Just one week before America celebrates the birth of Christ, War Secretary Pete Hegseth is moving to restore the U.S. Army’s Chaplain Corps to its original purpose: shepherding souls. In a video address this week, Hegseth announced several upcoming changes intended to remove controversial humanist and secular ideology from the military’s guidelines for chaplains, empowering chaplains to do their job and minister to the nation’s servicemembers.
“There will be a top-down cultural shift, putting spiritual well-being on the same footing as mental and physical health as a first step toward creating a supportive environment for our warriors and their souls. We’re going to restore the esteemed position of chaplains as moral anchors for our fighting force,” Hegseth declared. “This is a high and sacred calling. But this only works if our shepherds are actually given the freedom to boldly guide and care for their flock.”
Hegseth said that the Chaplain Corps’ “role has been degraded in an atmosphere of political correctness and secular humanism” over the course of the past several decades. “Chaplains have been minimized, viewed by many as therapists instead of ministers. Faith and virtue were traded for self-help and self-care,” he explained. In order to rectify this issue, the secretary of War shared that he is eliminating the “Army Spiritual Fitness Guide.” “In well over 100 pages, it mentions God one time. That’s it. It mentions feelings 11 times, it even mentions playfulness — whatever that is — nine times. There’s zero mention of virtue,” Hegseth reported. “The guide relies on New Age notions, saying that the soldier’s spirit consists of consciousness, creativity, and connection. The guide itself reports that around 82% of the military are religious, yet ironically, it alienates our war fighters of faith by pushing secular humanism.”
“In short, it’s unacceptable and unserious, so we’re tossing it,” Hegseth affirmed, sharing that he would sign a directive that very day to eliminate the use of the “Army Spiritual Fitness Guide.” “These types of training materials have no place in the War Department. Our chaplains are chaplains, not emotional support officers, and we’re going to treat them as such,” Hegseth stated. In a statement shared Wednesday, U.S. Army spokesman Tony McCormick confirmed, “We are aggressively moving forward with Secretary Hegseth’s intent to discontinue the Army Spiritual Fitness Guide.”
Additionally, the military will streamline its “faith and belief” coding system, a code system for personnel to report their religious affiliations. The system has “ballooned” to over 200 different religious beliefs recognized by the military, Hegseth shared, with many new codes being added under the previous administration for the sake of “inclusivity.” “An overwhelming majority of the military population only uses six codes. Eleven are not used by anyone,” the War Secretary noted. “So we’re going to streamline it and move it to a new list of religious affiliation codes so that our chaplains can actually use it to minister better to the flock.”
In comments to The Washington Stand, Family Research Council Executive Vice President Lt. Gen. (Ret.) William G. Boykin praised Hegseth’s reforms. “Once again, America’s secretary of War (SOW) has shown that he understands our military and what it takes to build a strong group of fighting men and women. He especially understands the importance of Chaplains on the battlefield,” Boykin said. “To the critics that said he was not capable of being the SOW, they ought to talk to the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines and see what they think, as they are the ones that put it all on the line and now they have a SOW that cares about everything except political correctness,” the General continued. “This is good news not just for the Chaplains but for the whole military, and all I can say is, ‘Thank you Pete, you’ve done it again.’”
“More reforms will be coming in the days and weeks ahead,” Hegseth pledged. “Chaplains are intended to be the spiritual and moral backbone of our nation’s forces. George Washington established the Chaplain Corps in 1775, one of his first actions as general of the Continental Army. Congress authorized chaplains for the Navy that very same year,” he recounted. “For about 200 years, the Chaplain Corps continued its role as the spiritual leader of our service members, serving our men and women in times of hardship and ministering to their souls,” he continued. “We are going to make the Chaplain Corps great again.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Make-Chaplain-Corps-Great-Again.jpg336640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-12-19 11:48:112025-12-19 11:49:37War Department Moves to ‘Make Chaplain Corps Great Again’
Progressive policies are out and wartime fitness standards are in at the newly-renamed Department of War, according to Secretary Pete Hegseth. At a high-profile meeting with the U.S. military’s top generals in Quantico on Tuesday morning, Hegseth and President Donald Trump unveiled new plans and policies to restore the military’s “warrior ethos” after years of left-wing dilution.
“Good morning, and welcome to the War Department, because the era of the Department of Defense is over,” Hegseth announced. “The motto of my first platoon was, ‘Those who long for peace must prepare for war,’” he shared. “This is, of course, not a new idea. This crowd knows that the origin dates to fourth century Rome, and has been repeated ever since, including by our first commander in chief, George Washington, the first leader of the War Department. It captures a simple yet profound truth. To ensure peace, we must prepare for war.”
“From this moment forward, the only mission of the newly restored Department of War is this war-fighting, preparing for war and preparing to win, unrelenting and uncompromising in that pursuit,” Hegseth, himself a decorated military veteran who served in the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War, announced. “Not because we want war — no one here wants war — but it’s because we love peace. We love peace for our fellow citizens. They deserve peace, and they rightfully expect us to deliver it,” the secretary of War continued. “Our number one job, of course, is to be strong so that we can prevent war in the first place. The president talks about it all the time. It’s called peace through strength. And as history teaches us, the only people who actually deserve peace are those who are willing to wage war to defend it.”
“We are the strength part of peace through strength, and either we’re ready to win or we are not,” Hegseth told the senior officers gathered. “This speech today is about people, and it’s about culture. The topic today is about the nature of ourselves. Because no plan, no program, no reform, no formation will ultimately succeed unless we have the right people and the right culture at the War Department,” he continued. “The best way to take care of troops is to give them good leaders committed to the war-fighting culture of the Department. Not perfect leaders — good leaders, competent, qualified, professional, agile, aggressive, innovative, risk-taking, apolitical, faithful to their oath and to the Constitution.”
“For too long, we have simply not done that. The military has been forced by foolish and reckless politicians to focus on the wrong things. In many ways, this speech is about fixing decades of decay,” the secretary explained. “You might say we’re ending the war on warriors,” he quipped. “For too long, we’ve promoted too many uniformed leaders for the wrong reasons based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts. We’ve pretended that combat arms and non-combat arms are the same thing. We’ve weeded out so-called toxic leaders under the guise of double-blind psychology assessments promoting risk-averse, ‘go along to get along’ conformists instead,” Hegseth recounted. “You name it, the department did it. Foolish and reckless. Political leaders set the wrong compass heading, and we lost our way. We became the woke department. But not anymore.”
“This administration has done a great deal from day one to remove the social justice, politically-correct, and toxic ideological garbage that had infected our department, to rip out the politics. No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses, no more climate change worship, no more division, distraction, or gender delusions. No more debris,” Hegseth declared. “As I’ve said before and will say again, we are done with that s***. I’ve made it my mission to uproot the obvious distractions that made us less capable and less lethal. That said, the War Department requires the next step.”
“The litmus test for these changes is pretty simple. Would I want my eldest son, who is 15 years old, eventually joining the types of formations that we are currently wielding?” Hegseth asked. “My son is no more important than any other American citizen who dons the cloth of our nation. He is no more important than your son. All precious souls made in the image and likeness of God,” he continued. “Every parent deserves to know that their son or their daughter that joins our ranks is entering exactly the kind of unit that the secretary of War would want his son to join,” Hegseth emphasized. “Jesus said, ‘Do unto others what you would have done unto yourself.’ It’s the ultimate simplifying test of truth. The new War Department golden rule is this: ‘Do unto your unit as you would have done unto your own child’s unit.”
“Would you want him serving with fat or unfit or under-trained troops, or alongside people who can’t meet basic standards, or in a unit where standards were lowered so certain types of troops could make it in, in a unit where leaders were promoted for reasons other than merit performance and war-fighting? The answer is not just no, it’s hell no,” the secretary proclaimed. “This means that the War Department, first and foremost, we must restore a ruthless, dispassionate, and common-sense application of standards,” he explained. “I don’t want my son serving alongside troops who are out of shape or in combat, in a unit with females who can’t meet the same combat arms physical standards as men, or troops who are not fully proficient on their assigned weapons platform or task, or under a leader who was the first but not the best,” Hegseth shared. “Standards must be uniform, gender neutral, and high. If not, they’re not standards. They’re just suggestions, suggestions that get our sons and daughters killed.”
“The era of politically correct, overly-sensitive, ‘don’t hurt anyone’s feelings’ leadership ends right now at every level. Either you can meet the standard, either you can do the job, either you are disciplined, fit, and trained, or you are out,” Hegseth stated. Some of the policies he shared that the Department of War is introducing to increase the U.S. military’s lethality and warrior ethos include:
The Department is restoring the highest male standards for combat roles, ensuring that all personnel in combat Military Occupational Specialties (MOS) and designated combat arms positions meet the highest male physical fitness and performance standards, regardless of their sex. “If women can make it, excellent. If not, it is what it is,” Hegseth said. “It will also mean that weak men won’t qualify, because we’re not playing games. This is combat. This is life or death.”
All servicemembers, including high-ranking officers such as generals and admirals, will have to pass rigorous physical fitness and weight tests twice a year. “Frankly, it’s tiring to look out at combat formations — or really any formation — and see fat troops. Likewise, it’s completely unacceptable to see fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon and leading commands around the country and the world,” Hegseth said. “It’s a bad look. It is bad, and it’s not who we are. So whether you’re an Airborne Ranger or a Ranger, a brand new private or a four-star general, you need to meet the height and weight standards and pass your P.T. test.”
Grooming and appearance standards are also being reset in an effort to promote uniformity and discipline. Bans on beards and long hair, for example, will be strictly enforced now, with exceptions made for Special Forces personnel. “No more beards, long hair, superficial individual expression. We’re going to cut our hair, shave our beards, and adhere to standards,” the clean-shaven Hegseth announced. “We don’t have a military full of Nordic pagans, but unfortunately, we have had leaders who either refuse to call B.S. and enforce standards, or leaders who felt like they were not allowed to enforce standards. Both are unacceptable.”
The War Department will also be reducing unnecessary training related to issues such as climate, sensitivity, gender ideology, and DEI. “An entire generation of generals and admirals were told that they must parrot the insane fallacy that ‘our diversity is our strength.’ … They had to put out dizzying DEI and LGBTQ+ statements. They were told females and males are the same thing, or that males who think they’re females are totally normal. They were told that we need a green fleet and electric tanks. They were told to kick out Americans who refuse an emergency vaccine,” Hegseth recounted. “Now we’re giving you back real time: less PowerPoint briefings and fewer online courses, more time in the motor pool and more time on the range.”
The online actions of troops will also be more strictly observed and disciplined. Anonymous posting and particularly criticizing or complaining about military leaders will not be tolerated. “Anonymous online or keyboard complaining is not worthy of a warrior. It’s cowardice masquerading as conscience. Anonymous unit-level social media pages that trash commanders, demoralize troops, and undermine unit cohesion must not be tolerated again,” Hegseth clarified. Additionally, officers will not be excessively penalized for “honest mistakes” or for taking risks. “A risk-averse culture means officers execute not to lose, instead of to win,” Hegseth explained. “Commanders and NCOs don’t take necessary risks or make tough adjustments for fear of rocking the boat or making mistakes. A blemish-free record is what peacetime leaders covet the most, which is the worst of all incentives.”
Diversity, equity, and inclusion standards, such as race-based hiring or promotion, and gender ideology, as Hegseth noted at the beginning of his speech, are over at the Department of War. Instead, the military will focus on merit-based hiring and promotion to ensure that it is advancing the best, brightest, and bravest that the nation has to offer.
In comments to The Washington Stand, retired Lt. Col. (Ret.) Robert Maginnis, senior fellow for National Security at Family Research Council, observed, “Secretary Hegseth sent a very clear message at Quantico: the Pentagon is back to being the War Department. His focus is on warfighting, not bureaucracy. That means ending politically-correct distractions — he said flat out, ‘the era of overly-sensitive, don’t hurt anyone’s feelings’ leadership ends right now.’” Maginnis added, “What this means moving forward is simple: a leaner, tougher, more lethal military. If it’s done right, it restores the warrior ethos that wins wars. But it will also test whether these reforms are about readiness or politics. The stakes couldn’t be higher.”
Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, executive vice president at Family Research Council, told TWS, “In my 36-and-a-half years in the U.S. Army, I never saw an event like this, where virtually all senior leadership of all the military services gathered to hear the secretary of Defense tell his people what he expects of them and the people they lead.” Boykin shared, “I think it is another indication that our American military is being restored from the abysmal shape that it was in when the last administration left office. I sincerely hope that this will be at least an annual event for him and these leaders.”
The president also spoke at the Quantico summit, joking that Hegseth’s speech was so strong that he would rather “fire” the secretary than have to follow him onstage. “There could be no higher honor than to serve as your commander in chief. It is a great honor. … To each and every one of you, I thank you for your unwavering devotion to the armed forces and to the country that we’ve all sworn a sacred oath to defend,” Trump began.
Addressing the change of name from Department of Defense to Department of War, the president commented, “We won the First World War. We won the Second World War. We won everything in between and everything before that. We only won. And then we went in a way that was probably the first sign of wokeness. And we changed it to Defense instead of War.” He observed, “It’s really a historic reassertion of our purpose and our identity and our pride. That’s when we go with the word war.” The president continued, “We want war, because we want to have no wars. But you have to be there, sometimes you have to do it. I have settled so many wars since we’re here. We’re here almost nine months, and I’ve settled seven. And yesterday we might have settled the biggest of them all.”
Trump observed that the only conflict he hasn’t “settled” yet is the one between Ukraine and Russia. He faulted his predecessor, Joe Biden, and his inept leadership of the military for emboldening Russian President Vladimir Putin to engage in the conflict. “I mean, if we were weak, they wouldn’t even take my phone call. But we have extreme strength. We had the horror show in Afghanistan, which is really the reason I think that Putin went in. He saw that horror show by Biden and his team of incompetent people, and that showed, I think it gave him a path in,” the president posited. “And now we’re back, and that’s it. We’re not going to have any of that crap happen, I can tell you. That was terrible. So terrible.”
“Together, we’re reawakening the warrior spirit. And this is a spirit that won and built this nation. And from the cavalry that tamed the Great Plains to the ferocious, unyielding power of Patton, Bradley, and the great General Douglas MacArthur, these are all great men in this effort. We’re a team,” the president told the gathered military leaders. “I am with you, I support you, and as president, I have your backs 100%. You’ll never see me even waver a little bit. That’s the way it is.”
“As leaders, our commitment to every patriot who put on the uniform is to ensure that the American military remains the most lethal and dominant on the planet, not merely for a few years, but for decades,” Trump declared. “To be so strong that no nation will dare challenge us, so powerful that no enemy will dare threaten us, and so capable that no adversary can even think about beating us,” he added. “History has shown that military supremacy has never been simply a matter of money or manpower. At the end of the day, it is the culture, the spirit of our military, that truly sets us apart from any other nation,” the president stated. “Our ultimate strength will always come from the fierce people, those brilliant people with such pride and the unbending will and the traditions of excellence that have made us the most unstoppable force ever to walk the face of the earth. And that’s what we are.”
“The men and women in this room inherit the legacy built and won by Washington and Jackson. Grant and Pershing, Eisenhower and Patton, Nimitz and LeMay. We carry forward the majestic military heritage passed down from father to son, soldier to soldier, and one generation of warriors to the next,” Trump soliloquized. “From Concord Bridge to Fort McHenry, from Gettysburg to Manila Bay, from Normandy to Sicily, and from the jungles of Vietnam to the dusty streets of Baghdad, America’s military has charged into hellfire, climbed up jagged mountains, crossed roaring oceans, and thundered across open deserts to defend our flag, our freedom, and our homeland.”
“Now we are discovering American muscle, reasserting American might, and beginning the next storied chapter in American military legends and lore. … When it comes to defending our way of life, nothing will slow us. No enemy will stop us. They cannot stop us. And no adversary will stand in our way. They won’t stand in our way,” the president asserted. “We will vanquish every danger and crush every threat to our freedom in every generation to come. Because we will fight, fight, fight, and we will win, win, win. I want to just thank you once again, and God bless the United States military and God bless America. God bless you all.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Warrior-Ethos-TWS.jpg336640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-10-01 14:25:392025-10-02 05:27:17‘Ready to Win’: Hegseth Announces New Policies to Restore Department of War’s ‘Warrior Ethos’
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered a U.S. Navy vessel to be stripped of its name. The USNS Harvey Milk is an oiler named after a San Francisco gay rights activist. In November 2021, the ship was “formally christened and launched” into service after plans were made to name a ship after Milk as early as 2016.
According to the Department of Veterans Affairs, the oiler was named after Milk to recognize his “legacy and dedication to gay rights.” Milk acted as an activist for LGBT causes, openly advocating for those who identify as homosexual while serving on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and giving speeches where he insisted, “Every gay person must come out.” Many criticized the ship’s namesake, questioning whether Milk deserved such an honor.
According to Military.com, the memo ordering the name change labeled the action as a realignment to the “priorities of reestablishing the warrior culture” within the military. Reportedly, making the announcement in June, dubbed Pride Month by LGBT activists, is also intentional.
Some Democrats have expressed their disapproval over the decision. California Congresswomen Nancy Pelosi (D) called the move “spiteful,” adding it is a “shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) rebuked Hegseth, calling it a “complete and total disgrace” and an “abomination.” Jeffries also referred to Hegseth as “the least qualified secretary of Defense in American history.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) blasted Hegseth, saying, “Erasing Harvey Milk’s name is disgusting, blatant discrimination — and during Pride Month to boot. He served the U.S. Navy and his country honorably, and he was assassinated while serving the public and fighting for LGBTQ+ rights. Hegseth should be ashamed of himself and reverse this immediately.”
In a statement made to USA Today, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell defended the decision, saying Hegseth “is committed to ensuring that the names attached to all DOD installations and assets are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief’s priorities, our nation’s history, and the warrior ethos.”
Other ships’ names may be on the chopping block as well. The USNS Ruth Bader Ginsburg and USNS Cesar Chavez, among others, are reportedly being considered for rechristening. Parnell noted, “Any potential renaming(s) will be announced after internal reviews are complete.”
As far as the USNS Harvey Milk goes, many are praising the decision, including Lt. Gen. (Ret.) William G. Boykin, executive vice president of Family Research Council. “Secretary Hegseth is sending a message to the entire military establishment that specific value is being put on the warrior ethos,” told the Washington Stand.
Boykin recalled his military experience, saying, “I have stood on east and west coast docks watching the christening of ships for two of my men who died in combat and had ships named for them. That is something that America can be proud of.”
Boykin expressed his gratitude at the changes being made under President Trump and Hegseth. “Our military under the last administration was headed over the cliff at a rapid pace with all of the DEI activities that were taking up time that should have been used to prepare for war. The warrior spirit is being restored by the secretary of Defense and the quality leaders in our military today. We must recognize that the world we live in has become so complex and dangerous that we must use our time wisely to ensure that our men and women of the armed services are ready when the call comes.”
“Ships and other memorials should be reserved for those who have either proven themselves in a courageous way or they have died in combat,” Boykin concluded. “[There are] no exceptions.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-06-05 14:55:362025-06-06 05:46:11‘Warrior Spirit Being Restored’: Retired General Weighs In on Renaming USNS Harvey Milk
Nearly four years ago, then-President Joe Biden withdrew U.S. military forces from Afghanistan in a disastrous, ill-planned maneuver that cost the lives of 13 U.S. servicemembers and 170 civilians. Now, President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are launching an investigation to determine how the withdrawal was botched.
In a Monday Department of Defense (DOD) memo shared with The Washington Stand, Hegseth wrote, “President Trump and I have formally pledged full transparency for what transpired during our military withdrawal from Afghanistan. The Department of Defense has an obligation, both to the American people and to the warfighters who sacrificed their youth in Afghanistan, to get to the facts.”
“This remains an important step toward regaining faith and trust with the American people and all those who wear the uniform and is prudent based on the number of casualties and equipment lost during the execution of this withdrawal operation,” Hegseth continued. He noted that the DOD has been conducting a months-long review of “this catastrophic event in our military’s history,” beginning shortly after Trump’s return to the White House. However, in order “to ensure that accountability for this event is met and that the complete picture is provided to the American people,” the DOD will establish a “Special Review Panel” to examine previous reviews, sources, witnesses, transcripts, and factual findings and “analyze the decision making that led to one of America’s darkest and deadliest international moments.” Hegseth pledged, “This team will ensure ACCOUNTABILITY to the American people and the warfighters of our great Nation.”
The DOD informed The Washington Stand that the panel will be led by Afghanistan War military veteran and senior DOD official and advisor Sean Parnell, along with Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller, an outspoken critic of the Biden administration’s management of the withdrawal, and investigative reporter and author Jerry Dunleavy. Previously, Dunleavy played a key role in helping the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee conduct its own investigation and compile its own report on the withdrawal.
In comments to TWS, former House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), who oversaw the compilation and publication of the report, recounted, “The Biden administration’s catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan ceded the country to the Taliban, abandoned our allies, and resulted in the deaths of 13 brave American servicemembers.” He stated, “This was a failure of epic proportions, yet President Biden and his Democratic allies in Congress tried to sweep it all under the rug.” The congressman continued, “I’m glad to see the Trump administration putting rightful focus on the impacts of this debacle — as the Foreign Affairs Committee did under my chairmanship — and working to improve accountability, transparency, and procedures to ensure this never happens again. The American people, our Afghan allies, and our Gold Star families deserve nothing less.”
The House Foreign Affairs Committee’s report, published in September, was the result of months of extensive investigations and hearings. The report concluded that the Biden administration “was determined to withdraw from Afghanistan … no matter the cost.” The administration therefore “ignored” the provisions of the Doha Agreement, a 2020 treaty between the U.S. and the Taliban establishing the terms for a phased U.S. withdrawal, as well as the “pleas of the Afghan government, and the objections by our NATO allies, deciding to unilaterally withdraw from the country.”
The Biden administration also “prioritized the optics of the withdrawal over the security of U.S. personnel on the ground,” subsequently failing “to plan for all contingencies, including a noncombatant evacuation operation (NEO) and refused to order a NEO until after the Taliban had already entered Kabul.” That failure to initiate an NEO in time resulted in jeopardizing the lives of numerous DOD and State Department personnel in Kabul and the deaths of 13 U.S. servicemembers, as well as at least 45 others who were wounded.
According to the report, Biden administration personnel and officials, especially members of the National Security Council and then-National Security Advisor (NSA) Jake Sullivan, actively lied to the American public about the withdrawal and the circumstances surrounding it. In some cases, DOD personnel under the Biden administration’s command also destroyed hard drives and laptops, an act the report referred to as “inexcusable errors.” The report added, “As evidenced by this investigation, record collection and preservation are key to ensuring another such catastrophe does not occur again and preventing the loss of American life.”
“In the aftermath of the withdrawal, U.S. national security was degraded as Afghanistan once again became a haven for terrorists, including al Qaeda and ISISK,” the report stated. It continued, “America’s credibility on the world stage was severely damaged after we abandoned Afghan allies to Taliban reprisal killings — the people of Afghanistan we had promised to protect. And the moral injury to America’s veterans and those still serving remains a stain on this administration’s legacy.”
“Beyond the impact the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and abandon our allies for 20 years,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Bill Roggio tells The Washington Stand, “the Department of Defense should investigate what its prior leadership knew about the security situation at the time, Al Qaeda’s presence in the country, and how terror groups would thrive after the inevitable collapse of the Afghan government.
“Al Qaeda was closely allied with the Taliban at the time of the withdrawal,” he continued, “and fought alongside the Taliban to conquer the country. Today, Al Qaeda has significant infrastructure in the country, including terror training camps in 13 provinces, safe houses, religious schools, and a weapons storage depot. The infrastructure didn’t materialize out of thin air; it was the result of years of a close alliance forged in blood and sacrifice. The Taliban has paid its debt to Al Qaeda, and the world is far less safe today because of it.”
Trump has repeatedly and openly castigated the Biden administration’s handling of the withdrawal. When Kabul was taken by the Taliban in August 2021, Trump called on Biden to “resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan,” adding that the botched withdrawal “will go down as one of the greatest defeats in American history!”
On the three-year anniversary of the Abbey Gate bombing in Kabul that claimed the lives of the 13 U.S. servicemembers, Trump referred to the withdrawal as “the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country…” While Biden and his deputy, then-Vice President Kamala Harris, criticized Trump for appearing at an Arlington National Cemetery event commemorating the fallen soldiers, the families of those soldiers defended Trump’s presence and lambasted Biden and Harris for their mismanagement of the troop withdrawal.
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-05-24 12:22:342025-05-24 12:26:13DOD Announces Investigation of Biden Admin.’s Deadly Afghanistan Withdrawal
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard referred two intelligence officials to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution over their alleged leaks of classified information Wednesday.
The two officials reportedly leaked top-secret military information to The Washington Post and The New York Times, purportedly to hamper President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and stir up public opinion for their own partisan political gain.
“Politicization of our intelligence and leaking classified information puts our nation’s security at risk and must end,” Gabbard told Fox News, noting that a third criminal referral is on its way. “Those who leak classified information will be found and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”
This isn’t the first time Gabbard has cracked down on intelligence community leakers. In March, she announced her department’s intention to aggressively pursue such activity and gave examples of how leakers recently shared classified info ranging from American intel on Israel and Iran to the U.S.’s relationship with Russia with left-wing media allies such as The Huffington Post, The Washington Post, and NBC.
At the time, Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton (R) praised Gabbard for working to end “the weaponization of the intelligence community.”
Yet the weaponization of the intelligence community against the Trump administration is far from over. Gabbard’s recent criminal referrals for two intelligence leakers come as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faces a slew of coordinated media attacks meant to slander his reputation and give him the boot at the Pentagon — all thanks to partisan intel officials leaking to their allies in the press. For example, The New York Times recently tried to resurrect “Signal-gate” by alleging Hegseth sent classified info via Signal to his wife and other personal contacts. NPR joined the psyop, by reporting that an unnamed “U.S. official” told the outlet the Trump administration is now looking for a new Defense secretary (the White House immediately repudiated the claim). Notably, both “scoops” rely entirely on anonymous sources for their articles (NPR’s “story” relies on only one anonymous source).
These anonymous sources are the partisan operatives within the intelligence community Gabbard hopes to root out. Because they are diametrically opposed to Hegseth and the threat he poses to both the military industrial complex and pointless foreign conflicts, as well as the PC-ification of the military, they regularly leak to their ideologically-aligned allies in the press and jeopardize the integrity and cohesion of Trump’s intelligence agencies.
“Leaking is always designed to damage a specific target and promote a narrative,” Chris Gacek, senior fellow for Regulatory Affairs at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand. “The Deep State cannot be given free shots on goal. It appears Gabbard realizes this, and she is taking action.”
The Trump administration has learned its lesson from its first term, where leaks abounded and intelligence officials and federal employees — both overwhelmingly Democratic Party-affiliated — tried thwarting President Trump’s agenda at every turn, many times through coordinated media attacks made possible by anonymous leakers.
But this time around, it’s different. “We are aggressively investigating other leaks and will pursue further criminal referrals as warranted,” a Gabbard official told Fox News. “Any intelligence community bureaucrat who is considering leaking to the media should take this as a warning.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-04-27 07:57:512025-04-27 08:02:56Tulsi Gabbard Gives the Deep State the Boot
Under Joe Biden, nothing was a greater threat to our military than the administration in charge of it. With a brief respite during Donald Trump’s first term, America’s fighting force has spent the better part of the last 15 years as a minefield of social experimentation — with little to show for it but low morale, retention and recruitment woes, and a global reputation of weakness and wokeness. In the name of “equity,” the Biden and Obama administrations made a mockery of the military’s high standards. According to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, that ends now.
Say what you will about Hegseth’s personal life, his choice of tattoos, or his inadvisable group chats, but when it comes to making our men and women in uniform respectable, this veteran is on a one-man mission to turn our troops back into an elite warrior class. After years of relaxing standards, the Pentagon announced it was returning the military to the high physical benchmarks that made our men and women the most lethal fighting force in the world.
“For far too long,” Hegseth insisted on X, “we have allowed standards to slip. We’ve had different standards for men/women serving in combat arms [military occupational specialty’s] and jobs. … That’s not acceptable, and it changes right now!” The time has come to ditch the Left’s DEI approach to national security. “We need to have the same standards — male or female — in our combat roles to ensure our men and women who are under our leaders and in those formations have the best possible leaders and the highest possible standards that are not based at all on your sex.”
As part of a memo released Monday, the DOD secretary directed the secretaries of America’s military departments to “develop comprehensive plans to distinguish combat arms occupations from non-combat arms occupations. This effort will ensure that our standards are clear, mission-focused, and reflective of the unique physical demands placed on our Service members in various roles.” For certain combat roles, Hegseth continued, “it is essential to identify which positions require heightened entry-level and sustained physical fitness. These roles, which are critical to our military’s mission success, demand exceptional physical capabilities, and the standards for them must reflect that rigor.”
From now on, the secretary declared, “All entry-level and sustained physical fitness requirements within combat arms positions must be sex-neutral, based solely on the operational demands of the occupation and the readiness needed to confront any adversary.” Those standards, he directed, must be implemented by October.
As Hegseth himself explained, this isn’t meant to denigrate or shame female recruits. But the reality is, men and women are physiologically different, and females should never be allowed in combat units if they aren’t physically up to the task. And according to a study by the left-leaning RAND in 2022, the Army’s women were not — failing even the easier fitness tests at significantly higher rates than men. That was the same year the Biden administration decided to loosen certain requirements for women against the advice of experts, who warned that it would only create a more dangerous environment for everyone.
Hegseth took a lot of flak in the days leading up to his confirmation hearing for suggesting that women shouldn’t be in combat roles at all — a position that he’s modified with this caveat: “If we have the right standard and women meet that standard, roger, let’s go.”
When the last two Democratic presidents decided to dilute fitness tests for females, Family Research Council’s Lt. General (Ret.) Jerry Boykin was adamantly opposed — not just to their DEI approach to our national defense but to mixing the genders to begin with. Boykin, who’s commanded Special Forces in battle, was clear about the consequences of this kind of social experimentation. “Some units, like infantry, Special Forces, SEALs, and others, are not suitable for combining men and women. It has nothing to do with the courage or even capabilities of women. It is all about two things: the burden on small unit leaders and the lack of privacy in these units,” he explained.
“Leaders of these units must be focused like a laser on keeping their soldiers alive and defeating the enemy,” Boykin knows. “It is unreasonable to encumber them with the additional burden of worrying about how they provide privacy for the few women under their command during stressful and very dangerous operations. It is not the same as being a combat pilot who returns to an operating base or an aircraft carrier after the fight, where separate facilities are available.” It’s the absolute wrong policy for America, Boykin went on, because it “ignores fundamental biological differences between the sexes and the natural implications of those differences.”
And it’s not just men who feel this way, but brave women in uniform too. The New York Times pointed to an op-ed written by Kristen Griest, one of the first two females to graduate from the Army’s elite Ranger School, objecting to this woke approach to war-fighting. “With equal opportunity comes equal responsibility,” Griest insisted. “Lowering fitness standards to accommodate women will hurt the Army — and women.”
She argued that separate scoring based on gender would “drastically reduce the performance and effectiveness of combat arms units. … [T]he requirements to join the nation’s combat forces could soon be as low as performing ten push-ups in two minutes, running two miles in twenty-one minutes, deadlifting 140 pounds three times, and performing only one repetition of a leg tuck or, failing that, two minutes of a plank exercise,” she pointed out.
“While these low standards may have seemed adequate in a controlled study,” Griest insisted, “I know from experience that they will not suffice in reality. Indeed, the presence of just a handful of individuals who cannot run two miles faster than twenty-one minutes has the potential to derail a training exercise,” she warned, “not to mention an actual combat patrol. … Missions will be delayed and other soldiers will be overburdened with the weight of their unfit teammates’ equipment. This scenario is inconvenient and bad for morale during a training exercise; in combat it could be deadly.”
Griest stressed that “while it may be difficult for a 120-pound woman to lift or drag 250 pounds, the Army cannot artificially absolve women of that responsibility; it may still exist on the battlefield.” And frankly, “The entire purpose of creating a gender-neutral test was to acknowledge the reality that each job has objective physical standards to which all soldiers should be held, regardless of gender. The intent was not to ensure that women and men will have an equal likelihood of meeting those standards. Rather,” she argued, “it is incumbent upon women who volunteer for the combat arms profession to ensure they are fully capable and qualified for it. To not require women to meet equal standards in combat arms will not only undermine their credibility, but also place those women, their teammates, and the mission at risk.”
What Hegseth has done is recognize that men and women are different, Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Bob Maginnis told The Washington Stand. “Yet, across recent and mostly Democrat administrations, those differences were blurred to the point of insanity. As a result, the military departments watered down their standards for many combat positions to access women. However, as most combatants understand, that reduction in standards negatively impacted readiness. That’s the target of Hegseth’s directive — improve readiness.”
Maginnis, who wrote an entire book called “Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat,” blames Obama for starting this social experiment, which, he noted, coincided with that administration’s announcement to assign women to ground combat units. “That decision to violate a virtually universal principle of military practice represented our craven military leadership’s surrender to the political forces of radical feminism. The implications for U.S. national security were — and remain — sobering.”
Now, years later, Maginnis points out, “We know that a) very few military women are interested in combat duty; b) the Pentagon’s assurances that military readiness will not be compromised are seriously flawed; and 3) until Trump, our top uniformed leadership surrendered to feminist ideologues without a fight.”
As far as he’s concerned, this change “was a long time coming.” And it should be welcomed by every “common-sense American interested in maintaining a ready military.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-04-04 11:08:532025-04-04 11:09:34Trump’s Military Beefs Up Physical Standards to Build Back Elite Fighting Force
“Individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of … gender dysphoria are no longer eligible for military service,” according to a Pentagon memo providing “Additional Guidance on Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” revealed in a court filing Wednesday. The policy requires all servicemembers to abide by the standards associated with their biological sex and gives departments 30 days to commence separation procedures for members of the armed forces with gender dysphoria.
“The medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service,” explained the memo, signed by Darin S. Selnick, who is “performing the duties of” the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
People with gender dysphoria have significantly higher rates of other mental health disorders, related to the general population. Attempts to transition usually involve indefinite hormonal injections, and it can involve extensive elective plastic surgeries.
Such medical issues are a distraction from the military’s warfighting mission, and people who wish to prioritize an attempted gender transition would be freer to pursue their objective if they were not in the military.
In addition, the policy continues, “The Department [of Defense] only recognizes two sexes: male and female. An individual’s sex is immutable, unchanging during a person’s life. All Service members will only serve in accordance with their sex.”
In keeping with this recognition of biological reality, the Pentagon will now judge males as males and females as females. “Where a standard, requirement, or policy depends on whether the individual is a male or female (e.g., medical fitness for duty, physical fitness and body fat standards; berthing, bathroom, and shower facilities; and uniform and grooming standards), all persons will be subject to the standard, requirement, or policy associated with their sex,” the policy states.
The Pentagon will also require the accurate usage of titles and pronouns, a sharp departure from the pronoun anarchy promoted in the military under President Biden. In fact, it explicitly cancels policies dealing with transgender military servicemembers adopted under former Presidents Biden (2023 and 2021), Trump (2019), and Obama (2016).
The policy then outlines the process by which people with gender dysphoria will be fairly but firmly separated from the military. The disqualifying factors are clear: either a psychiatric diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or a history of cross-sex hormones or genital gender reassignment surgeries — both of which create permanent, physiological changes. The timeline is also clear: military departments have 30 days to “establish procedures and implement steps to identify Service members” disqualified under the policy, and then 30 days to “begin separation actions.”
The date on which the policy was adopted is not apparent from the court filing, but it did take effect immediately, sometime since January 20.
The policy does not categorize gender dysphoria as a moral failing but as a medically disqualifying factor, like blindness or dyslexia. It thus allows people with gender dysphoria, absent other blemishes on their record, to obtain an honorable discharge and keep any pay or benefits they would otherwise have.
Thus, the point of the policy is not to punish servicemembers with gender dysphoria, but to promote military readiness and warfighting capabilities. “Gender dysphoria is incompatible with military service” because it “is not in the best interests of the Military Services and is not clearly consistent with the interests of national security,” the policy explains.
To further underscore this purpose, the policy provides a waiver process in cases where “there is a compelling Government interest in retaining the Service member that directly supports warfighting capabilities.” Such individuals must demonstrate “36 consecutive months of stability in the Service member’s sex without clinically significant distress or impairment,” and “that he or she has never attempted to transition to any sex,” and they must be “willing and able to adhere to all applicable standards, including the standards associated with the Service member’s sex.”
In response to the news, the Modern Military Association of America, an LGBTQ military advocacy group, called the policy “both medically unsound and a blatant disregard for the proven capabilities and dedication of transgender individuals who have served and continue to serve with distinction,” adding that it “it sends a damaging message to the world about the values of the United States.”
Therein lies the problem with the Biden administration’s approach. The military is not supposed to be a vehicle for transmitting American values around the world. That is the State Department’s job. The military’s singular focus should be fighting and winning wars.
In fact, it was the Biden administration’s hijacking of the military as an instrument to promote transgender ideology that sent not only a damaging message, but an insulting one — not only to other countries but also to America’s own servicemembers. During the Biden administration, military recruitment numbers plummeted year after year.
Various excuses were suggested for the decline, but the true reason was a lack of enthusiasm among military-age Americans about pledging themselves to an institution that had been captured by woke nonsense. This became evident when, after Trump’s election victory, the U.S. Army posted its best recruiting numbers in more than a decade. Nothing changed except the political leadership of the military, yet recruitment increased dramatically.
Consistent with this more compelling vision of military readiness — one that recognizes biological realities — the Pentagon is also taking steps to scrub “all DoD news and feature articles, photos, and videos that promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell ordered public relations staff on Wednesday to remove such content from public-facing websites by March 5, although they will be retained “consistent with records management requirements.”
The directive also applies to social media content — a much more ambitious undertaking — particularly singling out social media content generated during the Biden administration.
If DoD staff “cannot remove DEI content from DoD social media accounts by March 5, 2025, they must temporarily remove from public display all news articles, photos and videos published between January 20, 2021 and January 19, 2025, until the content is fully reviewed and DEI content removed,” the memo states. “While DEI-related content outside of this date range must also be removed, articles, photos, and videos from the last four years are the immediate priority to align DoD communication with the current Administration.”
Like our adversaries, the Trump administration clearly recognizes that woke ideology is a military killer. It’s committed to restoring the military to its mission, projecting American power around the globe, and thus making the whole world safer. So far, the evidence seems to show that Americans are, on the whole, excited about that shift.
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-02-28 15:00:572025-02-28 15:05:35Pentagon: Individuals with Gender Dysphoria ‘No Longer Eligible for Military Service’
The Trump team may be slashing and burning lots of government jobs, but there’s one agency that’s been hanging a “We’re hiring” shingle for four years: the U.S. military. In yet another sign that the long and embarrassing chapter of the Biden administration is over, young men and women apparently can’t enlist fast enough, spiking recruitment numbers that had been at their lowest levels since World War II. Apparently, voters aren’t the only ones eager to exchange a commander in woke for a commander in chief.
The boom of sign-ups was celebrated by new Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who tweeted on Tuesday, “BREAKING: In December 2024, the @USArmy had its best recruiting number in 12 years. In January 2025, the Army hit its best recruiting number in 15 YEARS. BOTTOM LINE: America’s youth want to serve under the bold & strong ‘America First’ leadership of @realDonaldTrump.”
Since the election, a steady stream of recruits have been pouring into local offices. The Army, which has been hemorrhaging soldiers over the last several years, reported that it was enlisting almost 350 soldiers a day in December. For a Pentagon that missed its goals by 41,000 in 2023, the burst of potential reinforcements was welcome news. “Our Recruiters have one of the toughest jobs — inspiring the next generation of #Soldiers to serve. Congratulations and keep up the great work! #BAYCB,” Army officials wrote on X.
The surge couldn’t come at a better time, as Daniel Driscoll, President Trump’s nominee for Army secretary, made quite clear. “We have the fewest number of active soldiers that we’ve had since World War II, even as conflict is erupting around the world. We need to fix that,” he said at his confirmation hearing earlier this month. And while the Biden administration’s solution was lowering standards and sweetening the pot with benefits and signing bonuses, Driscoll doesn’t think that approach attracts the people America needs. “I actually don’t think the answer is throwing more money at the problem. I think it’s nice to get things like GI Bill benefits. But I didn’t join for that. I enlisted to serve the country.”
That jives with what some of Biden’s critics have been saying for years. To them, it wasn’t just that Americans couldn’t be bought, but that this generation didn’t believe in the only battle the last president insisted on fighting: the culture war. Instead of raising up a warrior class, the previous commander in chief seemed preoccupied with drag shows on military bases, critical race theory, preferred pronouns, underwriting gender transition surgeries, and projecting weakness on the world stage.
“It is no surprise to me that the recruiting figures have taken a turn for the better,” Lt. General (Ret.) William Boykin told The Washington Stand. “I think we will see this trend continue as young men and women step up to be part of our military now that DEI is no longer a part of it, and commanders are not bullying their people to take vaccinations that they don’t want. Now that Donald Trump is the commander in chief, the young men and women around the country see strength and resolve,” he pointed out. “They want to be part of something great, and our military will be great again when Donald Trump leaves office at the end of his term. Our enemies need to know that American military power is on the rise.”
Interestingly enough, this all comes on the heels of the annual Military Family Lifestyle Survey — which painted an unflattering picture of the state of service in the last year of the Biden administration. Conducted from March to May last year, more than 5,000 people chimed in about their experiences — from active-duty, National Guard, Reserve, veterans, and their families.
Among the more interesting findings, 69% agreed that military service has “added value to their family’s life,” but only 32% would recommend military service to a young family member. Equally as disheartening, there’s a national perception that the military is appreciated by the public at large when only 19% of active-duty families believe Americans are truly grateful for their sacrifice.
One area where the military does agree with civilians is that a major conflict is on the horizon. Eighty-three percent of active-duty families think America is on the cusp of global war within the next three to five years, as do 67% of everyday people. Clearly, the authors concluded, more needs to be done to bolster the troops and their families before those crisis times arrive.
Freshman Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-N.C.), a former Green Beret, emphatically agrees. He’s watched with disgust the decisions of the Biden administration — decisions, he says, that prompted him to run for Congress. “I [saw] Afghanistan fall,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Thursday’s “Washington Watch.” “And I knew at that point that we had just condemned the next generation of Americans to conflict.”
Widely viewed as one of the most catastrophic decisions of Joe Biden’s term (and there were many), Harrigan believes more than anything that the Afghan withdrawal emboldened our enemies. “We had never been weaker than that one moment in our nation’s history. And so, we need real change in this country,” the veteran insisted. “We need real leadership. Thankfully, we have it. And as you were talking about with the record-breaking January recruitment cycle that the Army had, I think that there is a resounding consensus that that leadership is back. And this is a military that our young men and women want to join again.”
Perkins, who served in the Marine Corps, nodded. “I know there [are] a lot of young men and women who are willing to serve this country, but they don’t want to serve for no reason,” he reiterated. “They want to serve, and they’re willing to make sacrifices if it’s for a purpose. And I think, as you pointed out, what happened in Afghanistan was disastrous. And it just, I think, it turned many, many young men and women away, thinking, ‘What’s the point?’”
And Harrigan was quick to make a spiritual connection to that mentality. “I think a lot of us — and a lot of your viewers — [who] have a biblical worldview would identify with this. I think there [was] a genuine question prior to President Trump getting elected: ‘What are we fighting for? Are we fighting for those time-tested concepts of freedom, democracy, free market economies, and the things that our fathers and forefathers have fought and died for in order to make this country the greatest country on the face of the earth? Or are we fighting for some sort of social agenda that we are actually trying to project across the globe?’”
Frankly, he pointed out, “I think that was a question in many folks’ minds prior to November 5th. And so it’s just great to see that America is back — that strong, principled America that traditionally leads the world is back. And it’s here to stay moving forward.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2025-02-10 15:27:252025-02-10 15:29:27Americans Rush to Enlist in Trump’s Military Recruitment Boom
A new report released by the Department of Defense is highlighting a vast military buildup being undertaken by China. Experts say the report is an important snapshot of the expansionist goals of Xi Jinping’s communist regime but warn that the true nature of China’s military ambitions is likely far more aggressive and poses a graver threat to the U.S. than what is commonly believed.
The report details that since 2023, China has added 50 new intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that are capable of striking the U.S., increasing their total to 400. In addition, they have added 300 medium-range ballistic missiles, 100 long-range cruise missiles, and over 600 operational nuclear warheads. It also notes that hypersonic DF-27 missiles designed to evade U.S. defenses are positioned to potentially strike Guam, Hawaii, and Alaska?. As for China’s navy, which is already the largest in the world at 370 ships and submarines, it is expected to increase to 435 by 2030.
National security experts such as Lt. Col. (Ret.) Chuck DeVore say that “like Nazi Germany’s buildup in the 1930s, the militarization program ordered by the Chinese Communist Party [CCP] isn’t simply a great power buildup — it’s a weapon in service of a deadly ideology.”
The Pentagon report also notes that the CCP’s stated military objectives are to accelerate the modernization of its armed forces by 2027 for a possible invasion of Taiwan, to “complete the modernization of national defense and the military” by 2035, and to “fully transform the people’s armed forces into world-class forces” by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the CCP’s establishment of communist China.
But DeVore warns that “these timelines should be treated with skepticism. They are likely deliberate deceptions aimed at lulling adversaries into complacency or disguising China’s actual state of readiness. The pace of China’s missile expansion and cognitive warfare preparations suggests that Beijing’s capabilities likely exceed what is required for these projected milestones.”
Similarly, Lt. Col. (Ret.) Bob Maginnis, Family Research Council’s senior fellow for National Security, cautions that the DOD report does not accurately assess what China spends on its military.
“The PRC’s investment in its military is typically understated by the Pentagon,” he told The Washington Stand. “The 2024 Pentagon report understates the PRC’s defense budget at $330-450 billion. By comparison, the 2024 U.S. Commission on National Defense Strategy (CNDS) pegs China’s defense investment at $711 billion in 2023. That report cites Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, who has stated that ‘China’s military budget is likely three times what Beijing publicly claims, which would put it at about $700 billion annually.’”
Other experts say that the recent development of purges of top Chinese military officials for supposed corruption and disloyalty to Xi Jinping indicates that there is some ongoing instability within China’s armed forces. “Xi Jinping doesn’t trust his flag officers in the best of times, and now is certainly not the best of times,” Gordon Chang, distinguished senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, told TWS. “There’s turmoil in the military. We know this because we can see the purges, we can see the suicides and the personnel rotations.”
Chang also pointed out that China’s communist chain of command is a weakness. “The problem with China’s military is that it’s a communist military, which means it has two reporting lines, which means that it’s not going to be able to respond in a wartime situation.”
Nonetheless, Chang acknowledged that “Americans probably are underestimating China’s military strength from any number of different perspectives. So we have to be concerned that the Pentagon report does not fully capture the capabilities of the Chinese military.”
Maginnis went on to contend that the U.S. military is currently not up to the challenge of directly deterring China. “The U.S.’s active military is two-thirds the size it should be, operates old equipment, and many of its operators lack the required level of readiness,” he remarked. “Overall, our armed forces are weak, and we accept significant risk should we fall into a global war.”
“A major shortfall is our defense industrial base, which continues to underperform,” Maginnis continued. “Our industrial base cannot be quickly upgraded, and our arsenals, which were emptied by the Biden administration to supply the Ukraine war, will take years to replenish.” He added that the U.S. “isn’t attracting sufficient numbers of capable recruits, which undermines our overall readiness.”
DeVore concurred, further arguing that the incoming Trump administration must prioritize rebuilding the military in order to counter the threat from Beijing.
“To effectively counter China’s ambitions, the U.S. must rebuild its fleet, modernize its nuclear arsenal, expand missile defenses, and restore maritime lift capability,” he asserted. “… In short order, President-elect Donald Trump’s national security team must start to rebuild the Navy with more surface combatants, submarines, and support vessels to counter China’s maritime dominance. America’s aging nuclear arsenal requires upgrades to ensure credible deterrence against China’s rapidly growing stockpile of advanced warheads and delivery systems.”
DeVore concluded by expressing confidence that Trump’s administration will “understand” the threat posed by China. “With Pete Hegseth at the helm of the Pentagon, and other key positions filled by people who understand the danger and the urgency of the situation, it comes down to whether Congress will join in the effort to preserve peace through strength.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2024-12-31 14:38:402024-12-31 14:38:40China’s Military Buildup Must Be Met with U.S. Strength, Experts Say
At 1,813 pages, the latest version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) isn’t exactly light reading, but the fact that Congress has a bipartisan bill at all is as close as it gets to a Christmas miracle. While the proposal’s been on the front-burner of most leaders’ priorities, no one was quite sure if the two sides would be able to hammer out a deal before the holidays. In the end, they not only managed to agree on the text, but conservatives won a string of victories in the process.
It’s a shocking departure from the Senate version of the NDAA, which Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) had threatened to stand by if House Republicans insisted on some of their hard-fought policy wins. But, in the first real sign that Democrats are waking up to Americans’ election mandate, the legislation that dropped Saturday takes a sincere stab at some of the worst forms of military wokeness.
While the bill isn’t perfect, Family Research Council’s Quena Gonzalez stressed, conservatives can celebrate three major gains. Thanks to outspoken Republicans like Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), the latest version of the NDAA strips out the language that would have drafted American women into the military against their will, which, as far as Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) was concerned, was “a hill to die on.”
As he and others warned, “It will be over my dead body that I’m going to allow my daughter to get drafted,” he told “Washington Watch” guest host and former Congressman Jody Hice on Friday. “[I]f she wants to serve, she can serve,” the Texan reiterated. “We can have all those debates. If somebody wants to end the draft or start the draft, they can debate that. But you’re not going to draft my daughter. And unfortunately, there are some senators like Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), for example … and others who are committed to expanding the draft to our daughters. It’s just nonsense in a country of 330 million people.”
Other hugely significant changes included the first statute protecting minors from gender transitions in federal law. Under this latest NDAA text, American taxpayers will no longer be forced to fund the hormones, puberty-blockers, and gender mutilation surgeries for the troops’ minor children. “The fact that Democrats didn’t burn down the Senate over this is remarkable,” Gonzalez emphasized. But again, it “points to the weakness of this issue in the electorate.” It also suggests that the once-powerful Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is losing its grip on Joe Biden’s party. If Democrats refused to do the HRC’s bidding on this issue, then times really are changing.
That’s not to say the country’s largest LGBT activist group didn’t have something to say about it. HRC President Kelley Robinson called out Congress’s rejection of trans drugs and procedures as an “attack” on military families. Of course, old habits die hard, and some leftists are having a hard time swallowing the changing times. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) argued that the decision somehow “undermined the bipartisan tradition of the bill. … [I]f you want to play the role of doctor and ban the care for everybody when it is not debatable that there are some minors with gender dysphoria who benefit from the treatments that this bill would ban — so you are denying health care to the children of servicemembers that they need to serve a partisan agenda — I think that’s extraordinarily problematic.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) vehemently disagrees. “Taxpayer dollars should never be used to support procedures and treatments that could permanently harm and sterilize young people,” he told The Daily Wire. “In this year’s NDAA, we’re taking a critical and necessary step to protect the children of American service members from radical gender ideology and experimental drugs.” And, he promised, more legislation is coming to “protect America’s kids.”
Another course correction worth cheering was the members’ decision to shelve the radical expansion of in vitro fertilization in the military, which FRC publicly opposed for moral and ethical reasons.
Other rebukes of the current commander-in-chief’s agenda include “gut[ting] DEI bureaucracy,” stopping the Defense Department from contracting with advertisers who “blacklist conservative news services,” ending the president’s witch-hunt for extremists in the ranks, and a freeze on “climate change programs,” among other things. Unfortunately, one explosive issue that wasn’t addressed was the taxpayer coverage of abortion travel, which Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) bravely fought for so many months.
Even so, “This year’s Annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) ensures our men and women in uniform have the resources and support they need to defend our great nation,” Johnson underscored in a statement. “The NDAA refocuses our military on its core mission of defending America and its interests around the globe by supporting law enforcement operations and the deployment of the National Guard to the southwest border, expediting innovation and reducing the acquisition timeline for new weaponry, supporting our allies, and strengthening our nuclear posture and missile defense programs.”
As the speaker explained, “This legislation includes House-passed provisions to restore our focus on military lethality and to end the radical woke ideology being imposed on our military by permanently banning transgender medical treatment for minors and countering antisemitism.”
Of course, the revamped bill will still have to survive House and Senate floor votes to keep the 60-plus year streak of passing the NDAA alive. If far-Left Democrats decide to revolt over the transgender provisions, this could be a much more painful saga. But experts point out that the legislation has usually enjoyed bipartisan support. That started to change with the Clinton presidency, Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Robert Maginnis explained to The Washington Stand, when Democrats started “aggressively using the annual defense bill as a means to advance a radical social agenda [like] gays in the military, women in direct combat, and most recently, trans-identifying servicemembers.” And this year is no exception, he noted.
“Even though most Americans are opposed to the radical transgender agenda, some congressional Democrats oppose the common-sense legislation that restricts transgender medical care for servicemembers’ children.” It’s incredible, Maginnis continued, that extremists like Smith “want scarce military medical funds to be spread even thinner — wasted — to accommodate ‘gender-affirming care’ for military dependents. That issue is quite controversial and questionably scientific.”
Still, Gonzalez insisted, the fact that the House speaker was able to manage this language is a feat of its own. “Given that he was effectively bargaining with Majority Leader Schumer and President Biden for a vote this month — neither of whom have anything to lose by insisting on hyper-liberal priorities — the joint House/Senate NDAA language that Mike Johnson has negotiated is impressive on our issues. It doesn’t ‘draft our daughters,’ which the Senate version did. It doesn’t recklessly expand IVF without regard for pro-life concerns. It did protect military kids from gender ideology that would target them for lies that they were somehow ‘born in the wrong body.’”
Is this bill perfect, he asked rhetorically? “Nope. But is it better than we have any right to expect given who was opposite Speaker Johnson at the negotiating table? Definitely. Do we want to see more protections for kids? Of course, and we’ll be sharing ideas on how to build on this momentum when Republicans take over Washington next year.”
For now, Maginnis and others implore, “Members of Congress must pass the NDAA that refuses to advance a radical social agenda. … Our armed forces have a critical mission focused on serious security threats, and our defense dollars are already over-stretched. The Pentagon must be free from the demands of our culture’s fringe.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2024-12-10 12:15:262024-12-10 12:16:02Johnson Wows with Anti-Woke Wins in NDAA Compromise
Back in September 2021, Joe Biden reassured Americans that the Afghan refugees whom he was bringing into the United States would be as benign and harmless as Aunt Harriet. Old Joe’s crack team (no, not Hunter) of experts would make sure of that by “conducting thorough scrutiny — security screenings for everyone who is not a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.” Well, here’s a shocker: Biden, one of the world’s least trustworthy human beings, lied again: Not only were most of the refugees not vetted at all, but on Thursday it came to light that at least fifty Afghan refugees with “potentially significant security concerns” were admitted to the United States with no problem, and are here now. Thanks, Joe!
Wait, it gets worse. The Defense Department’s inspector general reported Thursday, according to the Washington Times, that not only did Biden’s handlers bring these security risks into the country, but now they have no idea where they are: “It looked at a sampling of 31 security risk evacuees identified as of Sept. 17 and found only three could be located.” Nor is that likely to be the extent of the problem: “Tens of thousands more names remain to be checked.”
The Defense Department’s audit explained laconically: “Not being able to locate Afghan evacuees with derogatory information quickly and accurately could pose a security risk to the United States.” Well, yeah. And so once again one has to wonder: Are the people who are running Joe Biden’s presidency really this careless and stupid, that they thought vetting these Afghan refugees was something they could dispense with when in a hurry, and that there would be no downside? Or is the situation even worse? If a gang of traitors who actively wanted to weaken the United States were ensconced in the White House, how could this have been mishandled any more than it has been?
The Times report suggests that the whole thing is just a result of poor planning and organization, not the massive betrayal of American citizens that it appears to be at first glance: “Investigators said a key set of Defense Department databases was off-limits to the vetting team in the early months of the evacuation effort, because of agreements the Pentagon had with other countries. Eventually, officials developed a workaround.” But that doesn’t make the situation any better. If unvetted Afghan refugees were brought into the United States because the vetting team didn’t have access to the necessary databases, the resettlement process should have been halted until those databases became available. Instead, an unknowable number of Afghans who could be jihadis or potential jihadis have been deposited into American communities, where they’re being welcomed with open arms by people who don’t have a clue about what they’re dealing with.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-02-20 05:41:312022-02-20 05:44:02Biden’s Handlers Release at Least 50 Afghans with ‘Potentially Significant Security Concerns’ Into the U.S.
