Troops Betrayed. Experts Purged. It’s Only Been One Hundred Days

By Gretchen Klingler 

A few weeks ago, the chaos at the Pentagon should have set off alarms in every military, veteran and national security space in America. When political appointees start playing musical chairs with national security roles—backed by ideologues like Pete Hegseth—it’s more than dysfunction, it’s a serious national security risk. Senior leaders are being pushed out or muzzled, while loyalists with agendas are being shuffled in.

For years, Republicans have loudly spoken of a sacred duty to those who served, promising to support our military and care for veterans and their families in meaningful ways. But those promises now collide with leaders and policies that say otherwise. After decades of this consistent “support the troops” rhetoric one would think veterans, service members and their families would be a protected class under the Trump administration, not thrown back into the line of fire.

But the first days of Trump’s second term have delivered consistent direct hits to the military and veteran community—undermining operational security (OPSEC), disrupting unit cohesion, straining alliances, and threatening access to care.

I served in the military myself and now continue to serve my community with Human Rights First as the Director of Veterans for American Ideals, a project of grassroots veterans firmly rooted in the principles of our service. We have watched day after day as faith with our allies has been compromised, leadership has failed to support our service members, and promises to veterans have been broken. And we’re only 100 days in.

Broken Promises, Endangering Troops

One of the most basic premises of military service is this: we don’t leave our people behind. That’s the promise we made to Iraqi and Afghan allies who qualified for the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program—safe passage to the United States if they were ever in harm’s way as a result of working with the U.S.

Having served in Afghanistan and originally trained as an Iraqi Arabic linguist, I know firsthand the risks our interpreters, local partners, and Afghan-American service members took. Their service came at great personal cost to them and their families.

This administration’s continued obstruction of Afghan resettlement—including its plan to end Temporary Protected Status for thousands of Afghans—makes liars out of our government. It’s a betrayal of our allies and of the troops who depended on them.

If we abandon them now, who will trust American promises in the future? These decisions don’t just weaken U.S. credibility. They endanger our servicemembers, who rely on strong alliances and the power of our word.

When we abandon those who stood by us, we tell the world that American loyalty has an expiration date.

Purging Expertise, Eroding Trust

Gone are the days when experience and expertise were the most important qualifiers for top positions in the Department of Defense. In less than three months, we’ve seen the removal of the military’s top legal experts, the forced ouster of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and the sidelining of senior women leaders. In some cases, political sycophants have been installed to oversee the administration’s agenda.

These moves aren’t about readiness or reform. They’re political and ideological purges—meant to consolidate loyalty and punish dissent, all while scapegoating DEI programs in the process.

The erasure of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the military is more than a policy shift. It’s an attack on unit cohesion and operational success. Rather than trusting their teammates “have their backs,” many service members now feel like they have to “watch their backs”.

After speaking with those currently serving, I’ve been told morale has shifted. Troops and civil servants are pulling back—shrinking social circles, disengaging from relationship-building, and detaching from their teams. While remaining consummate professionals and loyal to their oaths to defend the constitution, some are questioning whether this administration intends to challenge that loyalty.

This is not what unit cohesion looks like. And it’s a dangerous shift in the culture of our military.

Veterans Sacrificed, then Sidelined

Once considered some of our most valued and celebrated public servants, veterans are now being discarded by the very system that once promised to honor them.

In its first 100 days, the Trump administration announced plans to slash over 80,000 jobs from the Department of Veterans Affairs. This isn’t just a budget cut —it’s a strike at the heart of those who deliver on the promise to care for veterans. And these cuts won’t just affect wait times or access to care, they’ll gut the workforce that makes the system function, disproportionately affecting veterans and their families.

Like the rest of our federal workforce, nearly one-third of VA employees are veterans. Many more are military spouses. They’ve dedicated their lives, sometimes more than once, to what we’re told is one of America’s highest values: serving those who served.

As a nation, we say we honor service. We say we care for those who’ve borne the battle. But actions like these reveal the gap between what this administration says and what they are doing.

And veterans, who already did their part, should not have to pay for that hypocrisy.

Foreign Policy Failures

The administration’s reckless foreign policy rhetoric has already jeopardized U.S. credibility and damaged our international relationships for decades to come. Dismantling support for Ukraine, threatening to bomb Iran, “take over” Gaza, annex Greenland, make Canada our 51st state, shipping people to El Salvador without due process, and musing on crossborder drone operations in Mexico—none of this is normal foreign policy—It’s chaos.

These stunts have alienated allies, emboldened adversaries, and trivialized international law. The undercurrent isn’t subtle—military and veteran communities see it clearly: threats of force are now on the table not as a last resort, but as tools for whichever good idea fairy floats through the Oval Office on a given day.

Even more insulting is the disregard for the sacrifices of British, Danish, and other NATO service members who died supporting the U.S. in the War on Terror—the only time Article 5, the mutual defense clause of NATO, has ever been invoked. During my time in Afghanistan, I was even stationed at a NATO base for several months. These allies stood with us and served honorably. To dismiss their sacrifices—and those of their families—is a moral failure. 

It undermines everything we claim to stand for. Veterans, even those aligned with the President, know it. We remember who showed up when it counted.

SignalGate: A Dangerous Double Standard

In yet another national security failure, senior officials in the Trump administration used unsecured communications platforms to discuss sensitive operations not just once, but at least twice —an episode now known as SignalGate. These chats included targeting information, weapons systems, strike timing—and a whole lot of Americana-themed emojis.

As a former airman with a TS/SCI clearance, I can say this without hesitation: if I had made the same reckless decisions, I would’ve been grass. My clearance pulled, removed from duty, likely reporting to the recycling facility until a court-martial slapped me with every charge the UCMJ could muster.

And I’m not alone in that assessment. After speaking with fellow veterans and servicemembers—many involved in similar strikes—we all agreed: if it had been us, discipline would’ve been swift and unforgiving. We know people who were made examples of for far less.

This double standard isn’t just infuriating—it’s a dangerous turn for national security. It sets a tone that those at the top aren’t bound by the same rules or standards of professionalism that the rest of the Department of Defense and national security community live by, and it disregards the important guardrails established to maintain operational security.

And those left to pick up the pieces? They’re stuck trying to maintain their integrity in a system that punishes honesty and protects power.

The Road Ahead

Leadership comes from the top, and if that leadership is in disarray our adversaries have gaping opportunities to exploit our perceived weaknesses. And looming in the background is the Insurrection Act—a tool this President has openly considered invoking for years. Even though DoD and DHS have rejected invoking the Insurrection Act for now, it is doubtful the administration will completely remove it from the table. If you think this is all just noise, remember that top brass are being sidelined, and plans for using the military against American liberties aren’t hypothetical—they’re being discussed. The groundwork for the potential of military force against dissent is being laid in real time, and the Pentagon is being hollowed out to make it possible. Veterans and service members swore an oath to the Constitution—not to any one man. That oath demands we pay attention to what’s happening right now, before the next order comes down.

We’re taught in uniform that leaders worthy of respect accept accountability and stand up for what’s right; that silence and excuses in the face of failure are not signs of loyalty but complicity. If we mean what we say about honoring service, defending democracy, and never leaving our own behind, then now’s the time to prove it. Because what’s at stake isn’t just policy—it’s who we are as a country, and whether we’re willing to fight for the ideals we once asked others to die for.