The big reversal!
U.S. Lieutenant General Mark Hertling bravely challenged Defense Secretary Pete Hagesese, saying that they were not personal followers at the mercy of others and that they would never carry out illegal orders.
Let's figure out the names first. The one challenging the minister is Mark Hertling. This veteran has a 37-year military career, rising from the grassroots to lieutenant general, and fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan. After retirement, he has not been idle. He often comments on military policy in the media. He is a person with a lot of say.
Let's talk about Defense Secretary Pete Hegsese. He was born in 1980 and served in the National Guard, but he is more known as a Fox News host.
In November 2024, he was nominated by Trump as defense secretary, and only through a Senate vote in January 2025 confirmed the office, which is now less than a year to complete.
On September 30, 2025, Hergezs convened an emergency meeting of more than 800 senior U.S. military generals from around the world at the U.S. Naval Corps Base in Pattiko, Virginia.
At the meeting, he issued a series of new directives under the new title “Minister of War” (he pushed to change the “Ministry of Defense” to “Ministry of War”). He would abolish the “Diversity, Fairness and Inclusion” (DEI) policy that the U.S. military has pursued for many years, and said it was a “interference to weaken the military’s destructive power”.
What's worse is that he introduced a physical fitness test reform, requiring soldiers in combat-related occupations, regardless of men and women, to be tested according to male standards, with scores of more than 70%, or leave if they fail to achieve it.
In addition, he also announced that beards would no longer be allowed, and even publicly criticized some slightly fat generals as "unworthy of wearing military uniforms."
A commander of the Army Infantry Camp, who did not want to disclose the name, said that their troops had 12 female soldiers, three of whom were observers of the sniper group, their endurance and precision were better than many men's soldiers, but the number of men's soldiers was more than the number of downsides, 3 miles running speed, which did not meet the actual needs of the battlefield.
When Hertling learned about these things, he was quite angry. He publicly hit back at Hegseth on MSNBC's "Good Morning Joe" program.
"We swear allegiance to the Constitution, not to an official," he said. He also referred to Article 92 of the Unified Code of Military Justice, saying that soldiers have the right to refuse to carry out orders that violate the Constitution or the law.
He did not shy away from criticizing Hagesese, saying that he had been in the army for 40 years and had met 11 defense ministers from both parties. No one had ever regarded the military as his "private territory."
Hertling's words really hit the point. Hagesese's instructions were completely nonsense. He did not consider the actual situation of the military at all, nor did he respect the rights and interests of soldiers.
Let's just say the policy of abolishing DEI. This policy protects the rights and interests of ethnic minorities and women in the military and is in line with the constitutional principle of equality. Hegese will abolish it if he says it is abolished. Isn't this a violation of the Constitution?
And that physical ability to test the reform, not considering the difference between men and women, and do a cut, is it not a joke about the future of the military's career?
He was so radical in promoting these reforms, and his background was inseparable, that he, as a Fox News host, was good at welcoming the conservative audience with rhetoric, but he lacked practical experience in commanding the army.
As soon as he became Minister of Defense, he was eager to impose his political ideas on the army. Isn't this nonsense? He regarded the army as a tool to achieve his political goals, completely ignoring the tradition and actual situation of the army.
Hertling's counterattack was not for personal gain. He was to maintain the professionalism and institutional nature of the army. He is a veteran who truly loves the army and cares about the rights and interests of the military. He knows that the army is to protect the country, not someone's private armed force. Politicians like Hagesese cannot be allowed to mess around.
Now inside the U.S. military because of this matter, disagreements have become public, supporting Hertling, mostly middle-level officers and senior soldiers with real war experience, who value the professionalism and institutionality of the military more.
He is supported by senior officials who are closely related to the government, as well as some conservative people.This is not only a contradiction within the military, it also reflects the division and chaos of American politics.
I think that as the Minister of Defense, Hagesese should reflect on his actions. He cannot regard the army as his political capital and cannot arbitrarily torture the army to achieve his political goals.
The army is the cornerstone of the country, if the army is not stable inside, how can the country still be stable?
I hope the U.S. military can solve this problem as soon as possible and stop making the world laugh.
U.S. Lieutenant General Mark Hertling bravely challenged Defense Secretary Pete Hagesese, saying that they were not personal followers at the mercy of others and that they would never carry out illegal orders.
Let's figure out the names first. The one challenging the minister is Mark Hertling. This veteran has a 37-year military career, rising from the grassroots to lieutenant general, and fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan. After retirement, he has not been idle. He often comments on military policy in the media. He is a person with a lot of say.
Let's talk about Defense Secretary Pete Hegsese. He was born in 1980 and served in the National Guard, but he is more known as a Fox News host.
In November 2024, he was nominated by Trump as defense secretary, and only through a Senate vote in January 2025 confirmed the office, which is now less than a year to complete.
On September 30, 2025, Hergezs convened an emergency meeting of more than 800 senior U.S. military generals from around the world at the U.S. Naval Corps Base in Pattiko, Virginia.
At the meeting, he issued a series of new directives under the new title “Minister of War” (he pushed to change the “Ministry of Defense” to “Ministry of War”). He would abolish the “Diversity, Fairness and Inclusion” (DEI) policy that the U.S. military has pursued for many years, and said it was a “interference to weaken the military’s destructive power”.
What's worse is that he introduced a physical fitness test reform, requiring soldiers in combat-related occupations, regardless of men and women, to be tested according to male standards, with scores of more than 70%, or leave if they fail to achieve it.
In addition, he also announced that beards would no longer be allowed, and even publicly criticized some slightly fat generals as "unworthy of wearing military uniforms."
A commander of the Army Infantry Camp, who did not want to disclose the name, said that their troops had 12 female soldiers, three of whom were observers of the sniper group, their endurance and precision were better than many men's soldiers, but the number of men's soldiers was more than the number of downsides, 3 miles running speed, which did not meet the actual needs of the battlefield.
When Hertling learned about these things, he was quite angry. He publicly hit back at Hegseth on MSNBC's "Good Morning Joe" program.
"We swear allegiance to the Constitution, not to an official," he said. He also referred to Article 92 of the Unified Code of Military Justice, saying that soldiers have the right to refuse to carry out orders that violate the Constitution or the law.
He did not shy away from criticizing Hagesese, saying that he had been in the army for 40 years and had met 11 defense ministers from both parties. No one had ever regarded the military as his "private territory."
Hertling's words really hit the point. Hagesese's instructions were completely nonsense. He did not consider the actual situation of the military at all, nor did he respect the rights and interests of soldiers.
Let's just say the policy of abolishing DEI. This policy protects the rights and interests of ethnic minorities and women in the military and is in line with the constitutional principle of equality. Hegese will abolish it if he says it is abolished. Isn't this a violation of the Constitution?
And that physical ability to test the reform, not considering the difference between men and women, and do a cut, is it not a joke about the future of the military's career?
He was so radical in promoting these reforms, and his background was inseparable, that he, as a Fox News host, was good at welcoming the conservative audience with rhetoric, but he lacked practical experience in commanding the army.
As soon as he became Minister of Defense, he was eager to impose his political ideas on the army. Isn't this nonsense? He regarded the army as a tool to achieve his political goals, completely ignoring the tradition and actual situation of the army.
Hertling's counterattack was not for personal gain. He was to maintain the professionalism and institutional nature of the army. He is a veteran who truly loves the army and cares about the rights and interests of the military. He knows that the army is to protect the country, not someone's private armed force. Politicians like Hagesese cannot be allowed to mess around.
Now inside the U.S. military because of this matter, disagreements have become public, supporting Hertling, mostly middle-level officers and senior soldiers with real war experience, who value the professionalism and institutionality of the military more.
He is supported by senior officials who are closely related to the government, as well as some conservative people.This is not only a contradiction within the military, it also reflects the division and chaos of American politics.
I think that as the Minister of Defense, Hagesese should reflect on his actions. He cannot regard the army as his political capital and cannot arbitrarily torture the army to achieve his political goals.
The army is the cornerstone of the country, if the army is not stable inside, how can the country still be stable?
I hope the U.S. military can solve this problem as soon as possible and stop making the world laugh.