493
'Disbelief': Pentagon reporter can't find one military official who liked Hegseth's speech
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
493 points (99.6% liked)
politics
25874 readers
3160 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Things might get spicy when we finally have folks that decide to uphold their oaths to uphold the Constitution. We certainly haven't seen any in the Executive Branch yet, and most of the Judicial and Legislative seems to be abdicating their oaths too.
Note the oath the enlisted take specifically says they will follow the orders of the President.
That's not the one that matters.
The officer's oath does not include that, specifically for this reason:
I'm 99% sure that these oaths apply across the board regardless of branch, because they apply to more than just commissioned officers.
Foreign and DOMESTIC
Yeah they both say that.
Only one also says they'll do what the POTUS says.
I've already seen the taking point showing up on the right that the "... and domestic" part applies to the "antifa terrorists turning our cities into war zones and besieging federal (especially ICE) buildings."
I really hope that GOs don't take the oath lightly. When I taught that lesson to my cadets it was a serious conversation and usually involved stories about commanders I knew who got fired or court-martialed for everything including extra-marital affairs, to belittling subordinates, to fabricating illegal orders (and then breaking international law). I hope it doesn't come to it, but I imagine that a military court would be less partisan than our current courts have been.
And these generals will follow suit. People keep saying how serious and career-driven they are. What makes you think they won't put their career over the constitution like everyone else?
The federal courts are filled with people appointed through the political process, and a lot of the bullshit that's made it through the courts is a result of venue shopping to find sympathetic judges. But more importantly, the Trump administration has been losing a lot in court... until the Supreme Court steps in and reverses those rulings on the shadow docket. It's not the whole judicial branch that's the problem, just the ones that matter the most.
The legislature isn't doing its job because it's controlled by Republicans, and as a party they've gone through multiple purges to root out anyone who would put the country or the constitution ahead of Trump's slightest whim.
The executive branch has been under siege all year, a lot of people were fired without cause, and a lot of other people are resigning or getting fired rather than doing shit that's illegal and unconstitutional. While in some instances there are lawsuits making their way through the courts, there's only so much they can do after they get escorted out of the building.
To the best of my knowledge, the leadership of the military has had much more continuity and isn't so easily stacked with loyalists. You can't just grab some 20 something techbro douchebag from Elon's little band of hitler youth, or the last lawyer that was dumb enough to represent Trump and make them a general.
And there is also a big difference between what might be demanded of some congressman or civil servant compared to the military. While I doubt we'll see anyone directly disobeying an order from the white house that has troops standing around outside federal buildings, I do think it's pretty likely that an order to nuke an American city would be disobeyed. The question for each of them is where they draw the line. Openly defying orders is not something to be done lightly in the military.
If enough of them decide simultaneously that Trump is the main impediment to their careers, then you have a good, old-fashioned military coup.
Everyone there would have been the one for commissioned officers right below what you posted.