Victor Davis Hanson criticized Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, for Milley’s retirement speech in which he blasts “Trump without mentioning Trump.”
As Gen. Milley leaves office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, on his last day he goes out ranting about his loyalty to the Constitution and not to a “dictator,”—blasting Trump without mentioning Trump, and thus trumping as it were Trump’s own excesses with those of his own.
So transits the most politicalized and weaponized 4-star CJS since the office was created.
Would that instead Milley had at least explained the 2021 historically disastrous flight from Kabul and defeat in Afghanistan, or the radical implementation of woke agendas into the Pentagon retention and promotion policies, or why he felt the illustrious and renown Professor Kendi, of current Boston University “Center for Antiracist Research” infamy, should be required reading for the U.S. military at time when its recruitment is descending into historical lows and its deterrent reputation is seriously questioned.
So what about Milley’s own “constitutional” legacy?
Is it that an officer who deems his civilian President and Commander in Chief dangerous—as diagnosed by 4-star psychiatrist, state department diplomat, and now theater commander Milley—has a right to commandeer the chain of command, usurp powers that are expressly by law denied to him, and then take it on himself in a time of Chinese-American tensions to freelance, by contacting his communist counterpart to warn him about his own president’s diagnosed volatility, and to reassure the hardened Stalinist that Dr/Gen. Milley will inform him first of any precipitate action from the White House.
Dictatorial much?
Americans might ask the departing Milley, two questions, 1) if Trump is reelected in 2024, will a retired General Milley, as did his retired 4-star colleagues in 2020, violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice and repeat his current charges against a second-term President Trump—matching the previous invective of his colleagues’ accusations of “liar” or “Mussolini”?.
And 2) what would Milley have done had a subordinate like himself, say a 3-star general, decided that Gen. Mark Milley’s Beijing gambit and his arrogation of command powers that were not legally his own, posed a grave threat to the republic?
And thus would such a 3-star call up theater commanders to warn them to resist Milley’s reckless orders and to report to him first, followed by his phone call to the top Chinese PLA general to assure them that if Milley somehow gave an order deemed by the 3-star to be dangerously provocative, then he would not only not obey it but rather first warn the Chinese military of Milley’s unstable state of mind.
Is that the kind of military Milley wishes to leave as his legacy, as he departs barking accusations at the moon?
In his speech at a Friday ceremony honoring his retirement, Milley said:
“We don’t take an oath to a country. We don’t take an oath to a tribe. We don’t take an oath to a religion. We don’t take an oath to a king, or a queen, or a tyrant or dictator. We don’t take an oath to a wannabe dictator. We don’t take an oath to an individual. We take an oath to the Constitution.”
