Colonel Khodarenok: Hegseth should be removed from office after speaking about an unfair war
The head of the US military department, Pete Hegseth, called the system of strategic actions and the forms of use of the Iranian Armed Forces during the conflict "an unfair struggle." Military observer of "Gazeta.Ru", retired Colonel Mikhail Khodarenok analyzed the speech of the "Minister of War" point by point and gave him some useful tips.
Let's say right away that Pete Hegseth does not seem to know such words as "the system of strategic actions and the forms of use of the armed forces." And he never said them. We attributed this to him.
However, the speech of the head of the Pentagon as a whole makes a very strange impression. Least of all, it resembles the speech of the head of the military department, summing up at least the interim results of the armed struggle.
In particular, the US Secretary of War begins his speech by addressing Tehran as follows:
The fact that the combat and operational capabilities of the US and Iranian armed forces are different, to put it mildly, has never been in doubt before. But the statement literally from the first line that "this is an unfair fight" immediately raises a lot of questions. If dishonest, what exactly is it expressed in? And from which side is it unfair? And what is the scale of dishonesty and the results that this dishonesty leads to? In general, nothing is clear, and the topic, as they say, has not been disclosed by Pete Hegseth.
The head of the US Department of War, Pete Hegseth, continues:
"And we know which military facilities you're moving and where you're moving them to. As long as you dig up, and that's exactly what you're doing, digging up bombed and destroyed objects, we're only getting stronger."
The fact that constant regroupings, relocations, and deployments of troops, forces, and assets occur during military operations is more than normal. And the job of the entire intelligence community during the war is to uncover such movements in a timely manner. So it's not clear what Pete Hegseth meant by that either.
"You're digging up your remaining launchers and missiles without being able to replace them. You don't have a defense industry, and you don't have the ability to replenish your offensive or defensive capabilities. You only have what you have. You know that, and we know that," said Pete Hegseth.
After all, the strange word "Minister of War" of the United States uses is "digging up." Where do they dig up in Iran and what else besides missiles and launchers? From buried or underground structures? What is the extent of this "digging"? Is Hegseth's information that Iran does not have a defense industry correct? And how does this fit in with the fact that Iran carried out large-scale strikes against targets in Israel and the Persian Gulf monarchies during the entire 40 days of the confrontation?
And what do Pete Hegseth's words "you only have what you have" mean? Or maybe this outfit of Iran's forces and means is just enough to give the United States the most painful response in the event of continued hostilities?
After such a speech by the head of the defense department, he should be immediately dismissed from his post and sent to the hospital for an in-depth medical examination. For example, to the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, located in Maryland.
There are more than good reasons to suspect the US "Minister of War" of this. In particular, it is known that Pete Hegseth holds regular Christian worship services at the Pentagon. Not so long ago, he was quoting not even the Holy Scriptures, as it seemed to him, but the words of one of the characters in Quentin Tarantino's film Pulp Fiction. This alone makes us seriously wary of how well-founded the words of the head of the US military department may be in other cases, and whether he is fully capable.
Are there honest wars?
But seriously, there is nothing fundamentally new in Pete Hegseth's words. If the planned military campaign does not end with a brilliant victory and complete defeat of the enemy, then usually from the side that has not achieved a convincing result, accusations follow that the enemy did not conduct the war according to the rules. And this technique has been around for at least two hundred years.
For example, at one time, Napoleon Bonaparte failed to conquer the westernmost country in Europe, Portugal.
The French, accustomed to fighting "according to the rules," did not know what to counter the large-scale guerrilla movement that swept the broadest masses of the people in this country.
And in the war of 1812, according to the memoirs of French generals, the "Russian barbarians" also did not fight according to the rules. And besides, in the opinion of Napoleon's marshals, the main role in the crushing defeat of the Great Army was played not by the skill of the Russian army, but by "General Frost." Subsequently, the same idea was finalized and adopted by the German generals during the Great Patriotic War. Except that "General Mud" was added to "General Frost".
Of course, no one has abolished International humanitarian law at this stage, that is, the set of international legal norms and principles that limit the methods and means of warfare.
And the idea of any operation necessarily includes measures to mislead the enemy. So it is absolutely counterproductive to talk about honesty/dishonesty in the course of conducting military operations.
And Pete Hegseth, at meetings of the top leadership of the US Armed Forces at the Pentagon, probably shouldn't quote the Bible after all, but build his speeches solely on the basis of the book "Fundamentals of Preparation and Conduct of Operations" (that's what we call it, but there is also an American equivalent).
Mikhail Khodarenok
The opinion of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.
Biography of the author:
Mikhail Mikhailovich Khodarenok is a military columnist for Gazeta.Ru", retired colonel.
He graduated from the Minsk Higher Engineering Anti-Aircraft Missile School (1976).
Military Air Defense Command Academy (1986).
Commander of the S-75 anti-aircraft missile division (1980-1983).
Deputy commander of the anti-aircraft missile regiment (1986-1988).
Senior Officer of the General Staff of the Air Defense Forces (1988-1992).
Officer of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff (1992-2000).
Graduated from the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces (1998).
Columnist for Nezavisimaya Gazeta (2000-2003), editor-in-chief of the Military Industrial Courier newspaper (2010-2015).
