Pete Hegseth Tells Senators About the Glut of Four-Star Generals

As you know, Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth sat for his confirmation hearing in the Senate and was grilled by harpies such as Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Mazie Hirono … and Tim Walz. The post below shows what kind of open mind Warren was keeping:

Pete Hegseth said women shouldn’t serve in combat. He was credibly accused of sexual assault. He ran two nonprofits into the ground. And he got so drunk at work events that colleagues felt they had to carry him back to his room. Can anyone really say he should run the Pentagon?
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) January 14, 2025

Yes, he should run the Pentagon. There was a great moment when Hegseth said a rule keeping generals from entering the defense industry for 10 years didn't apply to him … "I'm not a general, senator," he said.

Hegseth would be replacing four-star Gen. Lloyd Austin, who went missing for a few days during his tenure without telling anyone he was going under anesthesia. Wouldn't America be better off with a four-star general as Secretary of Defense? Hegseth made it clear that the military bureaucracy was bloated and he intended to cut the fat:

PETE HEGSETH: "We won WW2 with 7 four star generals. Today we have 44 four star generals... we don't need more bureaucracy at the top, we need more war fighters empowered at the bottom."

🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/7yATY747W2
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 14, 2025

And how long has it been since we've won a war?

This right here. 👇 pic.twitter.com/nq8oCxzlbx
— theygonnalose 🏴‍☠️🐬⚓ (@theygonnalose) January 14, 2025

Anyone know how much actual combat these generals have been in?

The seven in WWII were all combat vets. I suspect at least a few now are West Point generals, who have studied, but never gone toe to toe in combat.
— Jim (@FuzzyFreak62) January 14, 2025

Pete is absolutely correct! We need more fighters and more competent military men at the bottom!
— Angry Trumper (@AngryTrumper) January 14, 2025

It's so common sense.

All you need to do to judge the effectiveness is military leadership is look at the results on the battlefield.

We've been losing for the last 70-80 years on the battlefield.

We need someone like Hegseth to shake things up.
— Master Chief (@BasedSierra117) January 14, 2025

Id like to point out that there were somewhere around 15 million active duty US forces at the height of WW2, managed by 7 4 star Generals. In 2023 we had 1.3 million Active Duty US forces, managed by 44 4 star generals.
— Corey (@BlueFinn42) January 14, 2025

This is the best thing I have head concerning the military in years, this march towards a bloated top heavy bureaucracy in the military had been going on since slick Willy started promoting lap dog political generals in the nineties and it needs to change
— Mark Sullivan (@Sullie870125) January 14, 2025