Almost every country desires a strong military, and that’s especially the case for the United States. If the U.S. wants to preserve it’s freedoms, it needs to have a powerful enough military to protect them and it’s citizens. That should be a basic principle, but unfortunately, the U.S. military has recently lost that sense of power and fight that’s desperately needed.

Under the Biden administration, the United States military seemed more focused on progressive causes like LGBT issues and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). That in turn has weakened America’s armed forces because they’ve been focused on these issues instead of having a warrior mentality. But since his reelection in November, President Donald Trump has made it a goal to bring the U.S. military back to its glory days.

He’s doing this by replacing various military leaders with more qualified candidates who will bring back a “warrior ethos” to the Pentagon. Trump’s Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, has also been heavily onboard with this approach by the president. Their goal of transforming the military has been off to a quick start. Not only that, but these moves by Trump and Hegseth are likely causing the American people to feel more secure again after having a military that seemed to be too distracted with DEI initiatives instead of actual war-fighting to protect this nation.

Changing Of The Guard In The Pentagon: A Closer Look

President Donald Trump’s recent decision to dismiss several high-ranking military leaders marks a significant move aimed at steering the U.S. military toward a sharper focus on combat effectiveness. “It’s a bold move… you could even say it’s fairly aggressive,” said William Ruger, President of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) and a former Trump nominee for ambassador to Afghanistan, in an interview with Fox News Digital.

“There’s a sense that I get that this isn’t merely a challenge to one or two individuals, but that there needed to be a greater push to change the direction the Pentagon has been going… in terms of lethality, warrior ethos.” Ruger, who also serves as an officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve, is described on his AIER profile as “a prominent advocate for ending America’s participation in the Afghanistan War.”

The shake-up follows Trump’s removal of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. C.Q. Brown, along with several other top military officials this past weekend. Among those dismissed was Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the U.S. Navy’s top officer and the first woman to lead one of the military branches. The abrupt firings reportedly sent shockwaves through the Pentagon. According to Reuters, the move created “upheaval,” prompting swift backlash from critics.

“Firing uniformed leaders as a type of political loyalty test, or for reasons relating to diversity and gender that have nothing to do with performance, erodes the trust and professionalism that our service members require to achieve their missions,” said Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, in a statement to Reuters. The report labeled the firings as “unprecedented.”

However, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rejected that characterization, asserting on Fox News Sunday that Trump is fully within his rights to select his national security team. “Nothing about this is unprecedented,” Hegseth said, pointing to historical examples of other presidents making similar moves. He highlighted Franklin D. Roosevelt, George H.W. Bush, and Barack Obama, noting that Obama “fired or dismissed hundreds” of military officials during his tenure.

One notable example came in 2009, when Obama removed Army Gen. David McKiernan from his position as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan just five months into his presidency. It was the first time a wartime commander had been fired since 1951. For Ruger, the firings reflect Trump’s intent to build a military leadership team aligned with his strategic vision.

“The president had good reason for trying to do this, believing that the military was not led by the admirals and generals that were necessary to implement his vision of our defense structure,” Ruger explained. “We should have some caution here in thinking that there’s anything amiss.” Ruger added that the changes are consistent with Hegseth’s approach to the military — one focused on combat readiness and fostering a warrior ethos, rather than what he described as “some of the more… identitarianism that we had seen creeping into the military.”

Beyond the personnel changes, Ruger emphasized an important principle at play: the importance of civilian oversight of the military. “It’s important that for good civil military relations purposes, that it’s clear who is the decision maker, and that should be the civilians, and that what they say will be faithfully implemented,” he stated. “That’s the hallmark of good civil military relations.”

President Donald Trump’s bold reshaping of military leadership points to his push for a fighting force laser-focused on strength, discipline, and combat effectiveness — a vision he intends to see through with a team he trusts. This is the type of military every U.S. citizen should want, as it’s the type to keep them the most safe and preserve their freedoms.

Do you agree with the leadership changes in the Pentagon by President Trump? Let us know in the comments!