zlacker

>>aspenm+(OP)
This strikes me as very odd. First of all, what's in it for the execs. Surely pay is worse so there must be some insider benefit. Or can they hold both positions? That just screams conflict of interest.

Secondly, why execs instead of people with actual technical skills. Surely military execs are already better prepared at managing military than some tech execs.

Lastly, as a non-U.S. citizen the optics seem horrible to me. Fire generals/people who served "the normal way" and bring in tech execs...that's gotta piss of just about anyone who ever served as a storyline or am I totally off base here?

>>kriro+MB1
Of course the optics are terrible but it doesn’t matter. Everyone is already either pissed off with trump or dedicated to never being pissed off at him.

>>lazyas+vD1
I somewhat agree with your thesis.

But recent developments with Musk, the FY26 budget proposal, and CA National Guard make me think that the Republican party is starting to fracture more, and some of them must be taking a dimmer view of Trump in the process.