Risa Brooks

Last week in class we talked about the possibility of an imminent war w/Iran. Most of my undergrads barely had it on their radar. I talked abt the GWOT wars & the lessons (not) learned. By the end of the class they were also pretty dismayed and many were filled w/ dread.

Random intervention to your discussion. But I think that maybe you all correct? The term is not new, but the larger context and intent is different now. That is, it’s part of a larger agenda in a way it was not in the past

This might help you. a.co/d/05J52UMu

Curious if any of you see this policy shift on sharing information about strikes as part of an overall skepticism on the need for transparency with the public that I am detecting in other DoD areas?

Really important questions.

Hopefully, this all remains hypothetical. But given everything else, I am worried. /end

Column | Pete Hegseth seems open to ordering soldiers to shoot protesters Trump’s pick to lead the Defense Department indicates he would be willing to do what Mark Esper refused to do.

The Pentagon's civilian ldrs seem unlikely to counsel restraint.
Example: see how H avoids answering directly when asked by Sen. Hirono during his confirmation hearing abt whether he would oppose orders to shoot protesters (like Esper did in 2020).6/
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...

Also worth remembering, if reg military is deployed w/ Insurrection Act it will need to follow the law, but can be asked to carry out legal law enforcement activities putting troops in direct contact with civilians.5/
Mil commanders are likely to act cautiously, BUT . . .

As for the lgr military, this will divide Americans views of it. No matter what service members do, some ppl will see following any orders as complicity in the ICE agenda. Others will applaud the deployment. Polarizing attitudes abt the military is a feature not a bug of the admin's goals. 4/

Also, while service members are well trained, they are not immune from societal divisions. Some may sympathize w observers/protesters & others w/ ICE. Normally troops keep pol views private while serving, but such a high pressure situation cld lead to breakdowns in discipline or perhaps worse. 3/

Baseline is U.S. military would aim to comport itself professionally unlike ICE. Still it is not trained for these ops., doesn't work w/ law enforcement normally & this is a pressure cooker of a situation
See 1992 incident in LA when Marines fire into a house due to a miscommunication w/police: 2/

Hopefully, this all remains hypothetical. But given everything else, I am worried. /end

Column | Pete Hegseth seems open to ordering soldiers to shoot protesters Trump’s pick to lead the Defense Department indicates he would be willing to do what Mark Esper refused to do.

The Pentagon's civilian ldrs seem unlikely to counsel restraint.

For example, see how H avoids answering directly when asked by Sen. Hirono during his confirmation hearing abt whether he would oppose orders to shoot protesters (like Esper did in 2020).6/

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...

Also worth remembering, if reg military is deployed w/ Insurrection Act it will need to follow the law, but can be asked to carry out legal law enforcement activities putting troops in direct contact with civilians.5/

Mil commanders are likely to act cautiously, BUT . . .

As for the lgr military, this will divide Americans views of it. No matter what service members do, some ppl will see following any orders as complicity in the ICE agenda. Others will applaud the deployment. Polarizing attitudes abt the military is a feature not a bug of the admin's goals. 4/

Also, while service members are well trained, they are not immune from societal divisions. Some may sympathize w observers/protesters & others w/ ICE. Normally troops keep pol views private while serving, but such a high pressure situation cld lead to breakdowns in discipline or perhaps worse. 3/

Pete Hegseth Should Stay Out of Minneapolis By inserting himself into the situation in Minnesota, the secretary of defense is only making things worse.

"Is [Hegseth] itching to get the U.S. military into the streets, to back up ICE’s undertrained civilians with professional soldiers and heavier hardware?"

If T invokes Insurrection Act & sends mil to MN, as some allies have been pushing, what might happen?1/

www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...

I should add that I am sure that some in the audience saw things for what they are and were appalled/alarmed. I am also confident that lots of retirees are very worried.

You know my bias on this one, Steve.

I hope you are right.

I worry those blinders are on pretty tightly. My only hope is that there is more going on behind the scenes than we know. I wonder for example about why T backed off Insurrection Act (for now) & if those characters played a role. So, while they are preparing to implement, maybe they are advising ag/

Yes-enabling all sorts of bad things, including also strategic failure in war.

If you are unfamiliar with what I mean by "Huntingtonian mode" and want to know more, see link to article here (ungated):
direct.mit.edu/isec/article...

Pentagon readies 1,500 soldiers to possibly deploy to Minnesota, officials say Troops with the Army’s 11th Airborne Division in Alaska are preparing after President Donald Trump’s Insurrection Act threat, according to defense officials.

I increasingly wonder if US civ-mil is now operating in full Huntingtonian mode: civilians dictate political goals & mil leaders advise on technical/tactical options to implement them while siloed off from the political implications or wisdom of that advice.

www.washingtonpost.com/national-sec...

Mandatory reading for everyone across the DoD (and across the country, for that matter).

Whether someone agrees or disagrees with it is beside the point.

Things are far more likely to get worse before they get better.

The fundamental question will then be whether or not we can ever recover.

Often missed is how using the military in highly contested domestic security missions (immigration, crime, anti protest) enables politicization. Involving the military in controversial missions is a central tactic for politicizing it--it's a feature, not a bug of civilian politicization. 3/end

First, civ ldrs seek to neutralize military opposition to using its coercive & symbolic resources for anti-democratic purposes. Second, they aim to turn the military into a partisan ally by altering incentives, norms and forcing out those who oppose serving in a politicized military. 2/

They are great. There is so much to learn and teach.

I'm always trying to find good sources that can contextualize contemporary political violence in this way for my undergrads. Any suggestions?

The American Military Officer After Liberalism Across academia, government, and Silicon Valley, on social media, and in leading journals, intellectuals and political leaders are openly debating what

Hard to imagine a more sinister & dangerous argument, couched in euphemism & high-minded language. "This essay does not argue liberalism will collapse, only that [US] military officers should be intellectually (and spiritually) prepared for alternatives." warontherocks.com/2025/10/the-...