What do you think?
Rate this book
The War on Warriors
Real men fought for our freedoms. It’s time we fought for theirs.
Pete Hegseth joined the Army to fight extremists. Then that same Army called him one. The military Pete joined twenty years ago was fiercely focused on lethality, competency, and color blindness. Today our brass are following the rest of our country off the cliff of cultural chaos and weakness.
Americans with common sense are fighting this on many fronts, but if we can’t save the meritocracy of our military, we’re definitely going to lose everywhere else.
The War on Warriors uncovers the deep roots of our dysfunction—a society that has forgotten the men who take risks, cut through red tape, and get their hands dirty. The only kind of men prepared to face the dangers that the Left pretends don’t exist. Unlike issues of education or taxes or crime, this problem doesn’t have a zip code solution. We can’t move away from it. We can’t avoid it. We have only one Pentagon. Either we take it back or surrender it altogether.
Combining his own war experiences, tales of outrage, and an incisive look at how the chain of command got so kinked, this book is the key to saving our warriors—and winning future wars. The War on Warriors must be won by the good guys, because when the shooting really starts, they’re the only ones who can save us.
Pete Hegseth joined the Army to fight extremists. Then that same Army called him one. The military Pete joined twenty years ago was fiercely focused on lethality, competency, and color blindness. Today our brass are following the rest of our country off the cliff of cultural chaos and weakness.
Americans with common sense are fighting this on many fronts, but if we can’t save the meritocracy of our military, we’re definitely going to lose everywhere else.
The War on Warriors uncovers the deep roots of our dysfunction—a society that has forgotten the men who take risks, cut through red tape, and get their hands dirty. The only kind of men prepared to face the dangers that the Left pretends don’t exist. Unlike issues of education or taxes or crime, this problem doesn’t have a zip code solution. We can’t move away from it. We can’t avoid it. We have only one Pentagon. Either we take it back or surrender it altogether.
Combining his own war experiences, tales of outrage, and an incisive look at how the chain of command got so kinked, this book is the key to saving our warriors—and winning future wars. The War on Warriors must be won by the good guys, because when the shooting really starts, they’re the only ones who can save us.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published June 4, 2024
1418 people are currently reading
2642 people want to read
About the author
Pete Hegseth
6 books216 followersU.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is the former co-host of Fox & Friends Weekend and a frequent guest co-host for the weekday edition of Fox & Friends. He is also a former Fox News Senior Political Analyst. Pete is an Army veteran of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and was also a guard at Guantanamo Bay. He holds two Bronze Stars and a Combat Infantryman’s Badge for his time in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pete graduated from Princeton University in 2003.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 441 reviews
October 17, 2024
I don’t even need to review and point out all the stupidity in this book. Much easier just to say that the author is an absolute moron.
June 10, 2024
As a Vietnam combat veteran I was greatly disturbed by the candidness of Pete's experience and observations. I love my wife and daughters, and I can unequivocally say I do not want them in combat roles defending our country. Neither do I want someone who thinks they are a girl or woman there either. It is a distraction from combat readiness.
The failures of Vietnam are directly attributable to the leadership. They sent us trained warriors on a social work mission to win the hearts and minds of the people. How foolish then, and how foolish now.
This book should be a wake-up call to any American who has not had the first-hand taste of war! It is real, not reality TV.
The failures of Vietnam are directly attributable to the leadership. They sent us trained warriors on a social work mission to win the hearts and minds of the people. How foolish then, and how foolish now.
This book should be a wake-up call to any American who has not had the first-hand taste of war! It is real, not reality TV.
August 20, 2024
This book had very few references throughout and was mostly opinion-based or based on mainstream media. I’m not saying ALL of it was misinformation, but there were definitely parts missing context, especially in the chapter about women in combat jobs.
As a woman in a combat job, I have had the pleasure of working with many women who have been in combat and are fantastic at what they do, as well as people who excel in their job even though they have not yet been to combat. The lowering of physical fitness standards was the big one for me that was missing context. The author claims the standards are low for women (which they are) but the Army Combat Fitness Test has the same minimum standards for men and women. As a noncommissioned officer, I’ve had to grade these PT tests and have women that outperform men on the test (not every woman, of course, but it happens frequently).
There were plenty of things in this book I agreed with, so I’m not saying it was a bad book overall, I’d just urge people to take things with a grain of salt, do your own research, and don’t believe everything you read. This is a Fox News publication, and we all know mass media on both sides plays to their particular base and doesn’t always tell the whole story.
The lower rating I gave for this book was based on the author’s lack of using references, repetitive content (this book could’ve been about 50-75 pages shorter than it was), and the clear distaste for women in combat jobs. Yes, that part is probably petty, but as a service member myself and the girlfriend of a combat veteran who worked with women in combat and had nothing but respect for them, I find the author’s opinion to be a bit sexist.
For reference (although it shouldn’t matter), I’m a more conservative leaning independent. I do not align with the Republicans or the Democrats. This review is my personal opinion, and this book was clearly Pete Hegseth’s. I am thankful for his service to this country, but I’m allowed to disagree with some of his statements in his book.
As a woman in a combat job, I have had the pleasure of working with many women who have been in combat and are fantastic at what they do, as well as people who excel in their job even though they have not yet been to combat. The lowering of physical fitness standards was the big one for me that was missing context. The author claims the standards are low for women (which they are) but the Army Combat Fitness Test has the same minimum standards for men and women. As a noncommissioned officer, I’ve had to grade these PT tests and have women that outperform men on the test (not every woman, of course, but it happens frequently).
There were plenty of things in this book I agreed with, so I’m not saying it was a bad book overall, I’d just urge people to take things with a grain of salt, do your own research, and don’t believe everything you read. This is a Fox News publication, and we all know mass media on both sides plays to their particular base and doesn’t always tell the whole story.
The lower rating I gave for this book was based on the author’s lack of using references, repetitive content (this book could’ve been about 50-75 pages shorter than it was), and the clear distaste for women in combat jobs. Yes, that part is probably petty, but as a service member myself and the girlfriend of a combat veteran who worked with women in combat and had nothing but respect for them, I find the author’s opinion to be a bit sexist.
For reference (although it shouldn’t matter), I’m a more conservative leaning independent. I do not align with the Republicans or the Democrats. This review is my personal opinion, and this book was clearly Pete Hegseth’s. I am thankful for his service to this country, but I’m allowed to disagree with some of his statements in his book.
June 9, 2024
Pete tells the story as I would if able
As a 28 year veteran of Navy Aviation I was concerned for my Navy when I retired in 79. Since then I’ve watched as my brother, two sons, two grandsons (one of whom is currently a senior CPO) and and on his last tour and will retire early because of the wokeiny of the military. He and I feel that the military is now an empty vessel
As a 28 year veteran of Navy Aviation I was concerned for my Navy when I retired in 79. Since then I’ve watched as my brother, two sons, two grandsons (one of whom is currently a senior CPO) and and on his last tour and will retire early because of the wokeiny of the military. He and I feel that the military is now an empty vessel
November 20, 2024
I found myself agreeing with some points Hegseth made, but disagreeing with others. My low rating—usually reserved for books I don't finish—mainly stems from his writing style and argumentative skills. He relied on very few references and often failed to substantiate his claims. Many of his arguments were based on vague statements like, "one person said this," and then concluded that this was the reason the entire military institution was flawed.
Additionally, it was difficult to get through the constant tone of ranting and resentment throughout the book.
Minus one star: While he primarily argues against women in combat roles, he also insists that he doesn't care about someone's sex as long as they can do the job. However, he repeatedly brings up—in nearly every chapter—that women just don't really belong in the armed forces.
Additionally, it was difficult to get through the constant tone of ranting and resentment throughout the book.
Minus one star: While he primarily argues against women in combat roles, he also insists that he doesn't care about someone's sex as long as they can do the job. However, he repeatedly brings up—in nearly every chapter—that women just don't really belong in the armed forces.
December 13, 2025
(1.5 stars) (Audiobook) That this author is regular contributor to Fox News and has written several other books decrying the ills of the leftist woke mob should tell you exactly how this one is going to go. Saw where some very conservative social media contacts lauded this one. So, for diversification of viewpoints and being prior military, I decided to give this one a chance. Within the first chapter, Hegseth hits all of the key conservative/right wing buzzwords…you would claim instant buzzword bingo. From there, it goes about as much as you would expect, noting how the leftist, Marxist, woke enemies of the Republic, in particular Barack Obama and Joe Biden, are weakening the military from within and that the evil, vile threat of Wokeness is the real enemy of America. He basically can’t go a few paragraphs without leveraging those buzzwords. Thus, this work will not do much more than reaffirm world views (either that Hegseth is “right” on target, or that he is yet another MAGA-ite using yet another book to preach to the right wing mobs that decry the left).
Unfortunately, his distracting language submarines any potential reason or logic for his arguments. The testimonials from other soldiers and some of the key stats are glossed over so he can go again on the attack of the woke mob (never mind that he doesn’t define “woke” or any of those other terms). There could be some potential persuasion with transgender and women in combat, but even then, he kills any chance for reason as if he is trying to compete with a Newmax program. Interesting how he notes that Israel is the exception for using women in combat roles, but as he is excoriating how the “left” is shoving women in combat down our throats, he doesn’t go back to Israel and their use of women in front line combat. Seems to work out well for them. Ah well, not enough room to blast the left woke mob (also, I don’t think anyone use woke more than the Right, but aside over).
I won’t disagree that we do have an issue with generals/admirals not being held accountable, as seen with Afghanistan. So, I can’t complete trash the work, but I can only take so much of the Fox News preaching and had to stop. If I wanted that, I’ll just watch the news program. Clearly this work will not change any minds and will only reinforce certain world views. Also, based on the author’s personal history, some of his calls to morality and higher virtue ring incredibly hollow. He does have some personal axes to grind, which also takes away from any potential acceptance of his arguments outside of the target, right-wing audience. I suspect there are better, less Fox News/buzzwordy/dog-whistle type works that cover these issues. Stick to those.
Unfortunately, his distracting language submarines any potential reason or logic for his arguments. The testimonials from other soldiers and some of the key stats are glossed over so he can go again on the attack of the woke mob (never mind that he doesn’t define “woke” or any of those other terms). There could be some potential persuasion with transgender and women in combat, but even then, he kills any chance for reason as if he is trying to compete with a Newmax program. Interesting how he notes that Israel is the exception for using women in combat roles, but as he is excoriating how the “left” is shoving women in combat down our throats, he doesn’t go back to Israel and their use of women in front line combat. Seems to work out well for them. Ah well, not enough room to blast the left woke mob (also, I don’t think anyone use woke more than the Right, but aside over).
I won’t disagree that we do have an issue with generals/admirals not being held accountable, as seen with Afghanistan. So, I can’t complete trash the work, but I can only take so much of the Fox News preaching and had to stop. If I wanted that, I’ll just watch the news program. Clearly this work will not change any minds and will only reinforce certain world views. Also, based on the author’s personal history, some of his calls to morality and higher virtue ring incredibly hollow. He does have some personal axes to grind, which also takes away from any potential acceptance of his arguments outside of the target, right-wing audience. I suspect there are better, less Fox News/buzzwordy/dog-whistle type works that cover these issues. Stick to those.
August 28, 2024
a difficult book to slog through if you're anything but a staunchly fox-news-level right-wing. i'm interested in the treatment of veterans/military personnel as a left-leaning non-American, but the author oversimplifies and polarizes this issue.
~oversimplification~
he claims that "wokeness" is the #1 factor significantly declining military enrollment. really? i would think that the US govt., who this directly impacts and who's job is to research this exact issue, would acknowledge that. except, they include other factors alongside the /perception/ of "wokeness" like increasing obesity, medical record processing/documentation slow downs, low unemployment rate, COVID-19, withdrawal from Afghanistan, limited geographic draw, accusations of "right-wing extremism," failure to digitally reach gen-Z, the "broken veteran" narrative, and overreliance on the military family pipeline. if you're going to claim that the main factor is "wokeness" here, readers who are not already convinced of your claim are going to need /concrete/ proof and evidence against the other factors.
hegseth has some valid points in this book, but this is mostly an opinion piece with limited citations to back up his claims. (i will acknowledge there are some studies included, and those are appreciated but not enough for the amount of claims he makes). a good chunk of the book isn't even arguments, it's stories from hegseth's past (his high school and varsity basketball career, his ivy league education, how he came to enroll in the army, how he came to quit the army, his deployment in iraq).
~polarization~
furthermore, all of his ideas are buried in inflammatory language rather than matter-of-fact explanations; the emotional (and moral) fervor in his narrative aren't conducive to invoking logic and reason in readers. i didn't get a clear sense of a call to action for civilians either. isn't hegseth, with his connections and fame, in a better position to try to enact change within the military/govt. than the average civilian? if i give him the benefit of the doubt, this book is meant to educate the public, but if i don't, i would accuse him of undermining the military he claims to love by eroding public trust in national institutions and polarizing right-wing readers specifically -- all without the proper facts to back up his argument or the respectful and level-headed tone needed to reach the widest audience.
throughout the book, he injects his own views on BLM protests, climate change, abortion, international peace law, women in the army, and more. this book isn't an example of a civil discussion about the issue. i would have really liked to see a piece on this subject rooted in research rather than anecdotes. much of his evidence is "some guy i interviewed from the army said it" which isn't all that convincing.
lastly, an aside on his views of women in the army -- he's all over the place, and it's frustrating as a reader. i feel like he can't make up his mind. does he support them in the military or not?
in his chapter dedicated to the topic, he makes it obvious that he thinks the army shouldn't lower physical requirements for female applicants. okay. but then he goes on with his narrative, at one point saying "boys [in the military] (and it should be boys)," as if maintaining physical requirements will exclude all female applicants -- there will definitely still be /some/ female military personnel who show they're qualified to fight on the front-lines. the only other evidence he gives against women in fighting divisions of the military are moral-based (ex: women should be nurturers, not killers. it goes against their nature).
~oversimplification~
he claims that "wokeness" is the #1 factor significantly declining military enrollment. really? i would think that the US govt., who this directly impacts and who's job is to research this exact issue, would acknowledge that. except, they include other factors alongside the /perception/ of "wokeness" like increasing obesity, medical record processing/documentation slow downs, low unemployment rate, COVID-19, withdrawal from Afghanistan, limited geographic draw, accusations of "right-wing extremism," failure to digitally reach gen-Z, the "broken veteran" narrative, and overreliance on the military family pipeline. if you're going to claim that the main factor is "wokeness" here, readers who are not already convinced of your claim are going to need /concrete/ proof and evidence against the other factors.
hegseth has some valid points in this book, but this is mostly an opinion piece with limited citations to back up his claims. (i will acknowledge there are some studies included, and those are appreciated but not enough for the amount of claims he makes). a good chunk of the book isn't even arguments, it's stories from hegseth's past (his high school and varsity basketball career, his ivy league education, how he came to enroll in the army, how he came to quit the army, his deployment in iraq).
~polarization~
furthermore, all of his ideas are buried in inflammatory language rather than matter-of-fact explanations; the emotional (and moral) fervor in his narrative aren't conducive to invoking logic and reason in readers. i didn't get a clear sense of a call to action for civilians either. isn't hegseth, with his connections and fame, in a better position to try to enact change within the military/govt. than the average civilian? if i give him the benefit of the doubt, this book is meant to educate the public, but if i don't, i would accuse him of undermining the military he claims to love by eroding public trust in national institutions and polarizing right-wing readers specifically -- all without the proper facts to back up his argument or the respectful and level-headed tone needed to reach the widest audience.
throughout the book, he injects his own views on BLM protests, climate change, abortion, international peace law, women in the army, and more. this book isn't an example of a civil discussion about the issue. i would have really liked to see a piece on this subject rooted in research rather than anecdotes. much of his evidence is "some guy i interviewed from the army said it" which isn't all that convincing.
lastly, an aside on his views of women in the army -- he's all over the place, and it's frustrating as a reader. i feel like he can't make up his mind. does he support them in the military or not?
in his chapter dedicated to the topic, he makes it obvious that he thinks the army shouldn't lower physical requirements for female applicants. okay. but then he goes on with his narrative, at one point saying "boys [in the military] (and it should be boys)," as if maintaining physical requirements will exclude all female applicants -- there will definitely still be /some/ female military personnel who show they're qualified to fight on the front-lines. the only other evidence he gives against women in fighting divisions of the military are moral-based (ex: women should be nurturers, not killers. it goes against their nature).
June 10, 2024
A real eye opener… spared no words or blame !
It’s disheartening hearing what goes on behind the scenes…
It’s disheartening hearing what goes on behind the scenes…
Read
October 29, 2024Having served in the Navy under the Obama administration, the Trump administration, and the Biden administration, I found this book very cathartic.
I don't align with the author on everything (e.g., I'm more opposed to war in general), but this is an important book. Pete Hegseth really gives voice to what I and so many others experienced, especially from 2020 onward.
I once planned for a full 20-year career in the military, but the experimental vaccine, the fatal feminization of our fighting force, the plague of wokeness, and the internal war against conservative patriots and Christians made it impossible for me to stay in. The Navy wouldn't let me reenlist without my capitulation, denying my religious convictions. Now, since truths about the vaccine have been revealed and the recruiting crisis is dire, they've repeatedly tried to get me to rejoin, saying they'll waive things and offering a $20,000 bonus. But the present state of our military does not allow for Christians of certain values to serve with a clear conscience. I hope that changes, but things are not looking good right now.
This book, though, is quite good--especially the first half. Hegseth killed it when discussing females and transvestites and obese people in the military, the double-standards, the softening of our forces, the suicidal virtue-signaling by pusillanimous pencil pushers in positions of power. People need to hear this.
I don't align with the author on everything (e.g., I'm more opposed to war in general), but this is an important book. Pete Hegseth really gives voice to what I and so many others experienced, especially from 2020 onward.
I once planned for a full 20-year career in the military, but the experimental vaccine, the fatal feminization of our fighting force, the plague of wokeness, and the internal war against conservative patriots and Christians made it impossible for me to stay in. The Navy wouldn't let me reenlist without my capitulation, denying my religious convictions. Now, since truths about the vaccine have been revealed and the recruiting crisis is dire, they've repeatedly tried to get me to rejoin, saying they'll waive things and offering a $20,000 bonus. But the present state of our military does not allow for Christians of certain values to serve with a clear conscience. I hope that changes, but things are not looking good right now.
This book, though, is quite good--especially the first half. Hegseth killed it when discussing females and transvestites and obese people in the military, the double-standards, the softening of our forces, the suicidal virtue-signaling by pusillanimous pencil pushers in positions of power. People need to hear this.
January 5, 2025
Had to stop half way through and have no interest in finishing. Was hoping to read something insightful or revealing of recent policies to educate myself. Just a long diatribe of repeating the same narrative and complaining over and over, adding nothing really that isn’t obvious. If you want to read a repetitive Fox News editorial sound bite for hours, more power to you (and I watch Fox News regularly). But you can probably get the summary by just watching 15 minutes of any of the Fox News prime time shows.
December 10, 2024
I had hoped that by reading this book I would understand why he could be our secretary of defense. These were his words that he had time to curate and were not taken out of context. It increased my conviction that he does not possess the qualifications to be the secretary of defense
March 13, 2025
It’s bad.
Before you chalk this up to me not liking the politics, note that I gave the Elon Musk book three stars and the J.D. Vance book two. Hegseth’s book really is poorly written, half-baked, and mostly nonsensical. There were moments where I thought I wouldn’t be able to finish it because it was just that jumbled, repetitive, disorganized, and littered with cliches and stereotypes. It’s even somehow boring. How do you make a right wing screed, one of the most inherently entertaining forms of writing (just ask Rorschach! Or the hundreds of thousands of Tucker Carlson viewers) so fucking dry?
Rather than going over everything that’s dumb, it would be faster to catalog the bits that were almost interesting. (These were the moments where I considered bumping him up to two stars!) Hegseth thinks that we should give Congress more of a say in when we go to war. O.K.! That is a legitimate position. He also quotes the Quincy Institute while making a point about how damaging revolving door politics can be to the DoD. Sure! He is also mad about all that equipment getting left behind in the Afghanistan pullout which is fair enough.
This part was also almost interesting:
“The Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters were not any different than our soldiers. In fact, we were quite similar. We were passionate. We were brave. We did not fear pain or what the other side could do to us. We believe in the riteousness of our cause. At any other time in American history these protestors would have fought injustice by… Joining the military. Today, we are in separate sides.”
All of these points make up about 7 or 8 paragraphs in a book that is mostly a guy seething about trans people in the military and rambling about how there should only be “normal” and “masculine” people in the army. I can’t stress enough how repetitive it is. I kept thinking I had dog eared the wrong page and was accidentally re-reading a chapter.
You get to know what his favorite lines are. Like, for instance, I think there are four or five times when he drops “I don’t recognize black or white… all I see is army green” and every time you can tell he expects it to land like a Superman punch. A line like that works once if if works at all. A competent editor would tell you this! There’s also “‘DEI” makes you ‘DIE’” which I think he tags three times.
More interesting than what is in the book is what isn’t: any substantive talk about geopolitics, security, military policy, or the moral/philosophical reasons behind why we go to war. It’s just taken for granted from go that war is a cool experience that makes boys into men so you should probably join the military. The book actually ends with a letter to his sons that pretty much says he expects them to join the special forces.
I need to wrap this up because I could write for days about how bad this book sucks. You kind of have to hunt through the muck to find the bits that are actually funny (I’ll list some below) but probably the closest thing to a laugh-out-loud passage is on the jacket. In Hegseth’s bio, he claims he “used to have” a Harvard degree before “he mailed it back, because Harvard is a leftist indoctrination camp.” This is hilarious because
A) it implies that Pete thinks you can void a college degree by destroying a physical copy of the diploma, and
B) it’s obviously just another way of saying you went to Harvard, which is what a diploma does anyway
OK, thanks for bearing with me through that. As a reward, here are my other picks for the most unintentionally hilarious parts of The War on Warriors, many of which sound like discarded lines written for Tobias Funke/Mac McDonald:
“Their ideology is based on marginalizing whatever’s normal, because they think ‘normal’ is always oppressive. By their logic, the military runs on the most normal thing of all: strong men.” Mac vibes
“Riot shields surrounded me. Most were smeared with the filth of the streets and covered in the greasy handprints of America’s youth.” Lesser Rorschach vibes
“In a world of ‘equity’-a communist word-meritocracy is evil, unfair, and always racist.”
“They were doing to soldiers all over this military what Arthur Miller wrote about in the classic play The Crucible.” Bro mind-wiped his experience at Harvard but he wants to make sure you know he finished eighth grade drama
“Whores to the wokesters.” Almost no context! Weird italics!
“While America may run on Dunkin’, our military runs on masculinity.” Mac again
“My high school, in mostly rural Minnesota, produces some great warriors-tough as nails, masculine, football playing studs who were looking for their next masculine pursuit.” Could be Mac or Tobias, your call
“No excuses, no medications, no women-just men.” Tobias
“Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.” There’s a whole subcategory of these I’m leaving out that read like the drunkest Facebook posts from your uncle who got kicked out of the National Guard
“Karl Marx would be proud (Dwight Eisenhower, not so much). They say that red goes with everything, including digital camouflage. Our military officers are now on the same ideological path as Che Guevara.” I had a stroke reading this
OK, that’s all! I probably wasted 6 hours reading this and writing a review. Don’t make the same mistake as me! Read a local news paper or go see live music instead!
Before you chalk this up to me not liking the politics, note that I gave the Elon Musk book three stars and the J.D. Vance book two. Hegseth’s book really is poorly written, half-baked, and mostly nonsensical. There were moments where I thought I wouldn’t be able to finish it because it was just that jumbled, repetitive, disorganized, and littered with cliches and stereotypes. It’s even somehow boring. How do you make a right wing screed, one of the most inherently entertaining forms of writing (just ask Rorschach! Or the hundreds of thousands of Tucker Carlson viewers) so fucking dry?
Rather than going over everything that’s dumb, it would be faster to catalog the bits that were almost interesting. (These were the moments where I considered bumping him up to two stars!) Hegseth thinks that we should give Congress more of a say in when we go to war. O.K.! That is a legitimate position. He also quotes the Quincy Institute while making a point about how damaging revolving door politics can be to the DoD. Sure! He is also mad about all that equipment getting left behind in the Afghanistan pullout which is fair enough.
This part was also almost interesting:
“The Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters were not any different than our soldiers. In fact, we were quite similar. We were passionate. We were brave. We did not fear pain or what the other side could do to us. We believe in the riteousness of our cause. At any other time in American history these protestors would have fought injustice by… Joining the military. Today, we are in separate sides.”
All of these points make up about 7 or 8 paragraphs in a book that is mostly a guy seething about trans people in the military and rambling about how there should only be “normal” and “masculine” people in the army. I can’t stress enough how repetitive it is. I kept thinking I had dog eared the wrong page and was accidentally re-reading a chapter.
You get to know what his favorite lines are. Like, for instance, I think there are four or five times when he drops “I don’t recognize black or white… all I see is army green” and every time you can tell he expects it to land like a Superman punch. A line like that works once if if works at all. A competent editor would tell you this! There’s also “‘DEI” makes you ‘DIE’” which I think he tags three times.
More interesting than what is in the book is what isn’t: any substantive talk about geopolitics, security, military policy, or the moral/philosophical reasons behind why we go to war. It’s just taken for granted from go that war is a cool experience that makes boys into men so you should probably join the military. The book actually ends with a letter to his sons that pretty much says he expects them to join the special forces.
I need to wrap this up because I could write for days about how bad this book sucks. You kind of have to hunt through the muck to find the bits that are actually funny (I’ll list some below) but probably the closest thing to a laugh-out-loud passage is on the jacket. In Hegseth’s bio, he claims he “used to have” a Harvard degree before “he mailed it back, because Harvard is a leftist indoctrination camp.” This is hilarious because
A) it implies that Pete thinks you can void a college degree by destroying a physical copy of the diploma, and
B) it’s obviously just another way of saying you went to Harvard, which is what a diploma does anyway
OK, thanks for bearing with me through that. As a reward, here are my other picks for the most unintentionally hilarious parts of The War on Warriors, many of which sound like discarded lines written for Tobias Funke/Mac McDonald:
“Their ideology is based on marginalizing whatever’s normal, because they think ‘normal’ is always oppressive. By their logic, the military runs on the most normal thing of all: strong men.” Mac vibes
“Riot shields surrounded me. Most were smeared with the filth of the streets and covered in the greasy handprints of America’s youth.” Lesser Rorschach vibes
“In a world of ‘equity’-a communist word-meritocracy is evil, unfair, and always racist.”
“They were doing to soldiers all over this military what Arthur Miller wrote about in the classic play The Crucible.” Bro mind-wiped his experience at Harvard but he wants to make sure you know he finished eighth grade drama
“Whores to the wokesters.” Almost no context! Weird italics!
“While America may run on Dunkin’, our military runs on masculinity.” Mac again
“My high school, in mostly rural Minnesota, produces some great warriors-tough as nails, masculine, football playing studs who were looking for their next masculine pursuit.” Could be Mac or Tobias, your call
“No excuses, no medications, no women-just men.” Tobias
“Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.” There’s a whole subcategory of these I’m leaving out that read like the drunkest Facebook posts from your uncle who got kicked out of the National Guard
“Karl Marx would be proud (Dwight Eisenhower, not so much). They say that red goes with everything, including digital camouflage. Our military officers are now on the same ideological path as Che Guevara.” I had a stroke reading this
OK, that’s all! I probably wasted 6 hours reading this and writing a review. Don’t make the same mistake as me! Read a local news paper or go see live music instead!
April 11, 2025
I’ll start off by saying that I’m a US Army Infantryman that deployed for two years and saw extensive combat in Afghanistan. I’ll begin with the positives….I agree that standards have slipped, even in the time that I was in. Of course every generation of service members will say that the next generation has it easier, but during the height of our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we needed bodies. It’s the simple fact of an all volunteer force. And the fewer people joining, the more those of us that were in had to keep going back over. How do you help ease that burden? Lower the standards, allow more in.
Hegseth’s view that lowering the standard automatically gets people killed is just bullshit. Those that did the running and gunning like my unit did couldn’t afford to have those types on the line next to us. Individuals that couldn’t do the job got placed in roles that were akin to cooks, janitors, or babysitters of local nationals.
But it needs to be abundantly clear that those that do the door kicking are such a tiny portion of the military. They used to say that for every Infantryman putting bullets into bad guys, there were like 10-20 support solders that allowed him to do his job. These are the people in supply, admin, logistics, intelligence, cooks, doctors, dentists, mechanics, finance, and countless others. Just because a high standard might be needed to physically do the job of the Infantry, it doesn’t mean they are needed to do other jobs.
Another thing I semi agree on (and it’s hard even saying “agree” with this guy) is that the military shouldn’t be used for social experiments. I got a taste of it when I was in, but not to the extent that it got to. I am absolutely in support of DEI because we do have our biases in this nation. I have no problem ensuring that everyone gets a fair shot. But I will say when it becomes more important to sit through countless PowerPoints instead of ensuring that my guys could hit the target on the range, it became too much.
And that is the closest I’ll get to standing on the same side as Hegseth. This guy is an absolutely racist and misogynistic piece of garbage.
His entire book was full of shots at women and people of color in the military. He trashes the decades of service that some of these people dedicated their lives to by simply calling them a DEI hire. He repeatedly says that women have no business in the military. I have met many women in the military that were tougher and better soldiers than people I know that served.
During Vietnam we treated our returning veterans like trash. We have spent close to 60 years making up for that mistake. Now we take such pride in the service our veterans. It’s baffling that we have people like Hegseth that can talk up our veterans and their sacrifices, and then completely delegitimize the service of women and minorities.
And Christian values in our military? Give me a frigging break. It’s talk like this that makes me embarrassed to be a Christian. I served with Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, and one ninja (no joke…it was on his dog tags). Every single one of these people signed up to serve the people of the United States…..ALL people of the United States. These soldiers didn’t try to convert each other or anyone in the nations that we deployed to. We were there to do our jobs and bring each other home.
This book is nothing but Christian Nationalism written by an egotistical, hateful person. I only read this book to gain a better understanding of who Pete Hegseth is…..and if that’s what you’re looking for….you’ll walk away realizing that he’s worse than what you imagined.
Hegseth’s view that lowering the standard automatically gets people killed is just bullshit. Those that did the running and gunning like my unit did couldn’t afford to have those types on the line next to us. Individuals that couldn’t do the job got placed in roles that were akin to cooks, janitors, or babysitters of local nationals.
But it needs to be abundantly clear that those that do the door kicking are such a tiny portion of the military. They used to say that for every Infantryman putting bullets into bad guys, there were like 10-20 support solders that allowed him to do his job. These are the people in supply, admin, logistics, intelligence, cooks, doctors, dentists, mechanics, finance, and countless others. Just because a high standard might be needed to physically do the job of the Infantry, it doesn’t mean they are needed to do other jobs.
Another thing I semi agree on (and it’s hard even saying “agree” with this guy) is that the military shouldn’t be used for social experiments. I got a taste of it when I was in, but not to the extent that it got to. I am absolutely in support of DEI because we do have our biases in this nation. I have no problem ensuring that everyone gets a fair shot. But I will say when it becomes more important to sit through countless PowerPoints instead of ensuring that my guys could hit the target on the range, it became too much.
And that is the closest I’ll get to standing on the same side as Hegseth. This guy is an absolutely racist and misogynistic piece of garbage.
His entire book was full of shots at women and people of color in the military. He trashes the decades of service that some of these people dedicated their lives to by simply calling them a DEI hire. He repeatedly says that women have no business in the military. I have met many women in the military that were tougher and better soldiers than people I know that served.
During Vietnam we treated our returning veterans like trash. We have spent close to 60 years making up for that mistake. Now we take such pride in the service our veterans. It’s baffling that we have people like Hegseth that can talk up our veterans and their sacrifices, and then completely delegitimize the service of women and minorities.
And Christian values in our military? Give me a frigging break. It’s talk like this that makes me embarrassed to be a Christian. I served with Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, and one ninja (no joke…it was on his dog tags). Every single one of these people signed up to serve the people of the United States…..ALL people of the United States. These soldiers didn’t try to convert each other or anyone in the nations that we deployed to. We were there to do our jobs and bring each other home.
This book is nothing but Christian Nationalism written by an egotistical, hateful person. I only read this book to gain a better understanding of who Pete Hegseth is…..and if that’s what you’re looking for….you’ll walk away realizing that he’s worse than what you imagined.
December 12, 2024
I read this book to try and understand Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense. I sandwiched it in between “James” by Percival Everett because I couldn’t bring myself to exclusively read such unfettered garbage.
It reads like Pete Hegseth’s Mein Kampf as he hallucinates a vision of reality where the National Guard personally spit him out even though it never happened. He essentially paints a personal and false martyrdom the entire book that falls apart upon the most basic of research.
I respect him for his service and devotion to our country, but this book gives me greater concerns that he’s mentally unstable and a narcissist.
It reads like Pete Hegseth’s Mein Kampf as he hallucinates a vision of reality where the National Guard personally spit him out even though it never happened. He essentially paints a personal and false martyrdom the entire book that falls apart upon the most basic of research.
I respect him for his service and devotion to our country, but this book gives me greater concerns that he’s mentally unstable and a narcissist.
November 21, 2024
Excellent book.
Easy to read.
Lays out in great detail how the Woke Mind Virus has weakened the US Military.
A clear and precise road map for the Trump Administration to follow in dismantling this monster beginning on January 21, 2025.
Bravo.
Easy to read.
Lays out in great detail how the Woke Mind Virus has weakened the US Military.
A clear and precise road map for the Trump Administration to follow in dismantling this monster beginning on January 21, 2025.
Bravo.
February 2, 2025
Did not meet my basic standards for a well-written, or a good, book.
March 19, 2025
Listened to better understand mindset and it is sooo much ick.
August 21, 2025
would not recommend.
“I love America more than any country in the world and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.” - James Baldwin
“I love America more than any country in the world and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.” - James Baldwin
March 18, 2025
Without a doubt the worst book I have ever read.
I entered this book with an open mind, Pete Hegseth is a fellow veteran, Harvard graduate, & current Secretary of Defense, he must have something worth listening to.
Sentence after sentence, page after page I was proven wrong. His book is a 200+ page diatribe against all who are not white, male, and straight like him.
As a woman, service academy graduate, and veteran it is truly disheartening that this is who is running our nation’s military.
I entered this book with an open mind, Pete Hegseth is a fellow veteran, Harvard graduate, & current Secretary of Defense, he must have something worth listening to.
Sentence after sentence, page after page I was proven wrong. His book is a 200+ page diatribe against all who are not white, male, and straight like him.
As a woman, service academy graduate, and veteran it is truly disheartening that this is who is running our nation’s military.
March 22, 2025
This isn’t just a book—it’s a direct punch to the gut of the bloated, bureaucratic circus that’s replaced what was once the most feared military on the planet. Pete Hegseth doesn’t dance around the fire. He throws gasoline on it and lights a match.
The War on Warriors is what happens when someone with actual combat experience, a spine, and a functioning moral compass decides he’s had enough of the military being hijacked by ideologues, careerists, and soft-handed bureaucrats playing dress-up. Hegseth dismantles the rot—piece by piece. The forced politics, the woke obsession, the prioritization of feelings over firepower. This is what happens when warfighters get replaced by PowerPoint commandos and cowardly yes-men more worried about DEI briefings than deterring China.
He’s not wrong. He’s just the only one saying it out loud.
And now? The same guy who wrote this book just got tapped to be Secretary of Defense. About time. Maybe now we’ll stop handing out medals for pronoun compliance and get back to training men who can win actual wars. This isn’t just encouraging—it’s a full-blown course correction. The clown show’s over. The grown-ups are back.
Mark my words: Hegseth’s not going to “reform” the Pentagon. He’s going to bulldoze it and build something worthy of the oath it was supposed to uphold. And I’m here for every second of it.
Buy the book. Then hand it to every politician who thinks a war is won by hashtags and virtue signals.
The War on Warriors is what happens when someone with actual combat experience, a spine, and a functioning moral compass decides he’s had enough of the military being hijacked by ideologues, careerists, and soft-handed bureaucrats playing dress-up. Hegseth dismantles the rot—piece by piece. The forced politics, the woke obsession, the prioritization of feelings over firepower. This is what happens when warfighters get replaced by PowerPoint commandos and cowardly yes-men more worried about DEI briefings than deterring China.
He’s not wrong. He’s just the only one saying it out loud.
And now? The same guy who wrote this book just got tapped to be Secretary of Defense. About time. Maybe now we’ll stop handing out medals for pronoun compliance and get back to training men who can win actual wars. This isn’t just encouraging—it’s a full-blown course correction. The clown show’s over. The grown-ups are back.
Mark my words: Hegseth’s not going to “reform” the Pentagon. He’s going to bulldoze it and build something worthy of the oath it was supposed to uphold. And I’m here for every second of it.
Buy the book. Then hand it to every politician who thinks a war is won by hashtags and virtue signals.
January 10, 2025
I have no clue how this book has over 4 stars, but I have to applaud Pete for being unapologetically himself. He leaves no question regarding his personal beliefs and his stance on the state of our military.
Personally, I also think there is too much of an emphasis placed on DEI in our current military, but we are also not currently involved in a war... How else will we occupy our troops if not for endless briefings on diversity, equity, and inclusion??? ***Insert sarcasm here*** However, the CSAF, CJCS, and others have made it clear that there is a need to get back to the basics mainly of personal appearance standards but also of human decency. How can you go to war with someone that you do not think respects you? I see DEI as a sometimes misguided way to rectify this gap.
However, it really grinds my gears when people equate DEI initiatives in the United States with Marxism... It is so glaringly obvious that he has never taken the time to unpack Marxism and is instead parroting stereotypes that suit his personal narrative.
The absolute lack of citations really bothered me. At one point he says "according to peer-reviewed journals" and does not call a single journal out by name. WTF is the reader supposed to do with this? Trust him? Hell no. Anyone that uses the line "prove me wrong" as a legitimate tactic of persuasion is a sell out and a fraud.
Overall, this book was straight rage bait. The target audience is obviously those that served in a military that was still a boys' club (think LCWB vibes but in the 21st century) and think women can add no value to the fighting force.
Pete's arguments are stereotypical at best and harmful at worst.
2/5⭐️
Personally, I also think there is too much of an emphasis placed on DEI in our current military, but we are also not currently involved in a war... How else will we occupy our troops if not for endless briefings on diversity, equity, and inclusion??? ***Insert sarcasm here*** However, the CSAF, CJCS, and others have made it clear that there is a need to get back to the basics mainly of personal appearance standards but also of human decency. How can you go to war with someone that you do not think respects you? I see DEI as a sometimes misguided way to rectify this gap.
However, it really grinds my gears when people equate DEI initiatives in the United States with Marxism... It is so glaringly obvious that he has never taken the time to unpack Marxism and is instead parroting stereotypes that suit his personal narrative.
The absolute lack of citations really bothered me. At one point he says "according to peer-reviewed journals" and does not call a single journal out by name. WTF is the reader supposed to do with this? Trust him? Hell no. Anyone that uses the line "prove me wrong" as a legitimate tactic of persuasion is a sell out and a fraud.
Overall, this book was straight rage bait. The target audience is obviously those that served in a military that was still a boys' club (think LCWB vibes but in the 21st century) and think women can add no value to the fighting force.
Pete's arguments are stereotypical at best and harmful at worst.
2/5⭐️
December 7, 2024
Since the author was nominated to be the Secretary of Defense, I thought I would read, in his own words, his viewpoints. Terribly disappointed that he has been nominated and I will be amazed if he gets confirmed. He does make some valid points, but his opinions in many areas are flat out wrong and based on very limited military experience. In the foreword he trashes his Ivy League Education and in the book you learn that he was largely educated in those Ivy League schools. Was he trying to explain himself?
December 20, 2024
A Warrior Fights Back
The War on Warriors is an outstanding book. Pete Hegseth goes in to great detail about how the left has taken over our military colleges trying to cram DEI and Critical Race Theory to our new officers, eventually building a new officer corps and replacing the current. Those who are critical of him should first read this book by this outstanding Warrior.
The War on Warriors is an outstanding book. Pete Hegseth goes in to great detail about how the left has taken over our military colleges trying to cram DEI and Critical Race Theory to our new officers, eventually building a new officer corps and replacing the current. Those who are critical of him should first read this book by this outstanding Warrior.
June 10, 2024
Breathtakingly direct
Pete Hegseth’s forthright treatise on how the military has gone dangerously soft should scare every American. If even half of what he said is true, this country is in deep trouble. I believe that all he says in this book is accurate, and that America has reached a point in her existence that is critical: we do something now, or forever lose our freedom to do anything.
Pete Hegseth’s forthright treatise on how the military has gone dangerously soft should scare every American. If even half of what he said is true, this country is in deep trouble. I believe that all he says in this book is accurate, and that America has reached a point in her existence that is critical: we do something now, or forever lose our freedom to do anything.
November 15, 2024
There are plenty of opinions presented in this book that I don’t agree with. Which is fine. They aren’t the reason for the low rating. What has been more surprising is how poorly argued the entire thing is. The fact to vitriol ratio is low. Several arguments are grounded simply in “everyone who isn’t a left wing nut job knows this is true”.
July 4, 2025
Although I thought the author made some compelling points, like that generals should be more focused on readiness than politics and the slogan “diversity is our strength” is both unsubstantiated and contrary to the traditional military principle of unity, I was unconvinced by his argument that women should be barred from combat arms. I agree that competence and merit should be determining factors, and it’s a fact that the vast majority of women cannot perform on par with men in many combat jobs such as Army infantry. But how should we deal with the minority who can? Hegseth argues that at this point the matter becomes divine: God doesn’t mean for women to do things like that (take life). As a conservative, I’m unreceptive to the argument that the federal government should serve as the mouthpiece of God, and dismiss that. Next, he argues that men would be distracted by women in combat. I was similarly unconvinced by that, because surely the same argument was made to keep women out of the work force (or, right now, from speaking or visiting national parks in Afghanistan). Next, he argues that including women in combat would kill chivalry; we don’t want men to treat women like men once back at home. I would counter that we don’t want people of either gender to act like combatants at home, which would involve crass language, consistent sleep deprivation, and…killing others. He also argues that women have never been in combat because they’ve never been useful, agreeing that Joan of Arc was a “loser” and citing Wonder Woman as a case study. I’m never fond of anecdotal evidence. I have an anecdote, too, if we’re playing that game: Francis Clayton, who enlisted in Civil War service and fought alongside her husband, or female samuri such as Tomoe Gozen. These women were useful. They also put a dent in Hegseth’s claim that women don’t want to serve in combat, but are being pushed into it as political pawns. So do modern female warriors such as Col’s Kim Campbell and Allison Black (the “Angel of Death”).
I also dislike the emotion with which Sec Hegseth argues. Using phrases like “they’re coming for us as our children are sleeping” (to paraphrase Chapter 1) perpetuates the combative mentality he witnessed while serving in the DC National guard: war, us vs them. While there’s truth in that statement, it’s not a useful paradigm. There’s no room for cooperative problem-solving in it, and it feeds into our polarized temptations to dismiss arguments made by those who oppose us based upon their identity or voting patterns rather than the merit of the arguments. I was also exhausted by the insults and jabs he took at those he disagreed with, and irked by his painting of himself as a martyr (everyone knows not to get contentious tattoos in the military!) after scoffing at the victim mindset which he (rightfully) associates with many young progressives today. I found such feints and digressions distracting from his argument, which was often insightful, but scattered and unexciting. Lastly, the author relied heavily on the authority he gained from his time serving in the US Armed Forces. I thank Secretary Hegseth for his service, and enjoyed his war stories as my favorite part of the book. But I was always jarred when he would end his story by essentially claiming: “See? No women, no problem. A woman couldn’t do that. In fact, that’s what made me a man.” I was unconvinced because I know Army combat veterans of his generation that fought hard and continually support the inclusion of women in combat, and I failed to be convinced, from his stories, that the missions he served on were successful primarily due to their exclusion of women. I’d rather credit that to the persistent, top-notch professionalism of our Army, equipment, strategy, training, and personnel…which I have faith that an exceptional woman could adhere to and further.
As a woman in the military, I was annoyed by his open letter to his 5 sons (not to, what I presume are, his two daughter, since his bio says he has 7 kids) urging them to join the military in order to keep women out it. Putting all that together with the fact that I didn’t learn much that I couldn’t intuit, I’d give this book 2 stars, with my usual scale being “I’ll give it 3 if I’m glad I read it and I learned 1 thing.” But I was glad to hear an alternate perspective to what I normally hear at Harvard and to understand my Secretary of Defense better as a service member. What a well-read historical scholar! And unlike many, he has done exactly what he claimed needs to be done in his book now that he is in office, earning respect from me beyond that which I legally and naturally owe him as my leader (to end on a compliment!)
I also dislike the emotion with which Sec Hegseth argues. Using phrases like “they’re coming for us as our children are sleeping” (to paraphrase Chapter 1) perpetuates the combative mentality he witnessed while serving in the DC National guard: war, us vs them. While there’s truth in that statement, it’s not a useful paradigm. There’s no room for cooperative problem-solving in it, and it feeds into our polarized temptations to dismiss arguments made by those who oppose us based upon their identity or voting patterns rather than the merit of the arguments. I was also exhausted by the insults and jabs he took at those he disagreed with, and irked by his painting of himself as a martyr (everyone knows not to get contentious tattoos in the military!) after scoffing at the victim mindset which he (rightfully) associates with many young progressives today. I found such feints and digressions distracting from his argument, which was often insightful, but scattered and unexciting. Lastly, the author relied heavily on the authority he gained from his time serving in the US Armed Forces. I thank Secretary Hegseth for his service, and enjoyed his war stories as my favorite part of the book. But I was always jarred when he would end his story by essentially claiming: “See? No women, no problem. A woman couldn’t do that. In fact, that’s what made me a man.” I was unconvinced because I know Army combat veterans of his generation that fought hard and continually support the inclusion of women in combat, and I failed to be convinced, from his stories, that the missions he served on were successful primarily due to their exclusion of women. I’d rather credit that to the persistent, top-notch professionalism of our Army, equipment, strategy, training, and personnel…which I have faith that an exceptional woman could adhere to and further.
As a woman in the military, I was annoyed by his open letter to his 5 sons (not to, what I presume are, his two daughter, since his bio says he has 7 kids) urging them to join the military in order to keep women out it. Putting all that together with the fact that I didn’t learn much that I couldn’t intuit, I’d give this book 2 stars, with my usual scale being “I’ll give it 3 if I’m glad I read it and I learned 1 thing.” But I was glad to hear an alternate perspective to what I normally hear at Harvard and to understand my Secretary of Defense better as a service member. What a well-read historical scholar! And unlike many, he has done exactly what he claimed needs to be done in his book now that he is in office, earning respect from me beyond that which I legally and naturally owe him as my leader (to end on a compliment!)
July 5, 2025
Disclaimer to say I'm pretty conservative and I broadly agree with the premise of the book and its concerns, but this guy in particular really is a knuckle dragger. There are lines like in the introduction when he objects to soldiers being "pumped full of vaccines" and implies that they're toxic, which is such a low-IQ comment that it makes it hard to take him seriously in general. The tone of the book is overly sarcastic and snide and uses a lot of reactionary and vulgar language (i.e. "radical left", "straight up weirdo shit", "wokesters", "asshattery", random f-bombs, I think he called Mark Milley a pussy at some point) and I think that has the unfortunate effect of completely putting off serious people, and more importantly people who aren't already on board with the general point of the book. It's undignified and unacademic, and this is why it no longer means anything when people brag about having an Ivy League degree. There are actual real issues being pointed out in this book but when you present them like a disgruntled teenage 4chan poster it makes people less likely to listen to you.
The other problem is that the sexism just oozes out of this book, because he refuses to acknowledge women as valid members of the military and just goes on about men, and a particular stereotype of men at that. He keeps fantasizing about front line warriors as if there aren't tons of like, accountants and mechanics and desk jockeys in the military. Yes there should be baseline standards of fitness and readiness, and for certain jobs that might exclude some people (i.e. women or less fit men), but not everyone in the military actually needs to be Rambo, or even male. He was literally reading Bible verses and talking about comics where women are seductresses or just taking the place of men in an emergency to justify why women can't be anywhere near combat roles. He gave a long history lesson about how historically women weren't soldiers, but ancient Romans excluding women from service is not a good reason to exclude women from service in 2025. I agree there can be a nuanced conversation about this issue, but he was being childish and weird, and seems to have a fundamentally poor view of women outside of stereotypical infantilizing gender roles.
I don't have a problem with the idea of standards NOT being lowered to make sure women get whatever job they want - and I say that as a woman. I'm pretty meritocratic and I don't think standards should be lowered to appease any identity category. If any man or woman can't meet the necessary physical standard for that assignment they shouldn't get it. I can even understand and probably agree with the idea that there shouldn't be coed infantry units, but he made that point in the most insulting way possible, and at times went a step further, basically asserting that women shouldn't be in the military period, and that's insane. Later he claims that offering women free abortions was a method of keeping women in the military which is so crazy and insulting, as if female soldiers are just running around getting knocked up all the time and that's the reason for female attrition.
That whole chapter was really disgusting and ignorant, actually, and is the biggest reason for my very negative rating. At times he was actually just openly ridiculing women and the idea of women doing anything other than being loving caregivers. Calling Joan of Arc a loser is an inappropriately hot take, like just say you hate women and spare us the need to read the whole chapter. Bro was a National Guard member and not full time career military, so it seems like his perception of the military is incomplete and heavily supplemented by fantasy and personal preferences/biases.
I'm not a big audiobook enjoyer and I usually prefer reading, but his personality is so grating to me that i kept putting the book down, so in an effort to actually finish it, I put the audiobook on while I'm at work. This was not much better - he reads it like a literal robot. He sounds like an AI with Pete Hegseth's voice.
Basically this is a badly written book by an ignorant guy with a terminally nasty attitude. If he wants to earn my respect he'll fix all the problems he's whining about here now that he's undeservedly the SecDef, because I agree with him that (most of) the problems are real and the military, among other institutions, needs to be powerwashed to get rid of these trends and ideologies. Unlikely that he'll do it though, given his propensity for blackout day drinking and budget mismanagement. Maybe next time.
The other problem is that the sexism just oozes out of this book, because he refuses to acknowledge women as valid members of the military and just goes on about men, and a particular stereotype of men at that. He keeps fantasizing about front line warriors as if there aren't tons of like, accountants and mechanics and desk jockeys in the military. Yes there should be baseline standards of fitness and readiness, and for certain jobs that might exclude some people (i.e. women or less fit men), but not everyone in the military actually needs to be Rambo, or even male. He was literally reading Bible verses and talking about comics where women are seductresses or just taking the place of men in an emergency to justify why women can't be anywhere near combat roles. He gave a long history lesson about how historically women weren't soldiers, but ancient Romans excluding women from service is not a good reason to exclude women from service in 2025. I agree there can be a nuanced conversation about this issue, but he was being childish and weird, and seems to have a fundamentally poor view of women outside of stereotypical infantilizing gender roles.
I don't have a problem with the idea of standards NOT being lowered to make sure women get whatever job they want - and I say that as a woman. I'm pretty meritocratic and I don't think standards should be lowered to appease any identity category. If any man or woman can't meet the necessary physical standard for that assignment they shouldn't get it. I can even understand and probably agree with the idea that there shouldn't be coed infantry units, but he made that point in the most insulting way possible, and at times went a step further, basically asserting that women shouldn't be in the military period, and that's insane. Later he claims that offering women free abortions was a method of keeping women in the military which is so crazy and insulting, as if female soldiers are just running around getting knocked up all the time and that's the reason for female attrition.
That whole chapter was really disgusting and ignorant, actually, and is the biggest reason for my very negative rating. At times he was actually just openly ridiculing women and the idea of women doing anything other than being loving caregivers. Calling Joan of Arc a loser is an inappropriately hot take, like just say you hate women and spare us the need to read the whole chapter. Bro was a National Guard member and not full time career military, so it seems like his perception of the military is incomplete and heavily supplemented by fantasy and personal preferences/biases.
I'm not a big audiobook enjoyer and I usually prefer reading, but his personality is so grating to me that i kept putting the book down, so in an effort to actually finish it, I put the audiobook on while I'm at work. This was not much better - he reads it like a literal robot. He sounds like an AI with Pete Hegseth's voice.
Basically this is a badly written book by an ignorant guy with a terminally nasty attitude. If he wants to earn my respect he'll fix all the problems he's whining about here now that he's undeservedly the SecDef, because I agree with him that (most of) the problems are real and the military, among other institutions, needs to be powerwashed to get rid of these trends and ideologies. Unlikely that he'll do it though, given his propensity for blackout day drinking and budget mismanagement. Maybe next time.
January 18, 2025
Just as corporations are abandoning their DEI policies and dismantling their DEI boards, the U.S. military and the military schools throughout the country have decided the divisive measures of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are exactly what the country needs in order to protect itself. Forget the importance that unity plays in maintaining a cohesive military unit. Race and gender quotas are more important, regardless of ability.
It is absolutely appalling that our military strength has been capitulated to, or compromised by, woke generals and academy instructors who are teaching white males that they are the enemy. Pete Hegseth is the right man at the right time to fix the mess that has been created by Biden and his Generals, and return the military to its once great honorable institution. Perhaps young men and women will be proud to wear the uniform again. May God bless his confirmation as Secretary of Defense and keep him safe during his tenure.
It is absolutely appalling that our military strength has been capitulated to, or compromised by, woke generals and academy instructors who are teaching white males that they are the enemy. Pete Hegseth is the right man at the right time to fix the mess that has been created by Biden and his Generals, and return the military to its once great honorable institution. Perhaps young men and women will be proud to wear the uniform again. May God bless his confirmation as Secretary of Defense and keep him safe during his tenure.
November 4, 2024
Remember that scene in Elf when Buddy joyfully decrees that he’s in love and he doesn’t care who knows it? Well Hegseth is a bit like that in this book, only he’s giving us his opinion and he doesn’t care who the h*ll hears it. Tell us how ya really feel, Pete!
So, for entertainment purposes, no doubt, it’s all-in when someone is venting like Pete is here. But if you’re willing to dig deeper, you may find cogent opinions, some decent logic and even something to agree with if you’re willing to read between the ranting and resentment. But mostly, this one has lots of the quiet part out loud.
So, for entertainment purposes, no doubt, it’s all-in when someone is venting like Pete is here. But if you’re willing to dig deeper, you may find cogent opinions, some decent logic and even something to agree with if you’re willing to read between the ranting and resentment. But mostly, this one has lots of the quiet part out loud.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 441 reviews