User talk:KingEdinburgh

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

John D. Lavelle

@KingEdinburgh, EPMen, Garuda28, and SuperWIKI: just in case you guys don't know, both the House and version of the 2025 NDAA include a stipulation to restore John D. Lavelle's four-star rank, while the Senate's version would advance him to lieutenant general. Neovu79 (talk) 06:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morinao's new article, Legislative history of United States four-star officers from 2017, has already shed some light on this matter. It'll require updating, along with the relevant portions of the 1947–1979 and 1980–2016 companion articles, if Lavelle's posthumous promotion passes both houses of Congress. SuperWIKI (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Lavelle is on both versions of the NDAA stands a good chance that he will at least regain a star. Neovu79 (talk) 04:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible New SG and ASH

@KingEdinburgh, EPMen, Garuda28, and SuperWIKI: any guess on who will take over as Surgeon General of the United States and as Assistant Secretary for Health, now that Trump will be heading back to the White House? I have a feeling that he may bring back Jerome Adams and Brett Giroir to fill those positions. Neovu79 (talk) 01:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neovu79 As much as it pains me to type this, one named I've heard for Surgeon General is Joseph Ladapo. EPMen (talk) 01:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPMen I heard of that name as well, but more for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Neovu79 (talk) 01:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Senior military turnover

@Neovu79: There's been much talk on how the incoming president may be bolder in defying norms in his second term.

Would relieving a select few four-star officers associated (justifiably or otherwise) with divisive policies under the outgoing administration, and promoting those found to be more sound in personal interviews (like CJCS Milley, who was deemed more "macho" than DOD pick Goldfein), be feasible?

Social media, echo chamber that it is, is worrying about the prospect of a military purge, clearly not understanding the nuances of officer appointment procedures under Title 10. That being said, high-ranking officers holding extra-constitutional beliefs are not unheard of, like LTG Flynn, BG Bolduc, and Lt Gen McInerney.

What are the chances of a more mundane version of this, maybe even the intra-term relief of Gen Brown as CJCS?

A heightened, unscheduled pattern of high-level reliefs could disrupt our usual work significantly. SuperWIKI (talk) 02:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that this is the most number of black four-star officers the military has ever had at one time in history, and given Trump's history of extremism and other factors, it would not surprise me if he fires all of them to put a white four-star in their positions to "rectify" that. Neovu79 (talk) 03:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually would be surprised if he removed people just based on race, especially in combatant commands that are in less major theaters. EPMen (talk) 02:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If such a thing were to happen, it will likely not be race-based on the surface. It's more likely that they will fall back to the concept of "the president needs appointees who will work well with him", a key consideration for the JCS chairman in particular, and non-military political appointees. This was never applied forcefully on the apolitical military four-star brass (though it is not unheard of, especially with term-limited service chiefs in the past), but the incoming president has no compunctions about defying established norms. SuperWIKI (talk) 05:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SuperWIKI @Neovu79 @KingEdinburgh I did speak too soon. He's drafting an executive order that would purge officers he deems insufficiently loyal. https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/trump-draft-executive-order-would-create-board-to-purge-generals-7ebaa606

However, I don't think he'd purge much from non-frontline commands. EPMen (talk) 04:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well... Unfortunately U.S. law does say all three and four-stars serve at the pleasure of the president. It is within the president's power to create, said committee, if he so chooses. In reality, he could fire them without cause, and anytime, but that would completely rile up those in uniform, which is why the Executive Order makes sense to have in place. On a side note, you better believe that Trump will fire GEN Charles R. Hamilton as soon as he's in office. Hamilton fits the mold of "woke generals" to a T. Neovu79 (talk) 04:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neovu79 I also highly doubt the next SECDEF would keep Lt. Gen. Short as his Senior Military Assistant considering he has publicly spoken out against women in combat. EPMen (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neovu79I also tend to doubt he'd fire EVERY service chief and vice chief. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/exclusive-trumps-team-drawing-up-list-of-pentagon-officers-to-fire-sources-say/ar-AA1u2kW9 EPMen (talk) 05:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible removals

@Morinao, EPMen, and Neovu79: On the topic of who may be removed. Since this discussion started, Pete Hegseth was nominated to be secretary of defense, and there exists a draft executive order forming a board to remove senior officers deemed insufficiently in step with the incoming administration — especially supporters of using CRT/DEI to determine personnel selections and promotions.

Neovu brought up GEN Hamilton as an example of a "woke general to a T" in relation to meddling with an ex-subordinate's promotion assessment, and I suggested Gen Brown (so have others) and ADM Franchetti as possible undesirables. If Franchetti gets axed, ADM Paparo might get a second shot. Since Paparo was the DOD's pick for CNO before being overruled in favour of Franchetti, his nomination might be good politics — appointing someone seemingly sidelined for the position for "woke" reasons. Paparo will turn 60 by the end of the year, perfect for a four-year term.

For who replaces Brown, Morinao and I agreed that the incoming administration can't fundamentally change the officer corps into MAGA loyalists in four years, even by investing all of its political capital into doing so. However, controversial officers within age limits deemed "completely unpromotable without [the president-elect's] patrimony" could be recalled from retirement to relieve Brown, such as Anthony Tata, Don Bolduc, Steven L. Kwast (see here), and Mike Flynn. They'd make a dent in who is acceptable for promotion to the highest ranks.

I looked through the r/AirForce subreddit a few days ago. The current VCSAF, Gen Slife is incredibly unpopular to Gen McPeak/Foglesong levels. Slife, a special operations officer, would normally not be a top pick for CSAF (only 3 out of the 11 VCSAFs since 2001, and Goldfein was specifically groomed for it). It's not unheard of for senior officers to be moved into traditional positions from more specialised career paths (Miller, Webb). However, Slife seems to have an aggressive, take-charge, budget-cutting attitude that is heavily scorned by airmen but might be excellent for a CSAF under the president-elect. Uncertain of what the Biden-era CSAF's office saw in Slife that justified his four-star promotion, or what a Harris/Walz administration would have done with him.

More on Reddit, r/moderatepolitics has an excellent discussion on the subject.

Who else, from the four-star list, is ripe for elimination? Morinao, do you think racial factors (as discussed above) will play a significant role in who the president-elect removes and who he promotes? SuperWIKI (talk) 09:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the biggest risk factors for who gets fired are perceived ties to bugaboos like Milley (JS: Poppas, Mingus, Koehler, Franchetti, Allvin, Munsch; Army: potentially anyone), the Afghanistan withdrawal (Donahue, Buzzard, perhaps CENTCOM component commanders and staff like Guillot, Cooper, Bradley, Grynkewich, Henry, or even Paparo, depending on how they view McKenzie), the previous administration generally (entire JCS but especially Brown), and previous SecDefs specifically (SMA: Clark, George, Smith). I think racial or gender factors will play a lesser role in firings, except for individuals who already have a narrative associated with them (Brown, Franchetti, Hamilton). However, four-star demographics will trend white and male anyway if candidates like Short, Lenderman, and Joyner are systematically passed over for the same reason Esper left Van Ovost and Richardson to be nominated by the next administration.

- Morinao (talk) 01:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CENTCOM speculation

Now that General Kurilla is under investigation (https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/2024-11-01/kurilla-centcom-general-investigation-15700358.html), it might cause him to stay in his term longer than expected depending on how the long the investigation takes. He assumed command in April 2022. I will still speculate about who might succeed him.

-VADM Cooper would be only the second Navy admiral to command CENTCOM but during his time commanding Fifth Fleet, he spearheaded new unmanned innovations and the Navy had a major role in countering Houthi missile attacks.

-Lt. Gen. Grynkewich. There has never been an Air Force officer that commanded CENTCOM but given how much drone warfare occurs in the theater, I think we're overdue. I think Grynkewich is by far the most qualified in terms of the amount of experience he's had in the CENTCOM theater. However, Grynkewich is young enough (commissioned 1993) that he could conceivably hold a different 4-star role first (US Air Forces in Europe and Africa is a strong possibility) and still have another 4-star tour.

-GEN Poppas. If it were to go to another Army officer, I think Poppas is the most likely. I'd say Lt. Gen. Donahue is more likely for USSOCOM.

-I don't see any Marine Corps officers as obvious possibilities given that MARCENT has been downgraded from a three-star to a two-star command. The most likely would be LtGen Roger Turner since he seems straight of central casting for the incoming POTUS's liking. @KingEdinburgh@SuperWIKI @Neovu79 EPMen (talk) 02:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CENCOM is not likely to go to the Navy or Air Force. Ground forces still make up much of the command. GEN Darryl A. Williams and LTG Patrick Frank would be top candidates. Rumor has it that VADM Frank M. Bradley is is being floated around for SOCOM. Neovu79 (talk) 02:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Williams is 63. Unless the new SecDef (maybe Mike Waltz) decides to extend him to 66, it's unlikely. Williams is also from central casting though – big frame, booming voice. SuperWIKI (talk) 03:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You never know. I definitely think it could happen. And as for SOCOM, I'm 99.9% sure that it will be either LTG Donahue or VADM Bradley. Donahue was the last US soldier to leave Afghanistan while Bradley was one of the first to deploy after 9/11. I'll be making my full predictions for 2025 once the next (presumably final) batch of 3/4 star nominees for 2024 comes out.

In said batch, I wouldn't be surprised to see nominees for Deputy Commander, US European Command, Commanding General, US Army Special Operations Command and Commander, US Fleet Forces Command.

I honestly have no idea who to expect for EUCOM Deputy but given the lack of Navy representation at EUCOM HQ, I'd throw in RADM Spedero. For the other two, I think we won't get nominees till 2025. EPMen (talk) 05:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LTG Donahue is getting his four-star nomination, and LtGen Fulford his three-star nomination. SuperWIKI (talk) 14:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SuperWIKI Fulford almost certainly will be EUCOM Deputy. A little uncertain on Donahue. EPMen (talk) 17:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPMen yes Donahue is an unknown to me. He has backgrounds in special ops, as well as traditional infantry pipeline. He could fill: SOCOM, CENTCOM, FORSCOM, or AFC. I think we can rule out AMC. Neovu79 (talk) 06:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is of any indication, GEN Kurilla seems to be sort of liked by the enlisted folks. However, he seems to have a history of being boorish and clumsy when under stress. Nothing to the level of beating people up or berating them mercilessly. I think he'll slip through just fine. In any case, his term is scheduled to end by next year, so it makes less of a difference if he's relieved. SuperWIKI (talk) 03:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Space Sensing Directorate

Hello, KingEdinburgh. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Space Sensing Directorate, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vice Admiral Laura Lee

@KingEdinburgh, EPMen, Garuda28, and SuperWIKI: I'm hesitant to add a dog to the List of United States Navy vice admirals from 2010 to 2019, given that the appointment was not made by the president, nor can I find any record that the Senate voted on the appointment, as required by U.S. law. I'm leaning towards that rank being honorary since the promotion/appointment document was issues and signed by the Surgeon General of the Navy. However, Laura Lee was a two-star in 2011 prior to her promotion to three-star in 2015. Any thoughts?

Neovu79 (talk) 19:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's necessary. Perhaps a small mention in the three-star officers list. SuperWIKI (talk) 01:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]