US Defense Secretary Hegseth’s unhinged speech to American generals is of a piece with a real military build up against both Iran and Venezuela, explains Chris Bambery

You may have thought President Donald Trump’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly was worse than bad but in that particular race to the bottom he has competition from within his own administration. Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s Defense Secretary, or secretary of state for war as Hegseth styles himself, insisted all US generals, wherever they were in the world, at no little cost, must come to  Quantico, Virginia, to listen to a speech by him.

Before I continue just take a look at Hegseth in action. Does Hegseth remind you of anyone. The bulging eyes, the posturing, the strut, the braggadocio… well watch this clip to see who he reminds me of! Hegseth must be jealous of Benito Mussolini being able to wear a uniform and actually to declare the country at war.

The establishment media concentrated on Hegseth’s attack on ‘fat troops’ and ‘fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon’, his insistence on all having to pass the most stringent fitness tests and his dismissal of women service personnel.

Here’s what he said on that:

‘Today, at my direction, each service will ensure that every requirement for every combat MOS [Military Occupational Specialties], for every designated combat arms position returns to the highest male standard only … I’m also directing that warfighters in combat jobs execute their service fitness test at a gender-neutral age normed male standard scored above 70 percent.’

Regarding female personnel here’s what he said:

‘If women can make it, excellent. If not, it is what it is. If that means no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it. That is not the intent, but it could be the result. So be it. It will also mean that weak men won’t qualify because we’re not playing games. This is combat. This is life or death.’ Hegseth opposes women having any combat role.

If there are any US veterans alive who stormed the Normandy beaches in 1944 or Okinawa in 1945, they must be wondering how Hegseth sees them? They were conscripts who passed minimal standards at a time when Uncle Sam needed every possible serviceman (they were all men then).

The most chilling statements by Hegseth came towards the end:

‘From this moment forward, the only mission of the newly restored Department of War is this: warfighting, preparing for war and preparing to win, unrelenting and uncompromising in that pursuit …

‘Should our enemies choose foolishly to challenge us, they will be crushed by the violence, precision and ferocity of the War Department. In other words, to our enemies, FAFO [Fuck around, Find Out].’

The most dangerous part of his speech came later:

‘We also don’t fight with stupid rules of engagement. We untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement, just common sense, maximum lethality and authority for warfighters …

‘A few months ago, I was at the White House when President Trump announced his liberation day for America’s trade policy. It was a landmark day. Well, today is another liberation day, the liberation of America’s warriors, in name, in deed and in authorities. You kill people and break things for a living. You are not politically correct and don’t necessarily belong always in polite society.’

What are ‘stupid rules of engagement?’ The Geneva Convention, the Genocide Convention? It sounds like Hesgeth’s model for the US armed forces is the Israeli Defence Force, which daily ignores ‘stupid rules of engagement’.

Preparations for war

This is not just empty rhetoric. A month ago, US forces carried out a strike on a boat in the Caribbean Sea, in international waters, literally blowing it out of the water and killing eleven people. The White House said all eleven were Venezuelan drug traffickers, disregarding international human rights and maritime law.

American warships had ample opportunity to stop and search the boat, which would be legal. The video released by the White House, with gory relish, does not show any arms and if the occupants had any, they would have been handguns: not much use against a warship. This was a summary execution cheered on by President Trump, who ordered the strike, though as president, he is not above the law.

Hegseth told Fox News: ‘we’ve got incredible assets and they are gathering in the region … those 11 drug traffickers are no longer with us, sending a very clear signal that this is an activity the United States is not going to tolerate in our hemisphere.’ Note the words ‘gathering in the region’.

In August, the United States began a naval buildup in the southern Caribbean, off the coast of Venezuela, with the stated goal to combat drug trafficking. The Trump administration has accused President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela of trafficking drugs into the US. Earlier in August, the Trump administration offered a  $50 million reward for the arrest of Maduro. Maduro was indicted in the US on drug charges including narcoterrorism in 2020.

By 20 August, Trump had ordered three warships to the coast of Venezuela and a week later another seven US warships, along with one nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, were stationed there, carrying more than 4,500 sailors and marines. The Trump administration wants regime change in Venezuela and a war on drugs acts as perfect cover.

Meanwhile, the US is involved in another naval and air force build up, this time in the Middle East. The Pentagon has deployed two aircraft-carrier strike groups as well as a range of fighter aircraft to the region. Officially they are there to disarm Hezbollah, but few believe that. Read this chilling report: ‘The probability of a U.S. military strike on Iran in support of Israel is now a fait accompli. This is shaped not only by Iran’s nuclear posture but also by the depth of the U.S.-Israel alliance. Should Israel initiate an aggressive campaign against Iranian assets, American support may escalate from logistical assistance to direct involvement.

The buildup of military infrastructure and past patterns of joint operations indicate that such a move is not speculative; it is already accounted for in planning. This potential intervention is also framed by Washington as a defense of shared values, though critics argue it is more about strategic dominance and influence in the region.’

This is not just one such report. There is growing talk in the US that Trump will attack Iran again, side by side with Israel. Meanwhile, Pete Hegseth says the US is done with ‘stupid rules of engagement’. Heaven help us.

Trump was elected on the promise of ending the US’s ‘forever wars’. Yet in office, he is as committed to endless war as his predecessors and seems to have adopted the neo-con agenda of regime change utterly. If his neo-colonial plan for Gaza goes through, that will simply clear the way for further military adventures. Our response must be to continue mobilising against these ‘forever wars’.