The guy Hegseth/Trump have in charge of the new tests for military officer promotion doesn’t have the basic experience to know how to judge competence at high officer levels. When speaking about the current process, he says things that are just wrong.
The historical example Hegseth cites as what inspired him was an exercise to test maneuver and communications capability, not as a test for promotions. It was only used to evaluate commanders as a secondary element.
A lot of the things Hegseth says is needed to evaluate high level officers, are already done…he talks as if he is not aware of this. Is he ignorant, or/and is the point to these tests something else?
In justifying the new policy, multiple things Hegseth said about US military history was inaccurate.
‘I want generals like Hitler had’ ~ Donald J Trump…according to his former chief of staff.
“”He commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too,'” Kelly recalled to The Times. Kelly said he would usually quash the conversation by saying “nothing (Hitler) did, you could argue, was good,” but that Trump would occasionally bring up the topic again.
In his interview with The Atlantic, Kelly recalled that when Trump raised the idea of needing “German generals,” Kelly would ask if he meant “Bismarck’s generals,” referring to Otto von Bismarck, the former chancellor of the German Reich who oversaw the unification of Germany. “Surely you can’t mean Hitler’s generals,” Kelly recalled asking Trump. To which the former president responded, “Yeah, yeah, Hitler’s generals.””
Before 9/11, the Bush administration was warned about Al Qaeda, but they dismissed it. 9/11 could have been prevented if defense against terrorism was more of a focus. The previous administration was relatively more focused on it and did stop an attack.
The Jews accepted the UN partition, although some did hope to adjust the borders. The Palestinians rejected it and chose war instead. The surrounding Arab states were preparing for war the whole time, intending to take land for their countries.
The United States indirectly helped the Arabs by suspending the importation of arms into the region The UK helped by selling arms to Arab militias and blocking additional Jewish migration. Although, the US was the first to recognize Israel when they declared independence.
The different countries and groups against the Jews had different interests and different levels of commitment.
Many of the villages that the Jews forced to evacuate, were supporting Arab militias attacking Jews, so having them evacuate was a defensive strategy to not leave a population of enemy combatants scattered around the area. The combatants blended back into their villages, so it’s not like just the combatants could be arrested. Some of these combatants didn’t just fight Jewish armed forces, but attacked civilians.
Overtime, ideas of expelling all Arabs had been advocated for, but the actual expulsions were defensive military operations. Such ideas were often driven by the determination of the Arabs to expel and kill the Jews, so, the thinking was: if you can’t be peaceful and accept us here, then we will kick you out. Nevertheless, the actual expulsions were focused on villages supporting violent militias in the midst of war.
We really don’t know how many expulsions were completely unjustified and how many were battlefield necessities.
Jewish refugees, many from the holocaust, moved into the abandoned settlements.
Many Arabs fled on their own, encouraged to do so by some Arab leaders.
There was two steps to the war. First, the civil war between the Jews and local Arab militias, then, the Jews against the invading Arab states.
The oldest surviving structure built by a Muslim ruler is the Dome of the Rock, built on the location of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. It was a real imperial dominating occupier move.
Different entities better survived the bronze age collapse than others. Does the United States have the planning and nimbleness to well-survive nearby challenges?