to play a round of golf shortly after Trump was elected, when I heard one of the players comment, “he’ll have us in a war in no time.”  I didn’t say anything, but to this day I think of it every time I see him.

“The most enduring moment of the general’s tenure,” Ingnatius writes, “was his opposition to what he saw as President Donald Trump’s effort to politicize the military.”

“Wait, wait, wait … Trump’s effort to politicize the military?” shouts Boychuck.

After recalling the politicization in the military for decades under Bill Clinton and the “fundamentally transformed” military under Barack Obama, Boychuck reminds us of Milley embracing the divisive doctrines of “diversity, equity and inclusion.”  He goes on to describe how Milley succumbed to gender ideology, endorsed critical race theory, and saw climate change as an existential threat.

“Where exactly in the U.S. Constitution does it say the military is “independent from the president?” wrote Boychuck in response to Ignatius giving credit to Milley from what he saw as Trump’s assault on its independence.”

“The president shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States and of the Militia of the several states, when called into the actual service to the Unites States,” quoted Boychuck.

The president is elected by the people, he reminds us, while generals and colonels are elected by no one.  The president issues orders.  His subordinates are supposed to follow those orders, and if he cannot obey an illegal order from his superior, he’s obliged to object.  If he cannot obey a lawful order, then he’s obliged to step aside, Boychuck explains.

“When a general disagrees with his commander in chief, he should tell him so.  If the commander in chief rejects his advice, the honorable thing to do is to resign,” wrote Peter McCarthy of Scarsdale, New York in a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal. “Instead of resigning, however, Gen. Milley acquiesced to the disgraceful surrender of Afghanistan.  Now, he issues a parting shot at former President Trump.  This reflects on his character.”

Wasn’t Milley familiar with Biden’s four-decade record of foreign policy failures? Certainly, this called for Milley to take a firm position on Afghanistan with Biden.

But then, we later learned that Milley wasn’t the brilliant military mind he would have us believe, when he told Congress that a full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine could result in the fall of Kyiv “within 72 hours.”

Ten days later, not knowing when to keep his mouth shut, he declared that Russia had already lost Ukraine “strategically, operationally and tactically.”

Back to His Dislike of Trump

Oddly enough, Goldberg acknowledged that Milley admitted, “President Trump never ordered me to tell the military to do something illegal.  He never did that.”

Doesn’t that shoot down the picture Milley and Goldberg wanted to paint of Trump as a rogue actor and an existential threat to the Constitution and our democracy?

Goldberg also seemingly questioned Trump’s ability to overthrow the government on January 6, without the very generals who undermined and double-crossed him.  “It simply doesn’t make any sense,” Boychuck notes.

“Who the hell does Mark Milley think he is?  What gives him the right to second-guess a duly elected president?  For that matter, who the hell does he think he is to second-guess tens of millions of American voters who chose Trump to be their commander-in-chief?” concluded Boychuck, adding that of all the words in the beautiful English language for what Mark Milley really is, “patriot” is not one of them.”

Personally, I believe its time to stop giving credence to generals and other government lifers in the Deep State, who assume massive responsibilities without any real accountability.

Milley’s Out But …

… meanwhile, our other woke-minded generals in the Pentagon are now considering cutting 10 percent of is special-ops ranks, like the Green Berets, the very individuals most experts say we now need. 

With the Army’s recruitment problem, it would seem to me that the role of special-ops is one that would be attractive to young men, and even some young women. 

Did they switch from their catchy recruitment slogan What’s Your Warrior back to Be All You Can Be, because it was more fitting with the gender transition message it was trying to send?

The Army’s recruiting problem may well be traced to the Pentagon’s position on climate change and gender identity, A far cry from the covert missions of the Green Berets.

Coincidentally, who do you think Israel will be counting on as they weed the terrorists out of Gaza door to door? Special Forces. But theirs, not ours.

And … do those brilliant military minds in the Pentagon really think that changing the name of a base because it bears the name of a Confederate general really makes a difference?  Fort Bragg, named after Confederate Gen. Braxton Bragg, has been renamed Fort Liberty, but to those who once served there and those currently serving there, it will always be Fort Bragg.

Does the name Richard E. Cavazos mean something to the average military man or woman.  I don’t believe it, but Ford Hood in Texas is being renamed for him, the first Latino to reach the rank of four-star general in the Army.  It will always be known as Fort Hood.

Unfortunately, the naming of Gen. C. Q. Brown to replace Milley is like rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

May God continue to bless the United States of America.