/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Sad and pathetic attempts at shifting burden of responsibility from the great leader.

It's pretty obvious why he is trying to weaken and deplete the US military. Because Russiagate was right

>>2766183
I dont think thats the reason these are all army staff and the army hasnt seen action yet so theres nothing really they couldve failed at.
Im guessing all of these are instead people that vehemently oppose the possible planned ground invasion of iran.

>>2766185
Even if, even so, sabotaging the military, which are historically defenders of the bourgeoisie and their legacies, is kind of a banana peel moment for him.

Hoping Cuba survives long enough for Amerikkka to make another critical mistake

>>2766543
I think it's because the White House wants to downsize the Army, take money away from the Army and shift it into the Navy, Air Force, and nuclear weapons programs. They're also trying to cut the number of generals in the Army. So this has set up a conflict between the Pentagon and the Army.

The Pentagon wants to shift the Army away from being a big maneuver force of mechanized divisions fighting a great land battle into a supporting force for the Navy and Air Force. So the Army handles missile defense, long-range tactical missiles fired from land (HIMARS), and camping the bases. But it's less central.

Important name involved is Elbridge Colby in the suit next to Hegseth in this pic. Hes' the undersecretary of defense for policy. Hegseth is more of a hype man from Fox News.

>>2766701
You keep saying that, but what is your basis? Pete is a former army(national guard) I think he is more about turning the army into his perfect vision than downsizing it. They're doing a lot right now to modernize ot into a drone force like Ukraine and Russia.

>>2766707
Like even before the war their announced plans were all about imcreasing recruitment and retention. Seen no proof they want to downsize.

>>2766707
>>2766711
He did say he wanted to downsize the command and increase the rank and file tho.

>>2766707
This is just me guessing really. But Hegseth fired the chief of staff of the Army, so it seems like it's about the future force structure? He also fired the head of T2COM which replaced TRADOC and so that's definitely about the structure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Transformation_and_Training_Command

The Army has changed its doctrine to shift back into a division-centric force rather than a brigade-centric force. The division is larger so they're envisioning using the Army in big land battles. They had been in a brigade-centric structure after 9/11 for Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's important to raise this because this is how the Army brass has been trying to sell itself to the Pentagon in a fight over the budget because they're competing with the Navy and Air Force for resources. They go, like, we're in a new situation where we have to figure out how to fight Russia or China (we all agree…) which have large militaries, and here's how the Big Retard Army can play a central role in that (please don't cut our budget).

>>2766714
I'm far from an expert but from my recollection, his whole thing is he knows the army from the bottom up and hates the bloated command and lives the rank and file so he wants to get rid of a large part of the command who he feels are just woke dei desk jockeys who don't know about fighting a war. He's been pushing through pay raises for the rank and file too.

>>2766716
This is what he said when he called that joint meeting of the entire command last year. I think to his mind he is streamlining the army while also increasing its overall size, not reducing it. Also to note on the money issue, they just upped their funding request to $1.5 trillion.

>>2766716
>>2766721
To put more simply, I think he just wants more direct control over the army.

>>2766716
Some more stuff.

(1)

>On April 30, 2025, Secretary of Defense (War) Pete Hegseth issued a memorandum, "Army Transformation and Acquisition Reform," directing the Secretary of the Army to

<implement a comprehensive transformation strategy, streamline its force structure, eliminate wasteful spending, reform the acquisition process, modernize inefficient defense contracts, and overcome parochial interests to rebuild our Army, restore the warrior ethos, and reestablish deterrence.

>Among other things, this directive requires the Army to restructure Army forces; downsize, consolidate, or close what is described as redundant headquarters; end procurement of what is described as obsolete systems; and cancel or scale back what is described as ineffective or redundant programs. This report addresses actions taken by the Army in response to the Secretary of Defense's directive as they pertain to force structure, headquarters, and associated organizations.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48606

(2)

>For those looking past official statements, however, the writing is on the wall. To meet Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s budgetary and strategic goals, the U.S. Army will have to shrink, and the number of U.S. ground forces in Europe is likely to decline sharply. The Trump administration should not apologize for these changes. Though the moves will face pushback, they are badly needed and will better align U.S. military commitments with the country’s security priorities and available resources.

>Hegseth’s guidance leaves those looking for cost savings with relatively few choices. The protected categories cover many of the Pentagon’s priciest budget items: U.S. operations on the southern border, munitions programs, missile defense, executable ships and nuclear submarines, and military construction in Asia, among others. Notably under-represented on the list is the Army, for instance its prized modernization programs and support to commands in Europe or the Middle East, where Army personnel play the largest role.

>Unsurprisingly, then, a recent budget simulation exercise run by American Enterprise Institute found that when making cuts under a strict interpretation of Hegseth’s guidance, the Army inevitably winds up as a significant “bill payer,” meaning that it absorbs a large share of required reductions. To a person, participants in the exercise reported that they had to cut U.S. Army force structure to make the budget math work.

>Military planners in the Pentagon are likely to come to the same conclusion. From a budgetary perspective, reducing the size of the Army makes sense because force structure is a major military cost driver. Fewer units mean less money spent on total salary and benefits and lower requirements for training and equipment.

>From a strategic perspective, cuts to Army positions match the Pentagon’s intent to shift its focus to Asia. Though the Army would contribute to contingency operations in the Indo-Pacific, the demand for ground personnel would be much lower than the need for maritime and air forces and their warships and aircraft.

>If Hegseth moves ahead with his budget realignment, then, reductions in active-duty Army positions are likely. The size and shape of these reductions is harder to predict. The Army vigorously denied reports that it was planning to axe 90,000 active-duty jobs, asserting instead that “End Strength might even go up. We are building more combat power while reducing staff and overhead.”

>It is likely that some cuts will occur among Army administrative roles or to the large and redundant staff hierarchies at service and combatant commands. But this will not be enough to free up the resources Hegseth has requested. Active-duty positions will almost certainly have to be eliminated as well, including some of the Army’s brigade combat teams (BCTs) and special operations forces.
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/us-army-troops-budget/

>>2766723
> “End Strength might even go up. We are building more combat power while reducing staff and overhead.”
Exactly.

I hate to give Hegseth and the Trump admin too much credit, but they're absolutely fucking right. Everyone knows about the insane amount of graft going on in military procurement. That's not a secret. Now we're seeing how much these multi-million dollar interceptor missiles don't even fucking work, but if you were paying attention to the last decade in Ukraine and the Middle East you'd know that too. They're moving into cost-effective cheap drones which is the smart move.

Really a purge was probably necessary. The army has been slow as shit updating for a post Ukraine-Russia War world. There is no way that the army could actually be effective in combat and still keep doing this wunderwaffen strategy, especially when they don't even work(can't intercept no matter how many multi-million dollar interceptors you shoot at the target.)

>>2766183
but anon, the entire USA is responsible…

Uncritical support for JDPON Don in his righteous crusade against eh burgerreich