Ahh, well, I generally don’t read the comments so I had no idea where it came from.
Now you’re asking me if I agree with this question?
I have no idea either way. However, if there was something incriminating related to Epstein… why wasn’t he fired a while back? Do you think there was something incriminating about Epstein that got him fired?
No, he was mostly fired because he was a bigger advocate of the Trumpp battleship, and Hegseth wanted more unmanned service vessels.
Totally different shipbuilding priorities.
Here’s Google AI, quoting the NY Times.
As of April 23, 2026, U.S. Navy Secretary John Phelan was fired by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth due to slow progress on shipbuilding reforms and intense clashes with Pentagon leadership. His removal stemmed from failed efforts to increase shipbuilding numbers, a key priority for the administration, along with strained relationships with Hegseth and his deputy, Steve Feinberg.
[image]The New York Times +4
Key reasons for Phelan’s firing include:
It was a question from a user, from a link, that you linked. I don’t know the reason he was fired but you can bang your keyboard all day today and try and figure it out.
#1 reason, he wasn’t qualified as your key points highlighted
Don’t know, don’t care what the reason was
Honestly, I don’t care why he was fired. The link I posted was only about the news the SecNav was fired. I just thought it was important news for the discussion of the war. I didn’t know that I needed to read and be responsible for anything posted in the “comments” section of an article.
I don’t dispute that the service secretaries are involved in procurement.
And policy, logistics, etc.
But they are indeed also involved in strategy.
DON’T incorrectly state otherwise.
Trust me. I spent two years at the Army HQ at the Pentagon. I worked at Army G-35R International Relations Branch, and at Army G44M (Maintenance Branch).
There was policy, planning, procurement, acquisitions…AND strategy.
Essentially, developing the Army strategy to achieve the overall national defense strategy.
You aren’t responsible, but you made me responsible. All I did was quote the question.
I did a search on Google AI to see if Phelan was fired over disagreements with the blockade, since you like Google AI as a source.
The answer, again quoting the left-leaning NY Times…was NO.
Reports indicate his departure was driven by:
Again…it was largely over shipbuilding priorities.
And please note the BOLDED and ITALICIZED portion.
So yes, the SECARMY is definitely involved in STRATEGY.
Next please.
Probably a mix of all of it
I think most people would agree that Hegseth needs to go, but unfortunately Hegeth is in his position because he never disagrees with his master
I didn’t “make you responsible”. I also didn’t make you post a quote without context.
You gave no indication where the quote came from so I was completely lost. I questioned you because I wanted to understand where it came from, first, then if it was something you believed or what point you were trying to make. I guess I still don’t know what point you were trying to make by quoting some random person in the comments section of an article.
Also don’t know why you blamed a bunch of media outlets for the quote when I first asked, if you actually got it from the comments instead.
Yes, but the blockade or Iran strategy was NOT a reason Phelan was fired.
Dispel that idea from your head, no matter how much you might wish it were true. It’s not.
Even left-wing sources like the NY Times aren’t reporting that.
And also, dispel from your head the notion that the SECARMY and his staff at the Pentagon, which I was a member of TWICE during my career (2012-2013, Army G44 and 2014-2015, Army G35R)…aren’t involved in strategy.
They most certainly are. Each service secretary essentially designs service specific strategies…to implement the overall national security strategy under the direction of the SECDEF, to whom they directly report.
He does this constantly to delegitimize things, in this case, the Epstein issue.
For example, if someone made a post in the baseball section titled “Coach Todd Whitting has been fired”
Rob would make a comment that says “I bet it was his relationship with Epstein that got him fired!”
I guess where I am confused is the fact that we are constantly being told that we are winning the war, the blockade is a success, Iran’s economy is crumbling, Iran’s Navy and Air Force are all gone
Sounds to me like our military is doing dandy just fine if going by president’s words
I find it odd that many of any of the prior or present POTUS’ ties had a relationship with Epstein or flew on his plane. Before we get off on an Epstein tangent, the question was only relevant to Phelan and his firing. I saw the question and thought it should at least be broached. I made zero observations and voiced zero opinions on the question, but I did think it was pertinent, as it sounded like something I’d read in these pages.
Opinions vary.
Now, for some additional education, I was assigned to Army G-3/5/7 (my specific sub-department was Army G35R) during my second stint at the Pentagon.
Do you want to know what Army G-3/5/7 is? Here, since you like Google AI, I’ll help you out.
The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7, specifically the Directorate for Strategy, Plans, and Policy (DAMO-SS), is the primary branch at US Army Headquarters (HQDA) responsible for developing army-wide strategy, policy, and long-term planning. They are the proponents for Functional Area 59 (FA59) Strategists, who serve as the specialized officers dedicated to strategic planning, doctrine, and policy formulation within the Army Staff.
[image]Army.mil +2
Key Responsibilities of DAMO-SS and G-3/5/7 Strategy Components:
[image]War Room - U.S. Army War College +4
DAMO-SS, located within the Pentagon, serves as the key staff proponent for crafting the Army’s role in the National Defense Strategy and providing strategic assessments to the Chief of Staff of the Army.
[image]Army.mil +3
Notice how the word STRATEGY is in the title of the SECARMY controlled staff branch in question and the word “strategy” is used several times in this description.
There is even an Army Officer career field (Functional Area 59) that does nothing but strategy and plans.
Within G-3/5/7, there’s a whole sub-department (DAMO-SS) full of those guys. They sit in a big cubicle farm inside the pentagon where each of them does nothing all day except sit in the cubicles and do…guess what…STRATEGIZE!!!
Please, don’t make that mistake again. Each Service Secretary is involved in strategy.
PERIOD. FULL STOP.
As far as I’m aware, only Clinton and DT has relationships with Epstein. Bush and Obama did not have relations directly, though I wouldn’t be surprised if members of their admins/cabinets did have relations (such as Kathy Ruemmler)
With that being said, i think you made that initial comment to be snarky and/or sarcastic, but now you’re trying to twist it as if you’re being legitimate about Phelan’s relationship with Epstein when I know based on your previous posts that you could care less about the Epstein situation
i was mainly referring to combat strategy
At least one of Obama’s hires surely did. You mentioned presidential hires, I mentioned presidential ties. She resigned recently from her job if you can recall.
My opinions about the Epstein situation has always been consistent, nothing will happen. You will never get the accountability that you’re searching for.
Neither the SECDEF nor the SECARMY is involved in “combat strategy.”
That’s operational/tactical stuff.
The operational stuff is handled by the Regional Commands (CENTCOM, INDO-PACOM, AFRICOM, etc) within their respective region, each of which is led by a regional combatant commander or “CINC.” The one that controls the Iran War is the CENTCOM Commander, Admiral Brad Cooper, USN.
The tactical stuff is controlled by the commanders of the units on ground within each component that are subordinate to the combatant commander.
agreed
© 1999-2025 CoogFans.com