Monday's death of former Vice President Dick Cheney at age 84 has drawn reactions across the spectrum from U.S. citizens who remember a man who shaped war, peace and power for half a century.
Cheney, who served as President George W. Bush's vice president from 2001-2009, left an indelible mark on U.S. foreign policy, intelligence agencies and presidential authority. His death is prompting tributes from governors and members of Congress, and criticism from opponents.
Former President George W. Bush told Military.com the country lost “one of the most serious public servants of his generation.”
Bush said Cheney was a calm, steady presence in the White House after Sept. 11, 2001, and a leader who put national security first. The ex-president wrote that he and former First Lady Laura Bush “will remember Dick Cheney for the decent, honorable man that he was.”
Cheney, a Nebraska native, started life in Lincoln and grew into one of the most powerful national security figures in modern America.
Vice President Dick Cheney is greeted by his family after the vice presidential debate in Cleveland, Tuesday, Oct. 5, 2004. From left are his wife, Lynne, daughter Elizabeth, granddaughter Kate, and daughter Mary. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)
Kindness And Fly Fishing
Cheney’s family said he died at home in Virginia, surrounded by his wife, Lynne, and daughters, Liz and Mary. The former lawmaker died of complications from pneumonia, vascular disease and cardiac failure.
In a written statement, the family called him “a great and good man who taught his children and grandchildren to love our country, and to live lives of courage, honor, love, kindness, and fly fishing.”
“We are grateful beyond measure for all Dick Cheney did for our country. And we are blessed beyond measure to have loved and been loved by this noble giant of a man," they added.
President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney embrace following President Bush's acceptance speech in Madison Square Garden during the final night of the Republican National Convention Thursday, Sept. 2, 2004, in New York. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, file)
Outpouring of Remembrance
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds offered condolences and called Cheney “a remarkable statesman in Congress and the Executive Branch, in times of peace and war, at home and abroad.”
She added that “above all, he will be remembered as a patriot who dedicated his life to the service of his country.”
The Heritage Foundation, one of the nation's largest conservative movements since its 1973 institution, praised Cheney in an elaborate statement referring to him as "a committed conservative who dedicated his life to public service."
“Cheney was a kind man with high expectations and even deeper loyalty to America and its defenders, his family, and his friends," the statement reads. "He gave me great opportunities and was devoted to conservative principles and to all those he worked with. Cheney ably championed the Second Amendment, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. He was an experienced and loyal counselor to President Bush and the various American leaders he served."
Former Vice President Dick Cheney speaks in Emancipation Hall on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 3, 2015, during the unveiling of his marble bust. Congressional leaders and former President George W. Bush paid tribute to Cheney, who also served as congressman from Wyoming. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
They also mention how in 2002, he helped present Heritage’s highest award, the Clare Boothe Luce Award, to Lady Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He won that same award himself in 2011.
“Cheney was a patriot and a longtime friend to Heritage," Heritage added. "We will remember him with fondness and gratitude. I will miss him, and our nation owes him and his family gratitude for his long career of public service. We extend our condolences to his wife, Lynne, their two daughters, and their grandchildren.”
Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) recalled how he worked with Cheney for more than 40 years.
“While we did not always agree on everything, Cheney was a man I worked with on and off for over forty years in politics and government,” Cole said.
He remembered how Cheney and Bush came to Oklahoma during his first run for Congress. “This is something I will never forget.”
Congressman Adrian Smith called Cheney “a patriot who dedicated his life to service,” adding, “from the Capitol to the Pentagon, to the White House, he left an indelible mark on history.”
Defense Secretary Dick Cheney poses with some of the U.S. Army troops stationed in southern Iraq in this May 7, 1991 file photo. (AP Photo/Bill Haber, File)
Veterans Recall His Leadership
The American Legion mourned Cheney’s passing, calling him one of its “most distinguished Boys State graduates.”
In a statement to Military.com, National Commander Dan K. Wiley said: “America lost a longtime public servant, and The American Legion lost one of its most distinguished Boys State graduates.” Wiley said Cheney became a nationally known figure through his steady leadership during the Gulf War as Secretary of Defense. He added that Cheney brought “decades of experience” to the Bush administration and “nobody questioned his patriotism and love for his country.”
The Legion offered condolences to the Cheney family and to “those who knew him best in his home state of Wyoming.”
The organization also noted Cheney’s long ties to the Legion. He played baseball for American Legion Post 2 in Casper, Wyoming, and addressed national Legion gatherings as vice president.
At the American Legion’s 90th National Convention in 2008, Cheney told veterans, “The Legion serves America by leading on important issues, from health care and education, to employment opportunities for veterans, to homeland security, to a better quality of life for our military families. You proudly wear an emblem that stands ‘for God and Country,’ and the highest rights of man.”
Civil Liberties Groups See Different Legacy
Human rights advocates and other organizations offered a different perspective following Cheney's passing.
The Center for Constitutional Rights told Military.com that Cheney will be remembered for controversial post-9/11 detention and interrogation policies, citing the invasion of Iraq, surveillance programs, and the treatment of detainees. The group said its concerns reflect what it described as long-lasting impacts on civilians and detainees affected by those policies.
Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, left, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Colin Powell, huddle prior to testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Thursday, Feb. 21, 1991 on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/John Duricka)
Federal Agencies Stay Silent
Military.com asked the Pentagon, CIA, FBI, the White House, House leadership, veteran groups, and senior national security offices for reaction. None responded at press time.
The Marine Corps replied by saying it could not provide a statement due to a funding lapse and legal restrictions.
Watching President Bush and new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad during a video teleconference at Camp David, Md., Tuesday, June 13, 2006, from right are, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Peter Pace. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, file)
The silence was noticeable considering that Cheney spent decades inside the same institutions that declined to comment. He served in Congress, ran the Pentagon as secretary of defense, and later became vice president. None of the agencies contacted, including the Department of Defense (War) and the White House, responded to requests for comment about his death.
The flag at the White House was lowered to half-staff around 10 a.m., several hours after his death was announced.
South Korea is joining a small circle of nations that operate nuclear-powered submarines.
On Oct. 29 during his days-long trip to Asia, U.S. President Donald Trump announced following his meeting with various heads of state that nuclear submarines will be built at the Philadelphia shipyards in the United States. The deal came after the president announced that an economic agreement was being finalized for South Korea to invest $350 billion in the U.S. as tariffs continue to impact domestic and foreign policy.
“Our (U.S and South Korea’s) military alliance is stronger than ever before, and based on that, I have given them approval to build a Nuclear Powered Submarine," Trump wrote on Truth Social.
A U.S. Air Force A10C Thunderbolt II flies over the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Kentucky (SSBN 737) in the Pacific Ocean, July 29, 2025. (U.S. Navy Photo by Lt. Zachary Anderson)
The proverbial green light turns South Korea into a blue-water navy and places the nation among a small group with such capabilities. Only the United States, China, Russia, Britain, France, India and Australia have moved toward nuclear-powered submarines.
Bruce Bennett, a senior defense analyst at the RAND Corporation, told Military.com that the submarine brings South Korea closer to wartime operational control of allied forces. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung has pushed for that authority, with a nuclear submarine now giving the nation the ability to act without waiting for U.S. direction.
Military.com asked the State Department how the approval changes the balance of power. They referred the inquiry to the Pentagon, which at press time did not respond.
Domestic Responsibility
A nuclear submarine gives South Korea the reach to slip into deep Pacific waters, hunt Chinese and North Korean vessels, and guard sea lanes with U.S. forces. South Korea's submarine is anticipated run on uranium fuel enriched inside the country.
The move signals a new kind of alliance. Washington wants Seoul to take more responsibility for its own defense and prepare for wartime control of allied forces. South Korean officials have pushed for that authority for years, but a nuclear-powered submarine brings that goal closer.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, right, shakes hands with South Korean Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back at the southern side of Panmunjom in the Demilitarized Zone, South Korea, Monday, Nov. 3, 2025. (South Korea Defense Ministry via AP)
Military.com contacted U.S. Forces Korea and the U.S. Embassy in Seoul for comment.
The approval changes the U.S.-South Korea alliance. A nuclear submarine can stay underwater for long periods and track Chinese ships far from shore. Analysts say Washington wants South Korea to carry more of the security burden. Military.com asked U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and the U.S. Pacific Fleet whether the submarine would affect American posture in the region. Neither responded.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited South Korea while discussions were ongoing. His visit added political attention to the program and raised pressure on lawmakers in both countries.
Military.com asked the Defense Department whether the visit signaled new momentum. The Pentagon did not respond.
Ships from the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group, Zumwalt-class destroyer USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001), far right, and fleet replenishment oiler USNS John Lewis (T-AO 205), far left, steam in formation in the Pacific Ocean, April 10, 2025. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Carson Croom)
Crowded Waters
North Korea has previously attempted to build nuclear-armed submarines, but those vessels have limited range and operate with louder engines. A South Korean nuclear submarine could track North Korean and Chinese submarines in the Yellow Sea, the Sea of Japan, and a wider Pacific region that has become more crowded.
The U.S. Navy maintains aircraft carriers, destroyers and nuclear-powered submarines in the area. Japan continues to expand its submarine fleet. Australia plans to build nuclear-powered submarines through the AUKUS agreement. South Korea is preparing to join them.
South Korea has never operated a nuclear-powered submarine. The new program would change the balance on the Korean Peninsula and increase pressure on China. The region now waits to see how quickly Seoul will move from approval to construction.
Continuing U.S. military attacks on boats and individuals accused of trafficking narcotics through the Caribbean and potentially in association with Venezuela has drawn differing reactions from the Trump administration and members of Congress.
Questions by legislators in Washington abound on whether they should have the official say in terms of escalated military aggression[1] off the South American coast, where both Venezuela and Columbia have been embroiled with the U.S. as tensions have risen in recent weeks—in addition to claims that briefings have been held[2] but have shut out some of the highest-elected lawmakers due to partisanship or otherwise.
More than 60 individuals have been killed by U.S. boat strikes hailed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has warned that the 15 or so attacks since September are preventing “narco-terrorists” from drug smuggling to areas like the U.S.
Recently, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called the strikes part of a broader “new game” being executed by the U.S. government and military. He praised President Donald Trump, a longtime ally, for “doing the right thing” and suggested that congressional approval may not be necessary in such instances.
White House 'Maintaining Transparency'
“On the campaign trail, President Trump promised to take on the cartels and he has taken unprecedented action to stop the scourge of narcoterrorism that has resulted in the needless deaths of innocent Americans,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told Military.com[3]. “All of these decisive strikes have been against designated narco-terrorists, as affirmed by U.S. intelligence, bringing deadly poison to our shores, and the president will continue to use every element of American power to stop drugs from flooding into our country and to bring those responsible to justice while maintaining transparency with the Hill.”
A senior Trump administration official told Military.com last week that the administration has provided Congress seven separate classified briefings since early September, covering members or staff from House leadership, Senate leadership, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, and the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees.
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters on board Air Force One on his way back to the White House from a weekend trip at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., Sunday, Nov. 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
The Department of War is working through additional requests for information from Capitol Hill and continues to make senior officials available to answer questions, the official added, calling the Trump administration “more forthcoming with the legal rationale behind these strikes than prior administrations”—contrasting their ongoing actions in the Caribbean with the 500 or so drone strikes authorized and conducted by the Obama administration “without offering any legal justification to Congress."
Trump Administration Claims Disputed
A source familiar with the situation and associated with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), who sits on the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, told Military.com[4]: “The White House is counting the same briefing multiple times based on individual or small group touches with certain members and staff.”
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), ranking member and former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told the press last week that the system is designed for Congress to approve such military action.
"When you politicize decision-making about putting our servicemembers in harm's way, you make them less safe," Warner said.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, (D-IL), also a member of the Armed Services Committee, said last week that she was “disgusted” about so-called secret briefings exempting Democrats from the conversation on national security.
“This is ridiculous,” Duckworth said, per reports. “This is not how we will operate in the Senate.”
Sen. Adam Schiff, (D-CA), who has sponsored legislation mandating that Congress provide approval for continued military strikes, said the legislative body’s role involves moments just like these.
“It makes no sense to give a briefing to Republicans only,” Schiff told reporters last week. “This is exactly why Congress needs to be brought in to any decision about use of force, and I hope we’ll have more support for the war powers resolution when we take it up.”
Gabriel Cabrera, president of the Venezuelan Youth Center for Democracy, gives a statement outside of the U.S. embassy with members of the organization holding signs that read in Spanish "Intervention is not the solution," in reference to U.S. warships operating in the Caribbean, in Caracas, Venezuela, Monday, Oct. 27, 2025. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
Sen. Chris Coons, (D-DE), a senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations panel, questioned whether the “long-standing tradition” of conversation between the Pentagon, presidential administration and the highest levels of Congress is waning as this situation unfolds.
He’s only received the “most superficial” information on future plans pertaining to Venezuela and South America.
Bipartisan Calls For More Transparency
On Friday, during an appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) expressed some of the same disillusionment as his colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
“People were very frustrated in the information that was being provided," said Turner, a House Armed Services Committee member, of a Thursday meeting. "It was a bipartisan briefing, but people were not happy with the level information that was provided, and certainly the level of legal justification that was provided."
Republican Sens. James Lankford (OK) and Rand Paul (KY) are among conservatives veering from Sen. Graham’s position, warning of ongoing attacks without congressional approval.
A man wears shirt with a image of U.S. President Donald Trump during a government-organized rally against foreign interference, in Caracas, Venezuela, Thursday, Oct. 30, 2025. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
Lankford has stated he would be “apoplectic” if the Biden administration had taken the same steps as those being carried out by Trump and his administration.
Paul said the U.S. is engaging in “extrajudicial killings…akin to what China does, to what Iran does with drug dealers.”
Military.com reached out to the offices of Lankford and Paul for comment.
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) reportedly attended a briefing last week only to find that just Republicans were present.
Rounds said he received a phone call from the White House on Thursday asking if he had concerns.
“I said, ‘Yup.’ Because Intel and Armed Services, we do things on a bipartisan basis when it comes to this, we want to keep it that way,” Rounds said, according to the Associated Press.
The gathering of the United States’ highest ranking generals and admirals at U.S. Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia on Sept. 30 was the “most bizarre thing I’ve seen in my time on Earth,” said Larry Wilkerson, an ex-United States Army colonel and former chief of staff to past Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Wilkerson and a slew of others spoke with Military.com[1] in the aftermath of the impromptu assembly of the United States’ starred service members one month ago, warning that the Armed Forces currently helmed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are in a state of disarray most haven’t seen in their hundreds of years of combined military and defense service.
The scene was endemic of broader political and socioeconomic divisions[2] throughout the first nine months or so of Trump’s executive order-laden second term, in which the president and his administration have been aggressive in enforcement involving immigration and more recently the National Guard in multiple American cities[3]. It sparked continued debate over the role of the U.S. military in American politics and society at large, of which both have been intertwined since the nation’s inception, and concerns of a traditionally apolitical constitutional fixture espousing partisan rhetoric.
U.S. military senior leadership listen as President Donald Trump speaks at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025 in Quantico, Va. (Andrew Harnik/Pool via AP)
The Quantico “loyalty test” as one retired service member described may have far wider implications for the future of the U.S. military and those who serve in it. Officials who spoke to Military.com[4] warned of the potential of Trump and Hegseth sycophants replacing outgoing military members who disagree with the so-called warrior ethos mentality—while others connected the administration’s military approach to a broader, government-wide takeover rooted in greed, power, and arguably the most open embrace of Christian nationalism in the nation’s history.
“Certainly in my 40 years of government service for both the president and the secretary of war, it was just bizarre,” Wilkerson said.
Beyond the security implications and cost associated with galvanizing the generals and admirals, Wilkerson said that the messages from both Trump and Hegseth were “a little bit different but complementing each other quite well.”
“Hegseth essentially said, ‘I want you all to be killers, I want you to be killers for America. I want you to be killers for the flag. I want you to be killers under all circumstances where I give you orders to go to war or to do something that I’ve given you an executive order for. I want you to be that kind of person,’” he said.
'New But Familiar'
Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell told Military.com[5] that Hegseth's speech “cemented a new but familiar culture we refer to as the warrior ethos.”
“His message was simple: promotions and combat assignments will be given based on merit and ability, not diversity quotas,” Parnell said. “The war on warriors is over; political correctness has no home at the Department of War. Physical fitness standards will be high, uniform and sex-neutral, ensuring our warriors are prepared to fight and win in any arena, no matter the circumstances.
“These core principles have been the foundation of our force for generations and drive our entire institution.”
The same message is being pontificated from the White House.
“President Trump was proud to join Secretary Hegseth’s event to reignite warrior ethos within his top brass and reinforce the rigorous standards that once made our military the best in the world,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told Military.com. “These anonymous ‘criticisms’ are nonsense. The president is fully behind the secretary’s efforts to restore readiness and lethality within the Department of War.”
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth delivers remarks during a War Department address at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va., Sept. 30, 2025. (Department of War/Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Aiko Bongolan, DOW)
'Slippery Slope'
The Quantico gathering included speeches from both Hegseth and President Donald Trump, the former calling to minimize the number of “fat generals” while enforcing stricter military facial hair policies across branches. He mentioned achieving a “higher male standard” that some have surmised is the Defense Department’s (now federally known as the “War Department”) attempt to push some females out of the military altogether.
Hegseth also railed against “woke garbage” infiltrating forces and implored service members to embrace the administration’s aforementioned “warrior ethos,” with those not getting on board encouraged to resign.
An Air Force general who was in the room on Sept. 30 spoke to Military.com[6] on the condition of anonymity, saying that when they first learned of the intended gathering, it was perceived as a “loyalty check.” There was even a thought that some admirals and generals would be forced to resign on [the] scene.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth meets with a National Guardsman in Union Station as part of the D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force, Washington, Aug. 20, 2025. (Department of War/Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza, DOD)
“But then as time went on, we realized that it was going to be such a public forum and that was just unrealistic—that it probably was just going to be what we ended up seeing: a very scripted speech and very partisan speech,” said the general with decades of service. “There were a lot of fears going into it.
“My chief and I kind of war-gamed it ahead of time, like, ‘Hey, if this happens, how will we react? If people stand up and clap, will we sit? Will we stand and not clap? How are we going to handle these situations? Or if [Hegseth] asks us to do something that is so completely against our morals and values, will we just walk out of the room?’”
The general said Hegseth’s remarks induced a “slippery slope” of what may happen moving forward, including potential harassment of minority and female military members that may discourage their service altogether and lead to resignations. Even making formal complaints could become cumbersome.
“We’ve never had a secretary of defense speak even remotely in a partisan way the way this man [Hegseth] does,” the general added, claiming Hegseth’s brand of conservatism has been invoked in the traditionally nonpartisan Armed Forces. “That’s discouraging because obviously the military isn’t a political organization, or at least we’re not supposed to be. So, that was hard, it was a slap in the face.
“I thought all of those generals and senior enlisted leaders and admirals who were in the room who had dedicated their lives to this, and then for their ultimate leader to just say the things that he said, was just incredibly frustrating.”
An anonymous senior-level Defense Department official with decades of experience had the following reaction when news of the Quantico gathering spread: “You’ve got to be kidding me.”
They said the situation harkened back to Hegseth’s words following his initial appointment, from Fox News co-host to oversee the world’s most powerful military, which was effectively described as a pro-Trump campaign speech devoid of specifics.
“That’s what I was anticipating, here’s another campaign plan speech,” the official said. “It’s going to be about men and women in the military, and a snot-nosed major in the National Guard talking down to seasoned senior officers who have 30, 40, 45 years as military professionals.
“That’s what I thought, and that’s exactly what he delivered.”
They “couldn’t believe” they were seeing generals being talked down to “as if they were platoon leaders…being used as pawns in sort of a public relations, political demonstration.”
President Donald Trump is greeted by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth before speaking to a gathering of top U.S. military commanders at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025, in Quantico, Va. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
An anonymous sergeant in the U.S. Army, who was not present that day in Quantico, told Military.com[7] that the entire scene surrounding that day’s events was “disturbing.”
“It was just very scary because my feeling when I first heard about all this was that Hegseth and Trump want to get a loyalty oath out of the military to void our loyalty to the Constitution, to protect the American people and pledge loyalty to them no matter what,” the sergeant said. “It reminds me of Hitler’s rise to power.”
The uniformed member described the situation as ironic, due to the “complete incompetence coming from this administration” and how it could “save” Americans and the military itself.
Asked to elaborate, the sergeant was blunt in his perspective: “These guys are just incredibly stupid, they keep f****** up so much.”
“Hegseth has been involved in so many Signal scandals he can’t save himself,” the sergeant said. “There are leaks constantly going on, even though he’s trying to find the leakers. He is the most unqualified and most incompetent secretary of defense that we’ve ever had, and he needs to go.
“And morale, from what I have seen, is very, very low in the military—like I’ve never seen it before.”
Parnell told Military.com[8] that current, former service members and defense officials who are speaking out anonymously in the media “should put their names to their comments if that's what they truly believe in and consider resigning from their post.”
“Our warriors deserve senior leaders who support the mission and put warfighting first,” Parnell said.
Reaction To The 'Show'
Marty France is a retired U.S. Air Force brigadier general who spent more than a decade as Permanent Professor and head of the Department of Astronautics and Engineering at the USAF Academy.
“I thought that the generals and the senior enlisted advisors handled it in the absolute perfect manner that our military should,” France told Military.com[9]. “In other words, they respectfully received the message and went on their way. They didn’t really, as a group, show any emotion. They, of course, didn’t show any disrespect either and sat quietly and received the message.”
U.S. military senior leadership listen as President Donald Trump speaks at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025 in Quantico, Va. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
The concerns of the 1981 Air Force Academy graduate and parent of a 2006 graduate mimicked others regarding “loyalty” pledges and meeting in person when the addresses that day could have theoretically been conducted virtually. The presentations by Trump and Hegseth were antithetical to the way service members responded, he added.
“I think the message that was sent to the rest of America, that our military does insist on standing above the fray and remaining apolitical while obeying the orders of our legal superiors, is absolutely the correct message,” he added. “I couldn’t have been prouder of how they handled it.
“And I think it also demonstrated how incompetent and bumbling the two speakers at the event were.”
France mentioned how Hegseth tasked the roughly 2.1 million currently serving service members to watch his speech or read the transcript by Oct. 31, 2025.
“I absolutely think that’s a wonderful idea,” France said. “I want everyone to see what a complete bumbling mess he is and to see how silly and unprofessional and incoherent the rantings of both of them were.
“I think that’s good so people can actually see firsthand what we’re dealing with.
Irv Halter, a retired two-star numbered Air Force commander who served more than 32 years, called what occurred on Sept. 30 “unprecedented” and rejected some notions, like that of Vice President JD Vance and others, that occurrences like these are not all that unusual.
He referred to the day’s events as a “show” rather than a serious meeting planned clandestinely that included no media attention. Then, Trump got involved “because he can’t pass up a camera,” Halter said.
“You don’t announce to the world, ‘Hey, I’m bringing all the senior leadership from all the services from across the world into one place, and I’m going to spend time with them in front of TV cameras. It’s just crazy,” said Halter, who formerly ran for Congress as a Democrat in Colorado.
Irving and others who spoke to Military.com[10] praised the disposition of service members in attendance, whose quiet patience while in attendance drew attention from onlookers. During his speech, Trump told the generals: “If you don’t like what I’m saying, you can leave the room. Of course, there goes your rank, there goes your future.”
U.S. military senior leadership listen as President Donald Trump speaks at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025 in Quantico, Va. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Once upon a time, some in the room worked directly for Irving.
“People from the outside don’t understand. … These are people who have decided to stay in the service for a long time,” he said. “They’re very capable, seasoned leaders. So, this idea that they stick around because they’re afraid about their jobs—they’re not afraid about their jobs. They can make money anywhere.
“They do what they do because they think it’s important and they care. And that’s why they stay in the room, because they still have a service to run or operations to run on behalf of the United States. And they’re the best, capable, best qualified people to do that.”
Wider Implications
Mike Farrell, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran known for his role as Capt. B.J. Hunnicutt on the television series M*A*S*H, described the motives of the Trump administration—be it the meeting at Quantico or potential escalation of a war with Venezuela—as “insane.”
He believes Trump is “mentally ill” and that those behind the scenes, naming White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, are “steering” the country in disputable manners.
“I think we’re in a very new place,” Farrell told Military.com[11].
The U.S. military is respected internationally and has been for decades not only because of the potential that they maintain, Farrell said, but also because of the fact that they are respectful of relationships and the chain of command.
While he’s glad he didn’t “have to deal with the horrors” of the Vietnam War and disagreed with policy decisions, he said the Constitution requires service members to follow what the Constitution requires.
“When the head of the nation and the people he’s appointed to do the work around and maintain the institutions have become so mindlessly brutal and stupidly self-aggrandizing, it seems to me to be a totally different world that we’re creating, where we’re losing respect around the world,” he said.
Author's Note: Mike Farrell, Marty France, Irv Halter and Larry Wilkerson are MRFF Advisory Board members.
Christian Nationalism Within The Ranks
Mikey Weinstein has been fighting against Christian nationalism in the military since Feb. 4, 2004.
The Air Force veteran was born and bred through his own military service. Not only did he serve but so did his father, a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, as well as his two sons who are also Air Force Academy graduates. Seven members of his family in total attended the Academy.
Mikey Weinstein during his time as White House counsel shaking hands with Ronald Reagan at Reagan's birthday party. (MRFF)
More than two decades ago, his focus shifted. That was the same time Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christ was released in theaters.
“It was astounding the degree to which the cadet chain of command and officer chain of command at the Air Force Academy was essentially almost making it mandatory for the cadets to go see this movie,” Weinstein told Military.com[12]. “Every meal in Mitchell Hall had a flyer on it, on the plate every meal. You go into the academic building, Fairchild Hall, [and] you couldn’t see the walls—it was plastered with these posters.
“That’s when I began to realize, what the f*** is going on here? I had three of my kids there at the time. This kind of changed my life. My wife and I realized that there’s something wrong here.”
It led to him founding the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), a civil rights organization with clients spanning all military branches in addition to officials within the Defense Department and all U.S. national security agencies. MRFF has been nominated myriad times for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Weinstein analogizes MRFF’s Christian clientele with the mathematical constant of Pi, in that as the members have grown over two decades the percentage of Christians—hovering around 95%—has also remained consistent.
“We found out that 10 years before the Mel Gibson movie, every Christmas the last edition of the Air Force Academy newspaper had a weekly newspaper that would come out,” he recalled. “The last page of it was filled with the most senior people at the academy and their spouses, making it clear that the only true hope for mankind was our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
“It was signed by scores of members of the faculty and the chain of command, etc. Obviously, these are all unbelievable violations of the separation of church and state. And this is what kind of formed what we were doing.”
Mikey Weinstein receiving the first ever Person of the Year Award in 2011 from Americans United for Separation of Church and State. (MRFF)
That message to separate church and state, especially within the military, has been Weinstein’s calling card for many years. In turn, it’s made him and his family targets for those who have disagreed with his tactics and intent.
He has many firearms in his home. When he and his wife leave the house, they conceal-carry weapons. They have what he describes as “elite-level protection” in the form of canines, bodyguards and infrared cameras, along with close relationships forged with local law enforcement and district attorneys.
The windows of his home have been shot out twice. Animals have been beheaded, disemboweled and left for dead on his property. Beer bottles have been thrown. Swastikas have been painted on his house. Feces has been rubbed on his mailbox.
“I’d never tasted anti-Semitism until my first six months at the Air Force Academy, and then I got it in spades,” said Weinstein, who post-service served as former presidential candidate Ross Perot’s general counsel. “I got beaten twice within a week, unconscious. … A generation later, my kids were going through this stuff.
“We are here to give a voice to these members of the military. If you want to believe in that tree down the road, or Spider-Man, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, as your deity—or no deity, humanism, atheism— that’s fine. But it’s time, place and manner.”
The MRFF, which has some 1,200 workers and representatives on almost every military installation including nuclear submarines and nuclear aircraft carriers, has four foundational principles: to chronicle what is happening, to expose it, to intervene, and to attack when able.
The current scourge of Christian nationalism is being filtered through the government and military, Weinstein and others claim.
One of the service members who spoke to Military.com[13] described themselves as a practicing Roman Catholic who doesn’t fit the present mold of “a dominionist or fundamentalist, a diehard Christian nationalist.” They sought MRFF for help in terms of their own moral quandaries and fears of retribution within the ranks.
“There are well-organized, well-funded organizations in this country who see the military as a mission field,” the senior defense official said. “Having Hegseth in charge of the military is just one piece of that bigger equation of God and country and achieving what Christian nationalists ultimately want to achieve—and dominion, make this a Christian country.”
It’s much worse now than nearly 20 years ago, they added, when MRFF took umbrage with Maj. Gen. Robert L. Caslen Jr., ex-Commandant of Cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, and six other military officers sanctioning, participating in a promotional video for an evangelical group called Christian Embassy while wearing uniforms.
“But coming from the Secretary of War, that is a whole other level,” they said.
A chaplain endorser from an Evangelical background who spoke anonymously with Military.com[14] currently helps represent typically independent Christian churches and the clergy they produce who desire to be federal or civilian chaplains. That includes 725 current chaplains endorsed, elected and serving.
The endorser, a former Army active-duty and Reserve chaplain, said that their ideology “is very inclusive and that God’s out there and He loves everybody.” Their work tends to align with more independent churches and not a denominational brand, with chaplains freer to administer and have their own philosophies that may not fit with other denominations.
“When I originally went into the Army chaplaincy myself, there was a real spirit of camaraderie whatever that chaplain’s faith was—whether they were Protestant or Jewish or Muslim, Roman Catholic, whatever,” the veteran said. “We all genuinely cared about one another, and we were all there to be helpful to service members.”
That type of openness in ideology today, compared to the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s, is missing, said the chaplain. They said things have changed due to politics and personal ideologies, extending even beyond religion to minimize the prospects of potential female chaplains due simply to gender.
“I’m just going to be blunt: the folks that look like me—white, Evangelical, male chaplains and their endorsers—in my opinion increasingly felt empowered. … [The chaplaincy] was originally about to perform or provide for the free exercise of religion for anybody who came to them,” they said.
They continued: “Instead, there’s been a hard right swing—and by right, I mean politically, theologically—that [they]re] there to convert them. … That took on a whole different flavor, a whole different tone, a whole different philosophy/worldview. That’s not turned out well.”
Americans' Role
The National Guard continues its presence across American cities. Citizens and public officials spar with one another over immigration-related activity, with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at the center. The U.S. has increased aggression against nations like Venezuela[15] without congressional approval.
Those who spoke with Military.com[16] expressed concern about the future of American leadership while expressing optimism regarding the stability of the military and its members—should traditional guardrails hold and individuals of conscience continue to serve.
“If all the good guys leave, there’ll be nothing but bad guys left and gals—maybe not too many gals because Hegseth doesn’t seem to like women too much, either,” Wilkerson said. “My advice—I gave it to Colin Powell for 16 years—is you’re not ordered to do anything unethical or immoral. Stay and make your stay as ethical, moral and constitutional as you can.
“Because if we get nothing in the military or we get a sizable minority even in the military of leaders who will not object to a coup, we will have a coup. There’s no way any state in the world really can be overthrown by a particular leader unless she has the military, the one element with the right to use force, if you will, and armed to the teeth to do so, that is absolutely necessary to a takeover of the government.”
President Donald Trump speaks to a gathering of top U.S. military commanders at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025, in Quantico, Va. (Andrew Harnik/Pool via AP)
What Farrell finds frightening is that he believes Trump wants to not only please world leaders and adversaries like Russian President Vladimir Putin, but also emulate them and their behavior. That could create the domestic possibility for “terrible damage” to occur without military action but posturing, he said.
“It puts our troops at risk, I think, and it worries me greatly,” Farrell said. “So, I think we are adrift a bit internationally now. The leadership of the Western nations is tolerating, as best they can, the kind of erratic behavior of Trump. But I think they’re significantly perturbed by it, and I think they’re appropriately worried about it. … Who knows who [Trump’s] trying to curry favor with, it could lead to a really terrible result.”
The senior Defense Department official told Military.com[17] that they “have drawn a line” and debated their future within the Defense Department, attributing sticking around to maintaining steady employment and a salary. That, along with a sense of patriotism.
“[I’m] disgusted,” they said. “Where is the outrage on the part of the American people about the way the whole administration is being run? I know that sounds very partisan, but let’s get specific. Do you care at all about how federal workers are being treated? Do you care at all about the talent that’s leaving, in the thousands—people I know and work with that are good, valuable employees.
“I mean, I still care, right?”
The Air Force general shared the sentiment, saying the people in the room at Quantico that fall day “aren’t dumb.” They are well-educated individuals, many with master’s degrees, who understand the challenges ahead.
The general has forged forward with compliments from peers and an understanding that their work and knowledge is meaningful and beneficial to the U.S. military and in turn Americans. It hasn't been easy, however.
“I would guess that a lot of the people in that room are the same as me,” they said. “Every day it’s a moral dilemma, like, how can I keep serving this organization?
“But if I don’t keep serving this organization, then who’s going to replace me? And who’s going to protect my people who are still here? And who’s going to protect my mission? I think so many people are asking themselves that question every day.”
Some notable, recent service member resignations have included Army Gen. Alvin Holsey, Air Force Chief of Staff David Allvin, and Navy Chief of Staff Jon Harrison.
Wilkerson warns that if individuals who disagree with the current trajectory of the U.S. military and government resign or walk away without attempting to right the proverbial ship, it could just allow the administration’s most sycophantic subscribers to ultimately possess even more power[18].
Ultimately, it’s up to the people to ensure their country’s success. That could be in the form of vocal denunciation or physical protests, like a massive one with 2 million people that Wilkerson found himself in 2003 in Iraq.
“People should be basically ashamed of themselves that we’ve let our republic get to this state,” Wilkerson said. “But you can say that all day long. People are worried about their next paycheck, about their job, about their kids.
“But ultimately, we’re all responsible for this republic. And when we neglect our responsibilities, things are going to get bad.”
