Category: Discrimination: Veterans

Military Dismisses Commander for Criticizing Vance’s Political Agenda Amidst Authoritarian Loyalty Purge

The military recently dismissed Colonel Sussanah Meyers from her position as commander of the Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, following an email she sent that criticized a visit from Vice President JD Vance. This decision came just days after Vance’s remarks, which implied that Denmark was failing in its responsibilities regarding Greenland’s security.

Colonel Meyers’ email sought to clarify that the opinions expressed by Vance regarding Denmark were not representative of the views held at the Space Base. In her message, she emphasized the importance of maintaining nonpartisan conduct within the military, a principle that appears to contradict Vance’s politically charged comments and the agenda of the Trump administration, which has consistently sought to undermine diplomatic relations with allies.

Colonel Kenneth Klock, the commander of Space Base Delta 1, made the decision to relieve Meyers of her command, citing a “loss of confidence.” The Space Force emphasized the necessity of commanders adhering to high standards of conduct and remaining nonpartisan in their duties. This move highlights the increasing scrutiny and pressure military personnel face to align with the political narratives advanced by Trump and his associates.

Defense Department officials, including Joe Kasper, reiterated the principle of civilian control over the military, asserting that any actions deemed as undermining the chain of command or disrupting the administration’s agenda would not be tolerated. This reflects a broader trend within the military under Trump’s administration, where political loyalty is prioritized over the ethical conduct expected of service members.

After the dismissal, Republican Senator Eric Schmitt called for a formal investigation into Colonel Meyers’ actions, reinforcing the idea that military personnel must not engage in political expressions while in uniform. This situation underscores the troubling reality of an authoritarian loyalty purge within the ranks of the U.S. military, where dissenting voices are silenced in favor of a singular, politically driven narrative.

(h/t: https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/commander-us-base-greenland-fired-email-critical-vance/story?id=120705531)

Trump’s Military Purge Targets Advocates of Diversity as Authoritarian Loyalty Crisis Deepens

Donald Trump’s administration has executed a blatant purging of military officials advocating diversity, firing Navy Vice Admiral Shoshana Chatfield, who was the only woman on NATO’s military committee. The decision, announced on Monday, follows her inclusion on a so-called “woke” list compiled by the conservative group American Accountability Foundation, which has sought to eliminate leaders pushing for inclusivity within the armed forces.

Chatfield, a combat veteran and helicopter pilot, was let go without a formal explanation. Sources suggest the dismissal was linked to her vocal support for diversity, which stands in direct opposition to Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s explicit denouncement of “woke” policies in the military. This reflects an alarming trend within the Trump administration to target and remove individuals who champion diverse and inclusive practices.

The administration’s campaign is not isolated; Chatfield is the third senior female military officer dismissed since Trump resumed office, following the firings of Admiral Lisa Franchetti and Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Linda Fagan. The removal of these decorated officials signifies a troubling shift towards an authoritarian loyalty purge, wherein dissenters from the hardline Republican ideology are systematically ousted.

Chatfield’s comments, such as “our diversity is our strength,” have been labeled as extreme by Trump and his allies, who have pledged to eradicate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs within defense. Lawmakers, including Senator Mark Warner, have condemned these actions, suggesting that undermining military professionals not only weakens America’s defense posture but also damages crucial international alliances.

This deliberate sabatoge of military leadership underlines a broader agenda to reshape the Pentagon’s narrative and operational directives, driving it further into the hands of an authoritarian regime that prioritizes ideological conformity over national strength and security. Trump’s actions represent a dangerous and divisive approach to governance that threatens the values foundational to American democracy.

Trump’s Golf Game Over Fallen Soldiers Sparks Outrage Among Veterans

Military veterans and their families have expressed outrage over President Donald Trump’s decision to skip the dignified transfer of four fallen soldiers in favor of attending a golf event at his Doral Golf Course. Instead of honoring those killed in a training exercise in Lithuania, Trump sent Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to represent him at the ceremony, which many have deemed a deep disrespect to those who serve and sacrifice for the country.

Veterans like Joe Stutler, who served in Desert Storm, voiced their disgust at the president prioritizing a golf event sponsored by the Saudi-backed LIV Golf over honoring the slain soldiers. Stutler noted that while civilian leadership is essential, respect for fallen service members is a fundamental responsibility of the Commander in Chief, which Trump neglects. “This will be remembered in history,” he stated, condemning Trump’s behavior as a disservice to those who served.

Blythe Potter, a military police veteran, expressed her embarrassment at Trump’s actions, believing that the Commander in Chief’s lack of interest in honoring the soldiers reflects poorly on America. “He doesn’t care about our troops dead or alive,” she asserted, highlighting the troubling implications for U.S. international relationships, especially with allied nations like Poland and Lithuania.

Rebekah Sanderlin, the spouse of a retired Army veteran, also empathized with the families of the fallen, lamenting the missed opportunity for the president to provide solace and gratitude during such a somber occasion. “It would have meant a lot to those families to have their Commander in Chief greet our fallen heroes,” she remarked, underlining the honor that comes with such sacrifices.

Army veteran Scott Peoples criticized Trump’s decision to skip the ceremony, asserting that it epitomizes his disregard for military service members. He concluded, “Nothing matters to him other than money, power, and ego,” illustrating a pattern of behavior that has consistently devalued the contributions and sacrifices made by those who serve the nation.

(h/t: https://www.mediaite.com/trump/vets-and-spouses-outraged-over-trump-blowing-off-dignified-transfer-of-slain-soldiers-for-golf-event/)

Trump’s Dismissal of Key Military Leaders Risks U.S. National Security and Integrity

In a dramatic upheaval at the Pentagon, President Donald Trump has dismissed Air Force Gen. CQ Brown Jr. from his role as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, alongside two other senior military officials, Adm. Lisa Franchetti and Gen. Jim Slife. This action comes amidst a broader campaign by Trump and his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, to remove military leaders who endorse diversity and equity initiatives within the ranks.

General Brown, the second Black officer to hold the chairman position, has been significantly involved in critical military operations, including the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East during his 16-month tenure. His public support for the Black Lives Matter movement following the murder of George Floyd has made him a target in the administration’s fight against perceived “wokeism” in the military.

Despite Trump acknowledging Brown’s service on social media, the dismissal underscores the growing trend of politicizing military leadership. The president’s choice to nominate retired Lt. Gen. Dan “Razin” Caine, who lacks specific required experience for the position, reflects an alarming willingness to sideline qualified leaders for personal biases rather than merit. This is coupled with the troubling backdrop of proposed cuts to civilian roles in the Pentagon, further showcasing a shift towards an autocratic style of governance.

The firings of Franchetti and Slife, both of whom held significant military experience, adds to a pattern of Trump dismantling the careers of competent military professionals. Franchetti’s dismissal marks another loss for female representation in senior military roles, echoing a worrying trend initiated during Trump’s first term.

This alarming series of events illustrates Trump’s increasing authoritarian control over military leadership, prioritizing political loyalty over professionalism and merit. Such actions not only undermine military integrity but also jeopardize the effectiveness of U.S. military strategy at a critical time, as national security increasingly depends on experienced and capable leaders in the face of complex global threats.

(h/t: https://apnews.com/article/trump-brown-joint-chiefs-of-staff-firing-fa428cc1508a583b3bf5e7a5a58f6acf)

Trump’s Dismissal of Coast Guard’s First Female Leader Highlights His Anti-Diversity Agenda

In a shocking display of disregard for protocol and dignity, President Donald Trump’s administration evicted Linda Fagan, the former Commandant of the Coast Guard, from her official residence with only three hours’ notice. This abrupt ousting reflects the administration’s ongoing disdain for women and minority leaders, as Trump continues to pursue a policy of fascistic exclusion under the guise of authority.

Fagan, a four-star admiral and a trailblazer as the first female leader of a military branch, faced dismissal on grounds of prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). This decision aligns with Trump’s well-documented agenda against DEI initiatives, which he and his Republican allies falsely frame as unlawful government overreach. The timing of her eviction—carried out on Trump’s second day in office—illustrates a clear strategy to eliminate any progressive influences within the military structure.

The Defense Homeland Security officials justified the eviction, citing that Fagan had been terminated “with cause.” However, this reasoning undermines the true intent: to intimidate those who promote inclusivity and diversity. Sources indicate that the administration’s need to control the narrative and eliminate perceived dissenters is a driving force behind such actions, revealing the underlying authoritarian motivations of Trump’s regime.

Trump’s maneuverings include not only the fierce removal of Fagan but also a subtle message about his administration’s starkly traditionalist approach, where women leaders are pushed out and replaced by more compliant figures. This aligns with his practice of surrounding himself with individuals who adhere strictly to his narrow vision for leadership in the military and government.

The abrupt manner in which Fagan was forced out serves as a reminder of how Trump’s leadership is defined by pettiness and personal vendettas against anyone who does not conform to his narrow views of governance. As Trump continues to reshape the federal landscape into one that marginalizes women and minorities, he exposes the core tenets of his administration’s ethical vacuity and authoritarian ethos, threatening the very fabric of democratic governance.

(h/t: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna190820)

Trump Jokes About Being Shot at Rally with Gold Star Family

During a recent town hall event in Oaks, Pennsylvania, former President Donald Trump made an inappropriate joke regarding being shot while addressing a Gold Star family who lost their son in Afghanistan. The family, Mary and Charles Strange, had come forward to share their grief over the loss of their son, Michael, who was killed in action in 2011. The moment became particularly uncomfortable when Trump humorously remarked about the difficulty of getting up to meet them because he “got shot.” This comment was seen as a lack of sensitivity towards their tragic loss.

The event, moderated by South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, included a request from Charles Strange for a Congressional investigation into his son’s death, which he described as part of a larger tragedy involving 30 servicemen. Trump responded by promising to set up a commission within his first week in office, indicating a willingness to address the concerns raised by the Strange family.

Trump’s town hall was marked by chaotic moments, including interruptions due to medical emergencies in the audience. After these disturbances, Trump shifted the focus from serious discussions to an impromptu musical performance, showcasing his tendency to prioritize entertainment over substantive political discourse.

The audience’s reactions during the event varied, with some cheering and participating in the unexpected musical segment. This behavior reflects Trump’s ongoing appeal among his supporter base, despite the controversial nature of his comments and actions.

Overall, Trump’s latest town hall illustrates his controversial approach to sensitive topics, particularly regarding military families and fallen soldiers. His history of disrespecting Gold Star families continues to raise concerns about his empathy and suitability for leadership.

(h/t: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13960467/amp/Trump-makes-bizarre-joke-talking-couple-son-died-war.html)

Trump Jokes About Being Shot at Rally with Gold Star Family

During a campaign rally in Oaks, Pennsylvania, former President Donald Trump made an inappropriate joke about being shot after being introduced to a Gold Star family who lost their son, Michael, in the war in Afghanistan. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem acknowledged the family’s loss before inviting them on stage, prompting Trump to quip that it was ‘a little harder to get up since I got shot.’

Noem reminded Trump of the family’s loss with the comment, ‘Sir, they lost their son Michael.’ Trump then engaged the Gold Star parents, Mary and Charles Strange, who requested a congressional hearing into the circumstances of their son’s death.

Charles Strange explained that his son was killed on August 6, 2011, alongside 29 other service members, marking one of the largest losses in the Iraq and Afghan wars. He expressed frustration over the lack of answers regarding the circumstances surrounding their deaths.

In response, Trump promised to set up a commission to investigate their concerns within the first week of his new administration, stating that many families are in similar situations and seek clarity about their loved ones’ fates. His comments included a pledge to prioritize other campaign promises as well.

This incident highlights Trump’s controversial style of humor and his approach to addressing sensitive issues related to military families and veterans.

(h/t: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-jokes-about-being-shot-after-he-is-told-couples-son-died-in-war-sir-they-lost-their-son-michael/)

Trump’s Dismissal of U.S. Soldiers’ Brain Injuries as ‘Headaches’ Sparks Outrage

Former President Trump has once again downplayed the serious brain injuries sustained by over 100 U.S. troops from an Iranian missile attack in Iraq, dismissing them as mere “headaches” during a campaign event in Waunakee, Wisconsin. This comment reflects a troubling pattern of minimizing the suffering of service members, which has drawn widespread condemnation.

The Harris campaign swiftly criticized Trump’s remarks, labeling him as “unfit to be Commander-in-Chief” due to his insensitive comments about the injuries, which are a result of a 2020 attack that he previously dismissed as inconsequential. His statements appear to echo a similar sentiment from that time when he falsely claimed there were no injuries.

At the event, Trump questioned the meaning of “injured,” suggesting that the loud noise from the attack was the only issue, stating, “What does injured mean? You mean because they had a headache? Because the bombs never hit the fort?” Such rhetoric shows a blatant disregard for the real trauma experienced by these soldiers.

Moreover, Trump’s insistence that he was the toughest on Iran and his claims that the missiles did not hit their targets only serve to further trivialize the experiences of those who served. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz highlighted this issue during a recent debate, pointing out that Trump’s previous comments also dismissed the severity of the injuries.

Critics, including national security spokesperson Morgan Finkelstein from the Harris campaign, have underscored the gravity of Trump’s comments, stating that insulting injured service members during a time of increased military engagement in the Middle East is particularly egregious. Such remarks raise serious concerns about his capability to lead and protect the men and women in uniform.

(h/t: https://www.axios.com/2024/10/02/trump-us-soldiers-injuries-iran-strike-iraq-base-2020)

Trump Minimizes U.S. Troops’ Brain Injuries from Iran Attack as ‘Headaches’

 

Former President Trump recently downplayed the serious brain injuries sustained by over 100 U.S. troops during an Iranian missile attack on a base in Iraq, referring to them as merely ‘headaches.’ These comments were made during a campaign event in Waunakee, Wisconsin, where Trump responded to questions about whether he should have taken a tougher stance on Iran following the incident.

The Harris campaign quickly condemned Trump’s remarks, stating that they deem him ‘unfit to be Commander-in-Chief.’ This criticism highlights ongoing concerns regarding Trump’s previous dismissals of military injuries, particularly those chronicled after the January 2020 attack.

In his remarks, Trump questioned the meaning of ‘injured,’ asserting that no bombs hit the fortified area and implying that the troops’ experiences were exaggerated. He suggested that the sounds of the explosions caused discomfort, which he accepted as a form of injury.

These comments echo Trump’s previous statements from January 2020, when he similarly minimized the impact of the Iranian attack, which resulted in traumatic brain injuries among service members. Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota also referenced Trump’s earlier comments during a recent vice presidential debate, highlighting a pattern of trivializing military injuries.

National security spokesperson Morgan Finkelstein from the Harris campaign emphasized that as U.S. forces are engaged in the Middle East, Trump’s remarks are not only insulting but also raise serious questions about his leadership capabilities regarding military matters.

 

Trump says he will “not even consider” renaming bases named for Confederate leaders

President Trump tweeted Wednesday that he will “not even consider” renaming the 10 U.S. military bases that are named after Confederate leaders.

Why it matters: A spokesperson for Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy said on Monday he’s open to a “bipartisan discussion” about renaming the military bases and facilities that are named after Confederate leaders, including Fort Bragg and Fort Benning.

  • The debate comes as the Navy and Marines have moved to ban the display of Confederate-era symbols.
  • A number of states and cities around the country have also taken steps to remove Confederate-era symbols amid racial unrest over the police killing of George Floyd.

What he’s saying: “It has been suggested that we should rename as many as 10 of our Legendary Military Bases, such as Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Fort Hood in Texas, Fort Benning in Georgia, etc. These Monumental and very Powerful Bases have become part of a Great American Heritage, and a history of Winning, Victory, and Freedom,” Trump tweeted.

  • “The United States of America trained and deployed our HEROES on these Hallowed Grounds, and won two World Wars. Therefore, my Administration will not even consider the renaming of these Magnificent and Fabled Military Installations.
  • “Our history as the Greatest Nation in the World will not be tampered with. Respect our Military!”

The bottom line: White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said at a press briefing Wednesday that Trump would not sign any potential legislation — including the National Defense Authorization Act — that includes language to change the names of U.S. forts.

[Axios]

1 2 3 … 8