51吃瓜

A progressive Pentagon? Talk about an oxymoron! The Pentagon continues to with ever larger budgets, ever more expansive missions (for example, a to dominate the heavens and in the Pacific to encircle China) and ever greater ambitions to dominate everywhere, including through global thermonuclear warfare, . No wonder it鈥檚 so hard, to the point of absurdity, to imagine a Pentagon that would humbly and faithfully serve only the interests of 鈥渘ational defense.鈥�

Yet, as a thought experiment, why not imagine it? What would a progressive Pentagon look like? I鈥檓 not talking about a 鈥渨oke鈥� Pentagon that touts and celebrates its 鈥渄iversity,鈥� including its belated acceptance of LGBTQ+ members. I鈥檓 glad the Pentagon is arguably more diverse and tolerant now than when I served in the Air Force beginning in the early 1980s. Yet, as a has it, painting 鈥淏lack Lives Matter鈥� and rainbow flags on B-52 bombers doesn鈥檛 make the bombs dropped any less destructive. To be specific: Was it really a progressive milestone that the combat aircraft in last year鈥檚 were operated and maintained entirely by female crews? Put differently, are the bullets and bombs of trans, Black G.I. Jane somehow more tolerant and less deadly than cis, White G.I. Joe鈥檚?

A progressive military shouldn鈥檛 stop with 鈥渕ore Black faces in high places,鈥� more female generals 鈥渓eaning in鈥� around conference tables and similar so-called triumphs for diversity. Consider Lloyd Austin, the first Black secretary of defense, whose views and actions have been little different from those of former Defense Secretaries James Mattis or Donald Rumsfeld, and whose background as a retired Army four-star general and well-paid former board member of Raytheon makes him the very stereotype of Dwight D. Eisenhower鈥檚 .

No, all-female air crews aren鈥檛 nearly enough. Indeed, they are, I鈥檇 argue, a form of 鈥渨oke鈥� camouflage for a predatory military leopard that refuses to change its spots 鈥� or curb its appetite.

A truly progressive military should start with the fundamentals. All service members swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution, the system of laws that defines and enshrines our vital rights and freedoms (speech, a free press, the right to assemble, privacy and so on); in short, the right to live untrammeled by domineering forces. Yet, almost by definition, that right is threatened, if not violated, by a massive complex that penetrates nearly every domain of American life. That complex, after all, is anti-democratic, shrouded in secrecy and jealous of its power, as well as fundamentally and profoundly anti-progressive. Indeed, it鈥檚 fundamentally and profoundly anti-truth.

Consider these hard facts. All too few Americans knew how badly they鈥檇 been lied to about the Vietnam War until the emerged near the end of that disastrous conflict. All too few Americans knew how badly they鈥檇 been lied to about the Afghan War until the emerged near the end of that disastrous conflict. All too few Americans knew how badly they鈥檇 been lied to about until the myth of Saddam Hussein鈥檚 weapons of mass destruction (which had been part of the bogus rationale for invading that country) crumbled.

Nor did they know how badly they continued to be lied to until the myth of the American 鈥渟urge鈥� there collapsed when the Islamic State forces triumphed all too easily over an American-built Iraqi security structure like a rotten house of cards. Perhaps some of them didn鈥檛 truly know until a loudmouthed Republican candidate for president, Donald J. Trump, dared to say that the Iraq War had been an unmitigated disaster, or, in Trump-speak, 鈥�.鈥� That burst of honesty helped him win the presidency in 2016. (His rival in that election, Hillary Clinton, remained essentially the chief spokesperson for the Pentagon.)

Yet despite the horrendous failures (and war crimes) of Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and other U. military ventures of this century, no one was ever punished! Sure, you could point to Donald Rumsfeld being cashiered as secretary of defense amid the rubble of 鈥渢he Global War on Terror,鈥� a belated admission by the administration of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney that the Iraq War was going poorly indeed. Still, all those cracks were later papered over with the myth of 鈥渢he surge,鈥� and when Rumsfeld died in 2021, he would receive remarkably in obituaries as well as bipartisan salutes for his 鈥渟ervice鈥� to America rather than condemnation for his numerous crimes and blunders.

The Pentagon鈥檚 rampant culture of dishonesty, a cancer that above all afflicts the brass, led one serving Army officer, Lieutenant Colonel , to write a now-renowned (or, if you鈥檙e part of the Pentagon, infamous) for Armed Forces Journal in 2007 on America鈥檚 failure of generalship. As he memorably noted, a US Army private suffered far more dearly for losing a rifle than America鈥檚 generals did for losing a war. The Army鈥檚 response was 鈥� no surprise 鈥� to change nothing, leading Yingling to .

13 tasks for a progressive Pentagon

Venturing into the Pentagon鈥檚 innermost corridors of power, one might be excused for recalling Obi-Wan Kenobi鈥檚 to Luke Skywalker in Star Wars as they approached the spaceport of Mos Eisley: 鈥淵ou will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.鈥�

How does one possibly reform such a top-heavy, self-serving, and dishonest institution along progressive lines? A moment in Greek mythology comes to mind: Hercules and the . Let me nevertheless press ahead with this all-too-Herculean task.

, as Blondie once sang, so why not dream a little dream with me? Here鈥檚 a list 鈥� a baker鈥檚 dozen, in fact 鈥� of ways a progressive Pentagon would both exist and act far differently from America鈥檚 current regressive (and very, very aggressive) version of the same.

A progressive Pentagon would: