Opinion Pete Hegseth’s Climate Change ‘Crap’ - The secretary of defense chooses to ignore a major national security threat.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Mark Hertling
Mar 13, 2025

1742050242159.png
U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth leaves the weekly Republican Senate policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on March 11, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH said Sunday that the DoD “does not do climate change crap,” implying the department should focus solely on training and war-fighting, and anything else is a distraction. While it may be a pithy soundbite, it reflects a dangerous blind spot—and contradicts a fundamental strategic principle.

Many people in the military, possibly even Hegseth himself, are familiar with Sun Tzu’s famous statement: “If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt.” Many fewer remember the following lines: “if you know Heaven and know Earth, you may make your victory complete.” Perhaps Sun Tzu was speaking metaphorically, but the rest of The Art of War is supremely practical, and any good soldier knows that terrain and weather—and, yes, climate—can be key allies or stern enemies.

As a combat commander in Iraq during the 2007 “surge,” I experienced firsthand how climatic conditions can disrupt operations. I had planned a ten-day operation involving a U.S. task force, and special operations forces, and five Iraqi Army divisions in northern Iraq. As we were about to kick off, we were hit by severe dust and sandstorms—“shamals” and “haboobs”—intensified by prolonged drought. (It was just about the same time that the National Intelligence Council was working on its first ever report on climate change, which found a likelihood of “increase of heat waves and droughts (both in frequency and intensity).” These storms canceled air operations, grounded reconnaissance platforms, blinded intelligence collectors, delayed maneuvers, and severely degraded communications. It became clear to everyone in our command: climate change wasn’t background noise—it was an operational variable. The weather forced us to delay a major tactical operation against our enemy for weeks; the climate made it more likely that more such operations would be delayed or canceled in the future.

That’s just one example—there are plenty of others from every service, domain, and combatant command to illustrate why climate change is a strategic issue that demands the attention of the secretary of defense. Sea level rise, storm surges, and extreme weather events increasingly threaten mission-critical infrastructure. Naval Station Norfolk—the world’s largest naval base—now experiences frequent tidal flooding that disrupts operations and damages infrastructure. Other key installations like Pearl Harbor, San Diego, and Key West face similar vulnerabilities. In 2018, Tyndall Air Force Base suffered $4 billion in hurricane-related damage.

Melting Arctic Sea ice is opening new transit routes and fueling geopolitical competition. Russia has militarized its Arctic coastline, and China has declared itself a “near-Arctic power”—a term it invented, since it doesn’t actually border the Arctic. During my time as Commander of U.S. Army Europe, our NATO allies—especially Canada, Norway, as well as Sweden and Finland, which have since joined the alliance— had expanded cold-weather training, exercises, and operations in their armies and navies. The Arctic has warmed nearly four times as fast as the rest of the planet in recent decades, and as it gets warmer, it becomes a more viable theater of military competition. Not surprisingly, our allies have modernized their Arctic fleets and the ability of their armies to thrive in cold-weather environments. Mirroring their efforts, our Marines and Army incorporated similar exercises.The president himself, at least momentarily, seemed to recognize the effects of climate change when he made the surprise—and apparently misleading—announcement of the purchase of “about 40 big icebreakers.” At the same time, the Defense Department canceled a training exercise in Sweden. It’s challenging to determine the logic.

Climate change is driving instability across the globe. When crops fail or water runs dry, populations move, and crises follow. Climate-driven migration is already destabilizing regions across Central America, the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. Commanders at Southern Command and Africa Command have repeatedly testified that environmental degradation is a primary driver of insecurity. The 2024 Annual Threat Assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence found that “the accelerating effects of climate change are placing more of the world’s population, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, at greater risk from extreme weather, food and water insecurity, and humanitarian disasters, fueling migration flows and increasing the risks of future pandemics as pathogens exploit the changing environment.” The secretary of defense normally listens to combatant commanders for input into the National Defense Strategy, but Hegseth seems to be precluding one of the major threats.

Climate shocks also create domestic demands on U.S. forces. The DoD is increasingly deploying National Guard and active-duty units to the southern border in response to political and climate-driven migration. Those missions will continue to compete for manpower and resources with military support to disaster relief operations. National Guard troops are increasingly asked to respond to out-of-control wildfires, severe hurricanes, and repeated once-in-a-century floods—missions that strain personnel and divert readiness. In 2023 alone, U.S. troops responded to record-breaking floods in Vermont, massive wildfires in California and Hawaii, and major hurricanes in the east and southeast. The disaster-related demands increased in 2024 and are expected to grow even larger in the future.

Facts matter. Running the Department of Defense requires strategic foresight based on critical analysis and force requirement assessments, not uninformed ideology or political soundbites for the base. Sun Tzu’s wisdom holds: We must know the enemy, know ourselves, and know the heaven and the earth. Today’s terrain includes rising seas, melting ice, extreme weather, shifting populations, and new demands on the force. Climate change is not a distant future threat—it’s shaping tomorrow’s battlefields, on land, sea and in the air, right now. To ignore it—or worse, dismiss it as “crap”—is not conservatism. It’s strategic malpractice.

Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (Ret.) (@MarkHertling) was commander of U.S. Army Europe from 2011 to 2012. He also commanded 1st Armored Division in Germany and Multinational Division-North during the surge in Iraq from 2007 to 2009.

Source (Archive)
 
Basically, Hegseth says that fighting climate change will now come second to combat effectiveness, and the journalist takes this to mean that the military will be ignoring the effects of climate change. It doesn't mean that. The journalist then proceeds to totally own this strawman with facts and logic for one billion words.

I skimmed it, but I think that's the gist of it.
 
Imagine, a War Department that wants to win wars and not "do science"?

The horror!
 
Climate shocks also create domestic demands on U.S. forces. The DoD is increasingly deploying National Guard and active-duty units to the southern border in response to political and climate-driven migration.
Those 10 million opportunists were here because people like you were literally paying their way. It had nothing to do with the climate.

And protecting your borders is the actual purpose of an Army, you “Modern Major General.”
 
Not a single climate change related action has actually reduced it. It's always a grift that makes the elites richer.
When crops fail or water runs dry, populations move, and crises follow. Climate-driven migration is already destabilizing regions across Central America, the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia
This is just straight up lies. If crops fail you just hope next year is better, you don't uproot your life to go to Europe and live on gibs. It's just a way to legitimize illegals by placing the blame on the west despite China and India being peak polluters.
 
If only. The author was a general.
Thing is, woke bullshit in the military (e.g. trannies) is usually championed by generals. From what I've heard, you need to have a politician's attitude and beliefs to get the highest ranks in the military. Hopefully that's no longer the case.
 
Is this the same climate change science that predicted the coasts would be submerged by the year 2000?

No other field can be so empirically wrong so often for so long and maintain its credibility.
 
Not a single climate change related action has actually reduced it. It's always a grift that makes the elites richer.

This is just straight up lies. If crops fail you just hope next year is better, you don't uproot your life to go to Europe and live on gibs. It's just a way to legitimize illegals by placing the blame on the west despite China and India being peak polluters.
They aren't coming because they don't have food, they're coming because they want better food for free and the West stupidly gives it to them because they think it'll so impress the migrants, they'll pitch in to help instead of just demand more.

Also, not a single one of these people who claim climate change is motivating this can cite a single failed harvest or famine in those home countries, it's just "trust me Bro".
 
This is just straight up lies. If crops fail you just hope next year is better, you don't uproot your life to go to Europe and live on gibs.
And what if next year’s crop fails? And the next? We saw what happens when the environment is so fucked up that you have to leave; it’s called the Great Dust Bowl.

If it starts getting warmer and desertification spreads, you’re fucked. You can try to mitigate the damage, but you can’t make a farm in a desert.
 
If it starts getting warmer and desertification spreads
But it's not. As I said, it's empirically, demonstrably not the case and their doomsday predictions have been consistently wrong for forty fucking years - and that's just since they decided the threat was man-made global warming and not a new man-made ice age.

You might as well legislate an entire restructuring of the global economy just in case the gravitational constant starts changing.
 
And what if next year’s crop fails? And the next? We saw what happens when the environment is so fucked up that you have to leave; it’s called the Great Dust Bowl.

If it starts getting warmer and desertification spreads, you’re fucked. You can try to mitigate the damage, but you can’t make a farm in a desert.
Then you hope enough of your family survives until it gets better. That's how it's always have been. If the EU collapses do you think a single African or Asian country will give a fuck and procure aid for free?
 
Those 10 million opportunists were here because people like you were literally paying their way. It had nothing to do with the climate.

And protecting your borders is the actual purpose of an Army, you “Modern Major General.”
But don't you understand?

He is the very model of a modern Major-General,
He has information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
He knows the kings of England, and he quotes the fights historical,
From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical,
He's very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
he understands equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem He's teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.

He's very good at integral and differential calculus,
He knows the scientific names of beings animalculous:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
He is the very model of a modern Major-General.
 
Last edited:
And what if next year’s crop fails? And the next? We saw what happens when the environment is so fucked up that you have to leave; it’s called the Great Dust Bowl.
Which was not permanent, as you can see by the current day state of Oklahoma, Iowa, etc...... The current global neo-Dust Bowl is being pitched as if it's happening when it's not and that it will be permanent, which the last one was not.

If it starts getting warmer and desertification spreads, you’re fucked. You can try to mitigate the damage, but you can’t make a farm in a desert.
It isn't, and there's no indication it will, despite being told we're on the brink of this for the last 40 years.

Things do not stay on the brink that long unless they aren't.

Again, these people who claim the current great migration to the West is from ecological destruction and not a desire for free shit can't point to a single desertified country...... they just say it's happening and we'll have to deal with it.

But look at where they are coming from instead: Mexico, Venezuela, Haiti, Ecuador, are those places suffering ecological blight? Climate induced crop failures? Nope, but we are told the people leaving what are all universally corrupt countries with oligarchical governments, corrupt bureaucracies and dead-end socialist economies are nonetheless "climate migrants".
 
Last edited:
I don't know if climate change is real or not but leftists have no one but themselves for creating skeptics. Don't turn your causes into money laundering scam artist grifts if you want people to believe in them.
 
I had planned a ten-day operation involving a U.S. task force, and special operations forces, and five Iraqi Army divisions in northern Iraq. As we were about to kick off, we were hit by severe dust and sandstorms—“shamals” and “haboobs”—intensified by prolonged drought.
Basically normal conditions for a Middle Eastern shithole. They even had names for it, HABOOBS.
 
Basically normal conditions for a Middle Eastern shithole. They even had names for it, HABOOBS.
Sandstorms, obviously, didn't happen in the world's largest natural deserts until the 1990's, when we invented discovered climate change!

That "prolonged drought" he's worried about? Has been going on for 6,000 years.... it's a DESERT you idiot.
 
Sandstorms, obviously, didn't happen in the world's largest natural deserts until the 1990's, when we invented discovered climate change!

That "prolonged drought" he's worried about? Has been going on for 6,000 years.... it's a DESERT you idiot.
Also keep in mind the various North African campaigns during World War Ii, saw sandstorms, etc.
 
Back
Top Bottom