Author Archives: sterlingcooper

DONALD TRUMP, JR. GETS MARRIED AGAIN IN PALM BEACH

Donald Trump Jr. and Bettina Anderson officially wed ahead of Bahamas celebration

Donald Trump Jr. and Bettina Anderson are officially married. The couple wed in a quiet ceremony on Thursday, ahead of a larger wedding celebration planned for the weekend in the Bahamas, Fox News Digital reported.

A marriage certificate obtained by TMZ confirmed the union. The license was signed by a Palm Beach County deputy clerk, and the ceremony was reportedly officiated by Brad McPherson, a real estate attorney with longtime ties to the Trump family.

The wedding caps a relationship that moved from first public sighting to engagement to marriage in roughly a year, a pace that suggests both parties knew exactly what they wanted.

President Trump sends well wishes, from Washington

President Donald Trump announced Friday that he would not attend the celebration, citing the demands of the presidency. His statement was direct:

“While I very much wanted to be with my son, Don Jr., and the newest member of the Trump Family, his soon to be wife, Bettina, circumstances pertaining to Government, and my love for the United States of America, do not allow me to do so.”

The president had formally announced his son’s engagement during a White House holiday celebration in December 2025. That public moment at the White House came after Donald Trump Jr. proposed to Anderson in late 2025.

MORE:  Aaron Rodgers says upcoming Steelers season will be his last in the NFL

The elder Trump’s absence underscores a simple reality: the presidency doesn’t pause for family milestones. That he acknowledged it plainly, rather than quietly slipping away for the weekend, says something about the weight he places on the office.

From Palm Beach to the national stage

Anderson and Trump Jr. first sparked public interest when they were spotted together in Palm Beach in September 2024. Over the following year, Anderson became a regular presence at his side, attending events including the Republican National Convention, international trips, and private family dinners.

The bridal shower drew the Trump women together. Ivanka Trump, Lara Trump, Tiffany Trump, and Arabella Kushner all appeared at the event, which was held at Mar-a-Lago.

Donald Trump Jr. was previously married to Vanessa Trump from 2005 to 2018. They share five children: Kai, Donald Trump III, Tristan, Spencer, and Chloe.

Who is Bettina Anderson?

Anderson, 39, brings her own biography to the marriage, one rooted in Palm Beach society, philanthropy, and conservation work. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in art history, criticism, and conservation. Her LinkedIn profile also lists her as a member of Sigma Delta Tau.

She has worked as a model and lifestyle influencer, serving as the face of a marketing campaign for Hamilton Jewelers and appearing on the covers of regional luxury magazines including Palm Beach Illustrated and Quest. She has more than 144,000 followers on Instagram.

But Anderson’s profile extends beyond the social circuit. She co-founded The Paradise Fund with her siblings, an environmental and disaster relief nonprofit now called Paradise.ngo. She also serves as executive director and spearheads the Project Paradise Film Fund, which awards grants to filmmakers documenting Florida’s endangered freshwater springs and wildlife.

Her family has deep roots in the Palm Beach community. Her father, Harry Loy Anderson Jr., was made president of Worth Avenue National Bank at age 26 and was instrumental in creating Palm Beach Day Academy, a coeducational independent day school in Palm Beach and West Palm Beach. He died in 2013 after what his obituary described as “a long illness and battle with Alzheimer’s.”

Her mother, Inger Anderson, is involved in advocacy through the YMCA, Urban Youth Impact, and the Paradise Fund. Anderson has a twin sister, Kristina, whom she has called “the greatest blessing in the entire world” on Instagram.

A sense of humor about it all

Before her relationship with Trump Jr. became public, Anderson’s Instagram offered a lighter self-portrait. She once described herself as “just your typical stay-at-home mom… only I don’t do household chores… or have a husband… or have kids…”

That last part has now changed.

Anderson was previously engaged to businessman Beau Wrigley, though that relationship did not lead to marriage.

A family affair, with a full house

The marriage merges two large, visible families. Trump Jr.’s five children from his first marriage are well known in their own right. His eldest daughter, Kai, recently announced a new NIL partnership with Accelerator Active Energy and her decision to attend the University of Miami.

Anderson, for her part, has spoken warmly about her new extended family, posting about “the most beautiful nephews and niece” on social media.

The Bahamas celebration this weekend will serve as the public wedding event. The Thursday ceremony handled the legal formalities, marriage certificate, officiant, deputy clerk’s signature. The weekend is for the rest of it.

In a political era that grinds through every news cycle looking for conflict, a wedding is a welcome change of subject. The country’s business will be waiting Monday morning. For one weekend, at least, the Trump family gets to be just a family.

NUTTY BUTTERS ANTI-AMERICAN CHINESE WOMAN-MEI VANG, (OF COURSE A DEMOCRAT) RUNNING FOR CONGRESS

Neo-Marxist Mai Vang, Running for U.S. Congress, Rejects the Pledge of Allegiance and Turns Her Back on US Flag

As Memorial Day approaches and Americans prepare to honor the fallen who secured the blessings of liberty, one Democratic congressional candidate in California has chosen a different path: open defiance of the nation’s most basic symbols of unity.

Sacramento City Council member Mai Vang has repeatedly refused to recite the Pledge of Allegiance during public meetings and has been captured on video turning her back on the American flag. This is not a quiet personal conviction but a public statement from a woman seeking to represent the United States in Congress.

Vang’s actions stand in stark contrast to the district she hopes to serve. California’s newly redrawn 7th Congressional District includes more conservative areas that value tradition and national pride alongside traditional Democratic strongholds. Yet Vang, polling competitively against incumbent Rep. Doris Matsui, has made her protest a point of pride rather than a liability. In doing so, she exposes a troubling trend on the left: the elevation of grievance over gratitude and global activism over national loyalty.

As a recent NY Post editorial notes, she has no place in the United States Congress.

Her refusal isn’t occasional hesitation but deliberate theater. Videos from city council meetings in 2025 and 2026 show Vang consistently averting her gaze from the flag while others participate. She even boasted about the practice on social media, framing the moment of national unity as an opportunity to “center our communities” and reflect on alleged injustices committed “under this nation’s influence,” complete with hashtags supporting causes far removed from her constituents’ daily concerns.

This episode raises profound questions about what kind of leaders Americans want shaping their future. The Pledge of Allegiance, for all its simplicity, represents a covenant: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. To reject it so brazenly while pursuing elected office isn’t principled dissent; it is a declaration that the republic itself falls short of one’s ideological standards.

Vang’s approach mirrors a growing radicalism that views America not as a flawed but exceptional experiment in self-government, but as an inherently oppressive force requiring constant resistance.

Democratic consultant Steve Maviglio captured the disconnect sharply, noting that reciting the Pledge is “Patriotism 101.” Even those who disagree with aspects of policy or history can stand in recognition of the sacrifices that preserved the republic. Vang’s choice to turn away during ceremonies, including a Veterans Day event, disrespects not only the flag but the men and women who defended the freedoms that allowed her family to find refuge here.

The irony deepens when considering Vang’s background as the daughter of Hmong refugees who escaped persecution with American military support. Her family’s story embodies the promise of America as a beacon for the oppressed. Yet rather than embracing that inheritance, she weaponizes selective grievances.

Compare this to Rep. Matsui, whose own family endured Japanese American internment during World War II yet continued to serve the nation with distinction. Matsui may be a Democrat, but at least she doesn’t overtly hate America.

Beyond symbolism, Vang’s record reveals substantive priorities that align with her Pledge protests. She has opposed city budgets over police funding disputes and championed policies that prioritize ideology over public safety. She is vehemently anti-Israel and a vocal “Free Palestine” activist.

Critics like community organizer Amy Gardner describe her approach as “infuriating,” particularly in how it undermines law enforcement in neighborhoods that need it most. This pattern suggests her rejection of the flag is part of a larger worldview that sees American institutions themselves as the problem.

Republican leaders have taken note. California Republican Party Chairwoman Corrin Rankin highlighted the broader implications: too much contempt for law enforcement and too little respect for country. San Joaquin Republican Party Chair David Cushman observed that Vang’s attempt to position herself as the AOC of the Central Valley misreads her district’s values. Republican challenger Zachariah Wooden put it plainly: such rhetoric rejects basic American principles.

In an era when congressional districts send representatives to Washington to defend the Constitution they swear to uphold, voters must consider whether candidates who cannot bring themselves to honor its most visible emblem deserve their trust. The Pledge is not a loyalty test for conformity but a reminder of shared commitment to something greater than factional grievances.

ENTRENCHED LOW-VALUE EMPLOYEES DRAG THE BUSINESS DOWN..FIRE THE SLACKERS!

CEO Saves His Failing Company by Firing Entire HR Department

When Elon Musk purchased Twitter and took the company over in 2022, he proceeded to fire approximately 80% of the social media company’s bloated 7500 person workforce. This included almost all HR related employees. The company roster was pared down to a lean 1500 people. Everyone in the establishment media claimed that Twitter (now called “X”) was going to collapse.

The political left and their corporate allies did everything in their power to make this happen, including advertising cancellations and even government intervention, but they failed. X’s monthly active user (MAU) count has grown over the past 5 years – rising from roughly 360 million in 2021 to over 550 million by early 2026. Part of the reason for this success despite the constant attacks was Musk’s removal of internal saboteurs.

The majority of corporations today have inflated their teams with people who do not add value – Rather, they create problems from thin air and drag the company down. The primary vehicle that facilitates this sabotage is the Human Resources department.

Trending:HR departments were originally created as a means of monitoring compliance with state and federal laws to avoid liability. In many cases this revolved around “sexual harassment” or “discrimination” in the workplace, but it ended up becoming a progressive crusade to make women, LGBT and minority groups a protected class of workers that are difficult to fire because HR is more concerned with lawsuits.

This lack of accountability based on gender and minority privilege reached its peak during the height of the woke era and DEI. Companies were rife with useless employees who did little work while raking in six-figure salaries.

Today, the situation is changing rapidly. A wave of layoffs has hit the white collar sector since 2025. The end of DEI is leading to mass cuts which are largely affecting women, with minority women making up the bulk of the job losses.

Breslow, who stepped down as CEO in 2022 but returned in 2025, cut 30% of the workforce in April and replaced HR with a smaller “people operations” team focused on training. “They were creating problems that didn’t exist,” Breslow, 31, said at Fortune’s Workforce Innovation Summit. “Those problems disappeared when I let them go.”

Bolt was founded in 2014 and makes checkout payments technology. The company saw a whopping valuation collapse from $11 billion in 2022 to $300 million in 2025.

But HR wasn’t the only group to lose their jobs. Breslow said employees had grown complacent during the boom years. He gave workers 60 days to adapt to a leaner culture but said 99% couldn’t make the shift. “There’s a sense of entitlement that had festered across the company,” he said.

He fired nearly the entire leadership team and eliminated four-day workweeks and unlimited PTO. Bolt now operates with about 100 employees, down from thousands. “We have a team a quarter of the size, who are much more junior, who work a lot harder, who have better energy,” Breslow says.

The CEO’s observations echo across the corporate world in the US and in Europe, and it’s the reason why many DEI related jobs are disappearing and why so many college graduates with psychology and communications related degrees can’t get hired to save their lives.

It makes sense; Human Resource employees are 75% to 80% women and 18% LGBT, far above the averages in most white collar fields.  These demographics commonly lead to a grievance-based work environment and an entitlement culture.  These are the groups who often create problems from thin air as a means to manipulate the policy courses of companies and they are difficult to eject because of liability fears.

Placing them in a position of power with the ability to drum up internal conflicts is a detrimental mistake.

Time, however, is healing.  The era of easy salaries for low value employees is quickly coming to an end.  Numerous tech companies and venture capital companies that expanded during the last decade are cutting the dead weight.  The viral TikToks of women spending most of their workday in corporate cafeterias and yoga rooms are disappearing.  The free ride is over, and soon there may not be any HR department’s left to protect the barnacles from being scraped off the ship.

THE DUMBEST SCHOOL SYSTEM IN AMERICA IS THE COSTLIEST-NEW YORK CITY

When Will New York Taxpayers Finally Revolt Against the Failing NYC School System?

New York City’s public schools represent one of the most glaring examples of government inefficiency in America today. While Mayor Zohran Mamdani pushes socialist spending priorities, the Department of Education devours more than a third of the city’s massive $126 billion budget—$43 billion annually for public schools alone.

Yet enrollment continues its steep decline, test scores stagnate, and families flee the system in search of better alternatives. This is not mere mismanagement; it is a tragedy funded by hardworking taxpayers who deserve far more accountability.

Jeff Bezos recently captured the absurdity with precision, comparing NYC schools to a dysfunctional Amazon operation where packages arrive late, overpriced, and incorrect. The comparison lands because it is painfully accurate.

A Citizens Budget Commission report lays bare the scale: New York spends a nation-leading $44,000 per pupil despite mediocre outcomes on standardized tests. Meanwhile, the system maintains excess capacity with hundreds of under-enrolled schools protected by “hold harmless” policies that prioritize bureaucracy over students.

This disconnect between lavish spending and dismal results should alarm every resident footing the bill. As enrollment drops by tens of thousands year after year, the bureaucracy expands rather than contracts. Such inverted incentives reveal a system captured by special interests rather than oriented toward genuine education.

Chancellor Kamar Samuels deserves credit for publicly criticizing the “hold harmless” policy and overly rigid class-size mandates. Some modest relief made it into the state budget under Governor Kathy Hochul, but these represent mere tweaks to a fundamentally broken machine. The real issue runs deeper: a monopolistic public education model insulated from competition and real consequences.

Parents recognize this reality. The sharp enrollment declines reflect not just demographic shifts but deliberate choices by families opting for charter schools, private options, or leaving the city entirely. Young families in particular cite school quality as a primary reason for departure. When government schools consume enormous resources yet fail to prepare children for productive lives, they accelerate urban decline rather than foster renewal.

The irony grows thicker under progressive leadership. Mamdani’s administration faces pressure to fund expansive social programs while the education budget crowds out fiscal flexibility. Taxpayers watch their hard-earned dollars fund administrative bloat, excess buildings, and ideological experiments instead of reading, writing, and arithmetic proficiency. This pattern repeats across blue cities, where public institutions serve employees and unions more effectively than the citizens they ostensibly serve.

Conservatives have long argued for parental empowerment through school choice, transparency in curricula, and basic accountability metrics. The NYC example validates those concerns. No private enterprise could survive such inefficiency. Only government monopolies, protected by law and political patronage, persist in delivering declining services at ever-rising costs.

History offers warnings about empires that neglected the formation of the next generation. When education systems prioritize self-preservation over student outcomes, societies weaken from within. America’s founders understood education’s vital role in maintaining a virtuous republic capable of self-government.

As the prophet Hosea declared, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” (Hosea 4:6) In our age, the tragedy lies not in the absence of funding but in its reckless misallocation away from the knowledge children desperately need.

Taxpayers across New York should demand more than incremental reforms. The obscene mismatch between investment and results in NYC schools calls for structural change: broader school choice, elimination of wasteful mandates, and a return to educational fundamentals. Until citizens revolt at the ballot box and in public discourse, the tragedy will only deepen, burdening future generations with both ignorance and insurmountable debt.

ELON MUSK’S NET WORTH IS NOW OVER $700 BILLION…GO ELON GO!

Elon Musk is even wealthier than previously thought. Bloomberg/Getty Images© Bloomberg/Getty Images
  • Elon Musk is worth a record $722 billion after a $45 billion gain on Thursday.
  • SpaceX’s IPO filing this week revealed he’s borrowing against virtually none of his shares.
  • The revelation led Bloomberg to remove a $45 billion liability from its wealth estimate for Musk.

Elon Musk’s estimated wealth soared by $45 billion to a record $722 billion on Thursday after the release of SpaceX’s IPO prospectus offered fresh transparency into his personal finances.

The SpaceX and Tesla CEO’s net worth jumped after the Bloomberg Billionaires Index removed a $45 billion liability tied to his SpaceX stake.

Bloomberg had assumed that 57% of Musk’s SpaceX shares were pledged as collateral for personal loans, after he said in 2019 that he’d borrowed against some of them.

However, SpaceX’s prospectus revealed that as of May 1, Musk had only pledged about 238,000 of his 849.5 million SpaceX shares — less than 0.3% — as “security for personal indebtedness.”

The disclosure led Bloomberg to scrap the $45 billion liability, catapulting Musk’s estimated wealth by that amount to a fresh high.

He’s now gained an unmatched $103 billion this year, making him richer than the next two people on Bloomberg’s rich list, Alphabet cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, combined.

Musk’s wealth has ballooned as his companies’ valuations have soared.

Tesla stock has surged roughly 14-fold since the start of 2020, propelling the EV maker’s market capitalization to $1.3 trillion.

SpaceX’s valuation rocketed around 20-fold between the spring of 2020 and December last year. The rocket business, which acquired Musk-owned xAI in February, has targeted a valuation north of $1.5 trillion as a public company.

Musk owns about 11% of Tesla, but could double the size of his stake in the coming years if he hits the milestones in his latest pay package. He owns around 50% of SpaceX per the rocket-and-satellite company’s filing this week.

The tech titan’s $722 billion fortune exceeds the market value of most of the world’s largest companies, including Exxon Mobil, Visa, and Intel.

 

WE ARE WASTING $4 MILLION VALUE MISSILES TO SHOOT DOWN CHEAP $2,000 DRONES…THANKS TO THE IDIOTS AT THE PENTAGON!

The U.S. uses $4 million Patriot interceptors to destroy drones that cost $20,000 to $50,000. OFTEN EVEN $2,000!!!!

The Economics of Victory in Ukraine and Defeat in Iran

The war in Iran teaches an old lesson about military spending.

Six hundred years ago, on a muddy field near Agincourt in northern France, King Henry V’s outnumbered, half-starved English army faced the flower of French chivalry. French knights were expensive, each man-at-arms the product of many years of training, his armor and warhorse a major investment.

Henry’s archers carried longbows that cost little, drawn by men trained in every village across the kingdom. When the volleys came, the knights fell by the hundreds. Quantity overwhelmed quality—and the mud helped. France lost the battle, but defeat in the war came not in the dying. It was in the impossibility of replacing what had died.

Patriot interceptors are exquisite, a wonder of engineering, the product of decades of accumulated technical mastery, each one the labor of hundreds, perhaps thousands. The Iranian drones they intercept are arrows— cheap, plentiful, made in bulk.

Since February, the U.S. has fired more than 1,300 Patriot interceptors against Iranian missiles and drones. Each interceptor costs around $4 million to destroy weapons that cost between $20,000 and $50,000. Based on the most recent rate of production, it will take two years for Lockheed Martin to replace what has been fired in the past 2½ months. That is the economics of defeat, and our adversaries understand it.

Each Patriot is also a creature of supply chains we don’t fully control. The U.S.-made guidance chips depend on helium, supplies of which have been disrupted by the war in Iran. Even if Congress voted the funds tomorrow for 10,000 new interceptors, the metal and the gas would still have to be found, the workforce trained, and the production lines tooled. We are running short of the raw materials for our exquisite weapons while our adversaries flood the battlefield with cheap drones.

Next-generation fighters, multibillion- dollar carriers and so much more mean that although each is a marvel, we have too few, and they’re too hard to replace, making them too valuable to risk.

Sophistication has become our vulnerability. Ukraine shows the alternative. More than 1,000 interceptor drones roll off Ukrainian production lines every day, at $1,000 to $3,000 apiece. The bodies of Kyivbuilt attack drones are redesigned within months, not years, their engines even more quickly, and their guidance software within a matter of days. By keeping costs down and rapidly iterating simple technology, at scale, Ukraine is delivering a devastating effect.

Behind this show of force sits a market the government built. Programs like Brave1 connect investors directly to startups and to the user on the front line, giving fast feedback. That’s how a country at war fields more than 2,000 defense companies and runs production cycles from outline to front line in months, not years.

Ukraine produced four million drones last year and plans to produce seven million this year, 10 times its output three years ago.

We’re not the only ones who have noticed. Gulf monarchies, which have bought American for decades, are looking at Kyiv as the partner for drone warfare. Their models are cheap, quick to produce and still in active development on the Donbas front.

While the U.S. is cautious about allowing even close allies to use cruise missiles, Ukraine has an alternative. See Spider’s Web, the June 2025 operation that smuggled more than 100 drones deep inside Russia and struck four air bases and 41 aircraft, including several bombers, causing an estimated $7 billion in damage.

For Ukraine, that’s the economics of victory: billions of dollars of weapons destroyed by drones that cost around $2,000 each.

The cure to what ails the North Atlantic Treaty Organizations’s militaries isn’t another exquisite platform. It’s an industrial base that can take an idea and turn it into a million in a year. That means pivoting civilian production lines to defense and giving contracts to the manufacturer that can deliver 100,000 drones a month, not the one that delivers a dozen platforms in a decade.

The goal is no longer the perfect weapon. You build the best you can. Then build it again, 90% as good, at 80% of the cost, in 50% of the time. Then do it again and again, a thousand times more. That not only fills the armory; it creates a system to keep it full.

In the Iran war, we’re equipping like the French at Agincourt when what we need is an army of archers.

USA LOST BILLONS AND BILLIONS OF AIRCRAFT IN THE IRAQ WAR!

F-15s, F-35, MQ-9 Reaper Drones: US Report Says 42 Aircraft Lost In Iran War

The CRS, which provides policy and legal analysis to the US Congress and committees, compiled the losses by perusing news reports and statements by the Department of Defence and the US Central Command (CENTCOM).

F-15s, F-35, MQ-9 Reaper Drones: US Report Says 42 Aircraft Lost In Iran War
The US Department of Defence has not published a comprehensive assessment of combat losses so far.
At least 42 United States military aircraft, including fighter jets and drones, have been lost or damaged during the war in Iran, according to an official report. The losses may increase due to multiple factors, including classification, ongoing combat activity, and attribution, said the report by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).

Recently, the Pentagon declared that the cost of military operations against Iran under Operation Epic Fury has already climbed to nearly $29 billion.

“A lot of that increase comes from having a refined estimate on repair or replacement costs for equipment,” said Pentagon finance chief Jules Hurst III during the May 12 hearing.

List Of Aircraft Damaged

The aircraft losses and damages include four F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jets, one F-35A Lightning II fighter aircraft, one A-10 Thunderbolt II ground-attack aircraft, seven KC-135 Stratotanker aerial refuelling aircraft, one E-3 Sentry airborne early warning-and-control system aircraft (AWACS), two MC-130J Commando II special operations aircraft, one HH-60W Jolly Green II combat search-and-rescue helicopter, 24 MQ-9 Reaper medium-altitude long-endurance uncrewed aircraft and one MQ-4C Triton high-altitude long-endurance uncrewed aircraft.

How the US Reacted The Number

The US Department of Defence has not published a comprehensive assessment of combat losses so far. The CRS, which provides policy and legal analysis to the US Congress and committees, compiled the losses by perusing news reports and statements by the Department of Defence and the US Central Command (CENTCOM).

 

The war in Iran began on February 28, when the United States and Israel launched coordinated military strikes on Iranian targets, killing several prominent figures, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Iran’s Warning

Iran’s foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, posted the CRS report on X, saying that the US said Iran had gained knowledge from two months of combat action before the ceasefire in April. He warned that Tehran will use its learning and will deliver “many more surprises” against the US forces if Trump resumes military action against the Islamic Republic.

“Months after initiation of war on Iran, US Congress acknowledges loss of dozens of aircraft worth billions. Our powerful Armed Forces are confirmed as 1st to strike down a touted F-35. With lessons learned and knowledge we gained, return to war will feature many more surprises,” he said.

 

WE HAVE WAY TOO MANY GENERALS-NO WONDER WE HAVE THE LARGEST MILITARY BUDGET IN THE WORLD-

List of active duty United States Army major generals

The list of active duty United States Army major generals comprises all officers currently serving in the rank of major general (O-8), the second-highest peacetime general officer grade in the Regular Army, who are assigned to commands, staff positions, or other duties within the United States Army as of November 2025.[1][2] Major generals, denoted by two silver stars, typically lead Army divisions of approximately 10,000 to 15,000 soldiers, serve as deputy commanding generals of corps or field armies, or hold principal staff roles at the Department of the Army or joint commands. The number of such officers is statutorily limited to a maximum of 90 in the Regular Army, excluding certain temporary assignments or positions designated for joint duty.[1] This list is maintained through official announcements and biographical updates issued by the U.S. Army’s General Officer Management Office (GOMO), which oversees the assignment, promotion, and retirement of general officers to ensure alignment with national defense priorities.[3] It excludes officers in the Army National Guard, Army Reserve, or those on the retired list, focusing solely on full-time active duty personnel whose roles contribute to operational readiness and strategic leadership across global theaters.[3]

Joint Assignments

Department of Defense

The Department of Defense (DoD) encompasses a range of high-level leadership positions that integrate military expertise from the U.S. Army into defense-wide functions, particularly in policy, intelligence, and acquisition. These roles, often within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) or combat support agencies, allow major generals to contribute to strategic decision-making, threat assessment, and interservice coordination outside traditional Army commands. Army major generals in these billets typically serve as deputies or directors, providing operational insights to civilian leadership and ensuring alignment with national security objectives.[4] A prominent example is in DoD intelligence, where Army major generals hold key positions within the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), a combat support agency under the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. The DIA director role, responsible for delivering all-source intelligence to warfighters, policymakers, and support personnel, has occasionally been filled on an acting basis by Army officers at the major general level during transitions. Major General Constantin E. Nicolet, U.S. Army, assumed duties as Acting Director of the DIA on August 22, 2025, leading a global workforce of approximately 16,500 personnel focused on military intelligence production, analysis, and counterintelligence support to DoD operations.[4][5] Nicolet, with a date of rank to major general of July 31, 2024, previously served as director of intelligence (J-2) for U.S. Central Command, bringing expertise in regional threat analysis and joint intelligence operations to the role.[6] In acquisition and logistics, Army major generals contribute to DoD-wide efforts through organizations like the Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Organization (JIDO), now integrated under the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), which addresses improvised threats such as IEDs and drones. These positions emphasize rapid technology development and field deployment to counter asymmetric risks, with responsibilities including coordination across DoD components and interagency partners. As of early 2025, transitions in these billets reflected broader DoD restructuring under Secretary Pete Hegseth, including a 20% reduction in four-star positions that indirectly impacted mid-level general officer assignments.[7][8]

Name Title Key Responsibilities Appointment Date
Constantin E. Nicolet Acting Director, Defense Intelligence Agency Oversees global intelligence collection, analysis, and dissemination for DoD; advises Secretary of Defense on intelligence matters August 22, 2025

Such assignments highlight the Army‘s role in bolstering DoD’s strategic depth, with major generals often rotating into these positions following combatant command or Army staff experience to foster joint warfighting capabilities.[9]

Joint Staff and Combatant Commands

The Joint Staff, headquartered at the Pentagon, supports the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in providing military advice to the President, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council, while facilitating cooperation among the services. Army major generals typically serve in deputy or vice director roles within key directorates such as J-3 (Operations), J-5 (Strategy, Plans, and Policy), and J-7 (Joint Force Development), ensuring the Army’s operational expertise informs joint planning, resource allocation, and capability development. These assignments are part of a deliberate rotation policy mandated by the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, which requires officers to complete joint duty tours—generally 24 to 36 months—to qualify for promotion to flag officer ranks and foster interservice collaboration.[10] In the unified combatant commands (COCOMs), Army major generals occupy operational and staff billets that integrate Army capabilities into joint and multinational operations, with approximately 2-3 such positions per geographic COCOM to balance service representation and mission requirements. These roles include chiefs of staff, deputy directors for operations, and directors of specific directorates, emphasizing tactical execution and service-specific support within the command’s area of responsibility. Recent 2024-2025 transfers highlight the emphasis on rotational experience, such as promotions and reassignments following retirements to maintain continuity in high-priority theaters like Europe and the Middle East.[11] Notable current assignments as of November 2025 include:

Name Billet Command Effective Date
Major General Richard A. Harrison Chief of Staff U.S. Central Command August 2025
Major General John L. Rafferty Jr. Chief of Staff U.S. European Command July 2025

These billets underscore the Army’s commitment to joint warfighting, with rotations designed to build senior leaders’ understanding of theater-level operations and allied partnerships. For instance, in U.S. Central Command, the chief of staff coordinates staff activities across the command’s 21-nation area of responsibility, focusing on counterterrorism and stability operations. Similarly, in U.S. European Command, the role supports deterrence against strategic adversaries through integrated planning with NATO allies.[12]

National Guard Bureau and Other Joint Roles

The National Guard Bureau (NGB) coordinates National Guard activities between the states, territories, the District of Columbia, and the Department of Defense, with the Army National Guard (ARNG) component focusing on readiness, training, and mobilization for federal missions. Major generals from the ARNG typically fill key deputy and special assistant roles within the NGB, often on full-time federal active duty while retaining state affiliations for dual-hatted responsibilities in both federal joint functions and state emergency responses. These positions emphasize integration of reserve component forces into joint operations, including homeland defense and support to combatant commands. In 2025, the NGB underwent several leadership transitions due to retirements and reassignments, contributing to temporary staffing gaps in senior roles. For instance, the retirement of Major General Gregory T. Day (Oregon National Guard) in June 2025 vacated his position as Special Assistant to the Combatant Commander, U.S. Northern Command/U.S. North American Aerospace Defense Command for National Guard Matters and Liaison to the Joint Staff, J-3, a role that facilitated ARNG coordination with joint operations for homeland security. Similarly, the ARNG Deputy Director position experienced a change when Major General Robert B. Davis (Rhode Island National Guard) departed in October 2025 for the Adjutant General of Colorado, leaving the role in transition as of November 2025; Davis had mobilized to the federal position in July 2025 after serving as National Guard Assistant to the Director of the ARNG Staff. These shifts highlight the dynamic nature of ARNG major general assignments, where officers often balance federal joint duties with state-level command, such as activations for disaster response or border security missions under Title 32 authority. Other joint roles for ARNG major generals include specialized liaisons and staff positions in inter-agency environments, such as those supporting the Department of Homeland Security for civil support operations. While specific 2025 assignments in areas like liaison to Joint Special Operations Command were not publicly detailed, ARNG major generals continue to fill hybrid roles that enhance reserve integration into special operations and homeland defense planning.

Name State Affiliation Position Mobilization/Assignment Date
Robert B. Davis Rhode Island Deputy Director, Army National Guard (prior to October 2025 reassignment) July 2025[13][14]
Jerry F. Prochaska Wyoming Special Assistant to the Chief, National Guard Bureau August 2025[15]
Joseph A. DiNonno Virginia Special Assistant to the Director, Army National Guard, for 18th Airborne Corps Matters August 2025

Department of the Army Headquarters

Office of the Secretary and Chief of Staff

The Office of the Secretary and Chief of Staff includes critical executive support roles filled by major generals, who provide specialized oversight in legal, religious, and administrative domains to the Army’s senior civilian and military leaders. These positions have evolved since the Army’s 2020 modernization initiatives, emphasizing enhanced personnel readiness, talent management, and integration of multi-domain operations into administrative functions, as part of broader efforts to adapt to great power competition.[16] A key billet is the Judge Advocate General (JAG), responsible for delivering legal counsel to the Secretary of the Army and Chief of Staff on matters including operational law, administrative actions, and international agreements, while managing the Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps. As of November 2025, Major General Bobby L. Christine serves in this role, having assumed duties on July 1, 2025, following his prior assignment as commanding general of the U.S. Army Legal Services Agency; he was promoted to major general in 2024 prior to this appointment.[17][18] Recent occupants, such as Lieutenant General Stuart W. Risch in the preceding years, highlighted the JAG’s growing focus on cyber and space law amid Army modernization, with Acting Major General Robert A. Borcherding serving immediately prior to Christine.[19] Another essential position is the Chief of Chaplains, which advises Army leadership on religious programs, spiritual fitness, and ethical guidance to support soldier resilience and unit cohesion, particularly in high-stress operational environments. Chaplain (Major General) William J. Green Jr. has held this office since December 5, 2023, when he was promoted to major general and installed as the 26th Chief of Chaplains; his tenure has emphasized integrating chaplain support into personnel management strategies post-2020 reforms.[16][20] Prior examples include Chaplain (Major General) Thomas L. Solhjem, who served from 2019 to 2023 and advanced religious accommodation policies during the Army‘s talent management overhaul.[21] In legislative affairs, major generals contribute through deputy roles supporting the Chief of Legislative Liaison, coordinating Army interactions with Congress on budgeting, policy, and oversight; for instance, 2025 appointees have focused on advocating for modernization funding in personnel and readiness programs, though the primary chief remains a brigadier general.[22] These roles collectively ensure seamless executive support, with broader Army Staff functions providing functional expertise in areas like G-1 personnel operations.[20]

Army Staff Elements

The Army Staff Elements encompass the specialized directorates under the Deputy Chiefs of Staff (DCS) at Department of the Army Headquarters, where major generals serve in key leadership roles such as directors and assistant deputies, supporting policy development, force management, and operational planning across the U.S. Army. These positions typically number 1-2 major general slots per element, with recent rotations often drawing from combatant commands to bring field experience to headquarters functions. As of November 2025, these officers contribute to implementing the Army‘s 2030 strategy, emphasizing modernization in areas like cyber operations and sustainment, amid structural changes such as the planned disestablishment of the DCS G-9 in January 2026, with its responsibilities redistributing to G-1 and G-4.[23] Major generals in these elements oversee core duties including force development, strategic operations, logistics readiness, and resource allocation to ensure the Army’s readiness for multi-domain operations. For instance, in the DCS G-3/5/7 (Operations, Plans, and Training), officers manage training programs and operational planning that align with joint force requirements. Similarly, in G-4 (Logistics), they focus on sustainment and mobilization to support global deployments, while G-8 (Programs) leaders drive force structure decisions tied to budgetary and technological priorities.

Position Name Assignment Date Core Duties
Director of Strategic Operations, DCS G-3/5/7 Major General Jake S. Kwon August 2023 Oversees strategic operations planning, force integration, and synchronization of Army capabilities with joint partners to enhance operational readiness and multi-domain warfighting.[24]
Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4 (Logistics and Mobilization) Major General John M. Dreska November 2024 Advises on logistics policy, mobilization readiness, and sustainment strategies, including integration of cyber and supply chain resilience for Army 2030 objectives.[25]
Director of Force Development, DCS G-8 Major General Thomas O’Connor July 2024 Leads force structure analysis, capability development, and resource prioritization to modernize Army units, incorporating updates to cyber and sustainment directorates.[26]

These roles exemplify the Army Staff’s focus on translating strategic guidance into actionable programs, with recent updates emphasizing cyber defense enhancements under G-6 oversight and sustainment reforms absorbing former G-9 functions.[23]

Major Army Organizations

Army Commands

The U.S. Army Commands (ACOMs) are major organizations responsible for generating and sustaining ready forces, developing doctrine and capabilities, and managing materiel readiness across the Army. As of 2025, the primary ACOMs include the U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM), the U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC), and the newly established U.S. Army Transformation and Training Command (T2COM), which absorbed the functions of the former U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) and U.S. Army Futures Command (AFC).[27] These commands play critical roles in advancing multi-domain operations (MDO), integrating emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and hypersonics into Army doctrine, and preparing forces for large-scale combat operations.[28] A significant development in 2024-2025 was the expansion of futures-oriented capabilities within what became T2COM, driven by the Army Transformation Initiative to accelerate tech integration and doctrinal evolution amid great power competition.[29] This merger, activated on November 14, 2025, following TRADOC’s inactivation on September 26, 2025, consolidated training, doctrine development, and modernization efforts under a single four-star command led by General David M. Hodne, enabling streamlined billets for major generals focused on MDO experimentation and capability prototyping.[30] The restructuring affected major general assignments by creating new deputy and staff roles emphasizing joint all-domain command and control (JADC2) systems and next-generation training simulations, with several promotions in late 2024 and early 2025 filling these positions to support rapid prototyping of multi-domain task forces. Recent assignments include roles in futures and concepts directorates, where promoted officers lead cross-functional teams prototyping integrated air-ground operations.[31][32] This expansion has increased major general billets by approximately 10% in capability development areas, reflecting the command’s priority on tech-driven transformation.[33] In FORSCOM, headquartered at Fort Liberty, North Carolina, major generals oversee force generation and readiness for conventional and contingency operations. This billet highlights the command’s role in scaling forces for theater-level maneuvers.[34] AMC, based at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, focuses on logistics and sustainment capabilities, with major generals leading subordinate commands essential to MDO sustainment chains. Additionally, Major General Lori L. Robinson commands the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM), a key AMC subordinate, overseeing missile defense and aviation modernization critical to multi-domain fires integration since her assumption of command on July 10, 2024.[35]

Army Service Component Commands

The Army Service Component Commands (ASCCs) represent the U.S. Army’s operational arms within the geographic unified combatant commands, responsible for force provision, sustainment, and synchronization of Army contributions to joint and multinational missions across theaters. Major generals in these commands hold pivotal billets, including deputy commanding generals, chiefs of staff, and commanders of sustainment or task force elements, which facilitate the Army’s integration into broader joint force structures. These roles are essential for executing theater-specific strategies, such as bolstering deterrence in contested regions and adapting to 2025 force posture adjustments that emphasize agile, distributed operations amid global tensions.[36][37] ASCCs typically allocate 2-4 major general positions per theater, varying by operational demands; for instance, U.S. European Command maintains around three such billets to support forward presence and rapid response capabilities. Recent rotations reflect priorities like enhanced multi-domain integration in the Indo-Pacific and selective adjustments in Europe, including a minor troop reduction in Romania without diminishing overall readiness.[38][39] These leaders often have extensive deployment histories in their theaters, bringing expertise in joint exercises, partner capacity building, and logistics under austere conditions.

ASCC Position Incumbent Key Details and Citation
U.S. Army Europe and Africa (USAREUR-AF) Deputy Commanding General Maj. Gen. Christopher R. Norrie Assumed role October 3, 2025; oversees strategic operations and NATO integration.[40]
U.S. Army Europe and Africa (USAREUR-AF) Commanding General, 21st Theater Sustainment Command Maj. Gen. Michael B. Lalor Assumed command July 30, 2025; manages theater logistics for EUCOM and AFRICOM.[41]
U.S. Army Europe and Africa (USAREUR-AF) / SETAF-AF Commanding General, Southern European Task Force, Africa Maj. Gen. Andrew C. Gainey Leads Africa security cooperation; active in 2025 engagements like African Land Forces Summit.[42][43]
U.S. Army Central (ARCENT)
U.S. Army North (ARNORTH) Deputy Commanding General for Operations Maj. Gen. Niave F. Knell Manages NORTHCOM operational planning, including continuity of operations.[44]
U.S. Army South (USARSOUTH) Commanding General Maj. Gen. Philip J. Ryan Leads SOUTHCOM engagements; promoted August 2024, active in 2025 partner exercises.[45][46]

These assignments highlight the Army’s emphasis on experienced leaders with theater-specific deployment histories, such as multiple tours in joint environments, to address unique challenges like hybrid threats in Europe-Africa and great-power competition in the Indo-Pacific.[47][43]

Direct Reporting Units

Direct Reporting Units (DRUs) of the United States Army are specialized organizations that provide institutional and operational support across a wide range of functions, reporting directly to the Chief of Staff of the Army rather than through intermediate commands. These units focus on critical enablers such as engineering, intelligence, personnel management, testing, and education, ensuring the Army‘s readiness and sustainment without direct involvement in combat operations. Established to streamline support functions, DRUs evolved significantly following the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, which was largely implemented by 2010-2011, leading to consolidations like the relocation of human resources operations to Fort Knox and enhanced integration with Army Commands for efficiency.[48][49] Major generals in DRUs oversee specialized missions, including engineering projects vital to national infrastructure, intelligence synchronization for global operations, and strategic leader development. For instance, in engineering, major generals direct civil works and emergency response efforts that support disaster recovery and energy infrastructure. In intelligence, they manage all-source analysis and counterintelligence to protect Army assets worldwide. These roles emphasize oversight of policy implementation, resource allocation, and interagency coordination, with leadership updates in 2025 reflecting the Army‘s focus on modernization and resilience.[50][51] Key DRUs led by major generals include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (established 1802), where Maj. Gen. Jason E. Kelly serves as Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations, overseeing engineering missions such as flood control, environmental restoration, and infrastructure development that bolster national security.[50] The U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC, established 1999), commanded by Maj. Gen. Patrick L. Gaydon since July 2024, conducts independent testing of weapons systems and acquisition programs to ensure operational effectiveness, including evaluations of next-generation technologies like hypersonic systems.[52] The U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC, established 2006), led by Maj. Gen. Hope C. Rampy since July 2024, manages personnel readiness for over 1.3 million soldiers, handling assignments, promotions, and retirement services to maintain force strength amid post-2010 BRAC realignments that centralized operations.[53] In the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM, established 1977), Maj. Gen. Timothy D. Brown, as Commanding General, directs intelligence operations and security countermeasures, including cyber threat mitigation and support to combatant commands, with 2025 updates emphasizing integration with joint intelligence efforts.[51] The U.S. Army War College (USAWC, established 1901), under Commandant Maj. Gen. Trevor J. Bredenkamp since August 1, 2025, educates senior leaders on national security strategy, conducting research on landpower doctrine and fostering strategic thinking for future Army leaders. These major generals exemplify oversight roles by aligning DRU activities with Army priorities, such as the 2025 emphasis on multi-domain operations and talent management, while briefly referencing integration with Army Commands for shared sustainment functions.[54][55]

DRU Major General Position Establishment Date Key Mission Focus
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jason E. Kelly Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations 1802 Engineering support for infrastructure and disaster response[50]
U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command Patrick L. Gaydon Commanding General 1999 System testing and acquisition validation[52]
U.S. Army Human Resources Command Hope C. Rampy Commanding General 2006 Personnel lifecycle management[53]
U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command Timothy D. Brown Commanding General 1977 Intelligence and security operations[51]
U.S. Army War College Trevor J. Bredenkamp Commandant 1901 Strategic education and research[54]

Field Operating Commands

Army-Level Commands

Army-level commands encompass major operational organizations within the U.S. Army that provide critical sustainment, logistics, and personnel support to enable global force projection and readiness. These commands, often led by major generals, focus on synchronizing resources, managing supply chains, and ensuring personnel lifecycle support across theaters, distinct from tactical corps operations that emphasize direct battlefield maneuver. In 2025, these entities have adapted to heightened demands from multi-domain operations, incorporating advanced technologies for contested logistics environments.[56] The U.S. Army Sustainment Command (ASC), headquartered at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, oversees the integration of Army logistics, including materiel management, distribution, and maintenance, to support worldwide deployments. Major General Eric P. Shirley assumed command on July 10, 2025, bringing expertise from prior roles in theater sustainment to enhance supply chain resilience amid global tensions.[57] ASC’s operations in 2025 emphasized rapid deployment capabilities, aligning with Army-wide efforts to counter peer adversaries through prepositioned stocks and joint logistics partnerships.[58] Theater sustainment commands form the backbone of operational logistics, delivering fuel, ammunition, and transportation to forward forces in specific regions. The 1st Theater Sustainment Command (1st TSC), based at Fort Knox, Kentucky, supports U.S. Central Command operations in the Middle East, focusing on host-nation collaborations for sustained presence. Major General John B. Hinson took command on June 26, 2025, following his promotion to major general earlier that month to fill a vacancy from the previous commander’s reassignment.[59] Similarly, the 8th Theater Sustainment Command (8th TSC), under U.S. Army Pacific at Fort Shafter, Hawaii, provides logistics for Indo-Pacific contingencies, including multinational exercises like Khaan Quest 2025 to bolster regional alliances. Major General Gavin J. Gardner has commanded since July 3, 2024, overseeing expansions in prepositioned equipment to support distributed operations across vast maritime domains.[60][61] The 21st Theater Sustainment Command (21st TSC), located in Sembach, Germany, sustains U.S. Army Europe and Africa missions, managing port operations and medical logistics for NATO commitments. Major General Michael B. Lalor assumed command on July 30, 2025, succeeding Major General Ronald R. Ragin amid retirements that prompted targeted promotions to maintain continuity in European sustainment.[41] Lalor’s leadership has prioritized integration with allied forces, expanding data-driven sustainment for hybrid threats.[62] In personnel management, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), at Fort Knox, Kentucky, handles soldier assignments, promotions, and transitions, ensuring manpower availability for operational needs. Major General Hope C. Rampy, commanding since July 10, 2024, has driven 2025 initiatives to streamline talent management, including digital tools for global personnel tracking to address recruitment and retention challenges. HRC’s role supports broader Army expansions, filling billets vacated by retirements through accelerated major general promotions.[63]

Command Commanding General Assumption Date Key Focus
U.S. Army Sustainment Command Maj. Gen. Eric P. Shirley July 10, 2025 Materiel synchronization for global readiness[57]
1st Theater Sustainment Command Maj. Gen. John B. Hinson June 26, 2025 Middle East logistics partnerships[59]
8th Theater Sustainment Command Maj. Gen. Gavin J. Gardner July 3, 2024 Indo-Pacific prepositioning[60]
21st Theater Sustainment Command Maj. Gen. Michael B. Lalor July 30, 2025 European NATO sustainment[41]
U.S. Army Human Resources Command Maj. Gen. Hope C. Rampy July 10, 2024 Talent management and assignments

Corps and Field Armies

Corps and field armies serve as the U.S. Army’s primary operational headquarters for conducting multi-domain operations at the theater level, commanding divisions and enabling rapid deployment for large-scale combat. Major generals in these formations typically hold key positions such as deputy commanding generals for maneuver or support, or chiefs of staff, focusing on operational planning, sustainment, and integration with joint and coalition forces. These roles are essential for maintaining readiness, with corps participating in exercises like Yudh Abhyas 25 to enhance interoperability with allies.[64] I Corps, headquartered at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, and activated on December 6, 1917, leads U.S. Army Pacific efforts, including rotational deployments to Japan and Korea for Indo-Pacific deterrence. In 2025, I Corps updated its rotation schedules to support large-scale combat training, with the deputy commanding general overseeing joint exercises such as the annual Stryker Leader Summit in Seoul. The position emphasizes maneuver and operations, often involving allied exchange officers, but U.S. major generals contribute to strategic readiness.[65][66] III Corps, based at Fort Cavazos, Texas, and activated on August 21, 1918, functions as the Army’s premier contingency corps for global response, prioritizing multi-domain readiness for peer competition. The chief of staff role coordinates staff functions and exercise participation, including joint operations that test large-scale combat capabilities. As of 2025, III Corps integrated enhanced Pacific rotation elements into its training, with the deputy commanding general for support managing logistics for deployments. Typically, corps like III Corps allocate 2-3 major general billets for these leadership functions, though exchange programs fill some with allied officers such as U.K. Maj. Gen. Andy Cox in the support role since April 2025.[67][68] V Corps, forward-headquartered at Camp Kościuszko, Poland, and activated on July 31, 1918 (reactivated in 2020), supports U.S. European Command through rotational forces and deterrence missions. Major generals in deputy roles facilitate joint exercises and NATO interoperability, with 2025 updates focusing on Arctic and European rotations for large-scale combat. The deputy commanding general for maneuver, often an exchange position (e.g., British Army Maj. Gen. Charles Grist as of August 2025), coordinates these efforts.[69][70] XVIII Airborne Corps, located at Fort Liberty, North Carolina, and activated on January 14, 1942, specializes in airborne and rapid global deployment, serving as the nation’s contingency corps. The deputy commanding general and chief of staff positions drive readiness for airborne operations and joint task force headquarters, including 2025 enhancements to Pacific and global rotations. As of November 2025, the deputy commanding general role is held by Brig. Gen. John P. Cogbill. Corps leadership participated in the 2025 Military Police Symposium to refine multi-domain tactics.[71][72] Eighth Army, a field army headquartered in Camp Humphreys, Republic of Korea, and activated on August 5, 1944, provides command and control for U.S. Forces Korea. Major generals in deputy roles support combined operations with Republic of Korea forces, with 2025 updates emphasizing sustainment for large-scale combat under Combined Forces Command. The deputy commanding general for operations oversees joint exercises like Freedom Shield. As of November 2025, deputy roles are held by brigadier generals such as Brig. Gen. Sean Crockett (operations) and Brig. Gen. William F. Wilkerson (sustainment).[73][74][75]

Corps/Field Army Role Current/Representative Holder (as of November 2025) Location Activation Date
I Corps Deputy Commanding General Brig. Gen. Bernard J. Harrington (U.S.; promoted from 2024 assignment; no U.S. MG) Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA December 6, 1917
III Corps Deputy Commanding General – Maneuver Brig. Gen. Geoff R. Van Epps (U.S.; historical U.S. MG: Thomas M. Feltey, 2023-2024) Fort Cavazos, TX August 21, 1918
III Corps Deputy Commanding General – Support U.K. Maj. Gen. Andy Cox (exchange since April 2025; no U.S. MG) Fort Cavazos, TX August 21, 1918
V Corps Deputy Commanding General – Maneuver British Army Maj. Gen. Charles Grist (exchange since August 2025; no U.S. MG) Fort Knox, KY / Camp Kościuszko, Poland July 31, 1918
XVIII Airborne Corps Deputy Commanding General Brig. Gen. John P. Cogbill (U.S.; no U.S. MG) Fort Liberty, NC January 14, 1942
Eighth Army Deputy Commanding General – Operations Brig. Gen. Sean Crockett (U.S.; no U.S. MG) Camp Humphreys, Republic of Korea August 5, 1944

Division alignments under these corps, such as the 1st Cavalry Division under III Corps, are covered in the Regular Army Divisions section.

Division and Equivalent Commands

Regular Army Divisions

The Regular Army divisions form the core of the United States Army’s active component combat forces, comprising ten permanent divisions structured for multi-domain operations across various terrains and mission sets. These divisions are configured as armored, airborne, air assault, infantry, or Stryker-equipped units, enabling rapid deployment and sustained combat capabilities in support of national defense objectives. As of November 2025, commanding generals of these divisions are major generals, selected through a rigorous promotion process that typically involves prior service as brigade commanders and staff roles at higher echelons, followed by Senate confirmation. Recent handovers in 2025, such as those in the 1st Armored Division and 3rd Infantry Division, reflect ongoing leadership transitions amid Army modernization efforts under the 2024 Force Structure Transformation Initiative, which emphasizes enhanced mobility and lethality without altering division numbers.[76] Division missions vary by type: armored divisions like the 1st Armored Division focus on heavy maneuver warfare with Abrams tanks and Bradley vehicles for high-intensity conflicts; airborne divisions such as the 82nd Airborne Division specialize in forcible entry operations via parachute assault for crisis response; the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) excels in vertical envelopment using helicopters for expeditionary operations; Stryker-equipped elements in divisions like the 2nd Infantry Division provide wheeled mobility for rapid reinforcement in theater, such as the Indo-Pacific; and light infantry divisions like the 10th Mountain Division prioritize mountain and cold-weather warfare. Recent restructurings include the integration of multi-domain task forces within several divisions to incorporate cyber and space capabilities, as piloted in the 1st Cavalry Division during 2025 exercises. These divisions fall under corps oversight, such as III Corps for most CONUS-based units, ensuring alignment with joint force requirements.[77][78][76] The following table lists the current commanding generals (all major generals) of active Regular Army divisions as of November 2025, including bases and command timelines based on recent change-of-command ceremonies. Deputy commanding generals who hold the rank of major general are noted where applicable; most deputies are brigadier generals.

Division Type/Mission Focus Base Commanding General Command Timeline Deputy Commanding General (MG, if applicable) Source
1st Armored Division Armored (heavy maneuver) Fort Bliss, TX Maj. Gen. Curtis D. Taylor Assumed command August 2024; ongoing through 2025 Maj. Gen. Jared D. Bordwell (Support) [79] [77]
1st Cavalry Division Armored Cavalry (mechanized/air assault hybrid) Fort Cavazos, TX Maj. Gen. Thomas M. Feltey Assumed command September 2024; ongoing through 2025 None (deputies are BGs) [80] [81]
1st Infantry Division Infantry (multi-domain) Fort Riley, KS Maj. Gen. Monté L. Rone Assumed command June 2024; ongoing through 2025 None (deputies are BGs) [82] [83]
2nd Infantry Division Stryker/Infantry (theater sustainment, Korea-focused) Camp Humphreys, South Korea Maj. Gen. Charles T. Lombardo Assumed command June 2024; ongoing through 2025 None (deputies are BGs) [84] [85]
3rd Infantry Division Infantry (mechanized/light) Fort Stewart, GA Maj. Gen. John W. Lubas Assumed command July 25, 2025 (handover from Maj. Gen. Christopher R. Norrie) None (deputies are BGs) [86] [87]
4th Infantry Division Infantry (mountain/mechanized) Fort Carson, CO Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Ellis Assumed command June 18, 2025 (handover from Maj. Gen. David Doyle) None (deputies are BGs) [88] [89]
10th Mountain Division Light Infantry (mountain/cold weather) Fort Drum, NY Maj. Gen. Scott M. Naumann Assumed command March 2024; ongoing through 2025 None (deputies are BGs) [90] [78]
25th Infantry Division Light Infantry (Pacific/jungle) Schofield Barracks, HI Maj. Gen. James B. Bartholomees III Assumed command July 28, 2025 (handover from Maj. Gen. Marcus S. Evans) None (deputies are BGs) [91] [92]
82nd Airborne Division Airborne (forcible entry/global response) Fort Liberty, NC Maj. Gen. Brandon Tegtmeier Assumed command August 28, 2025 (handover from Maj. Gen. J. Patrick Work) None (deputies are BGs) [93] [94]
101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) Air Assault (vertical maneuver) Fort Campbell, KY Maj. Gen. David W. Gardner Assumed command May 30, 2025 (handover from Maj. Gen. Brett Sylvia) None (deputies are BGs) [95] [96]

Division-Sized Task Forces and Units

Division-sized task forces and units in the U.S. Army are flexible, mission-specific formations designed to address dynamic operational requirements, often rotational in nature to support theater commanders without relying on permanent standing divisions. These entities, typically led by major generals, enable rapid deployment, security cooperation, and deterrence in regions like Europe and Africa, contrasting with the fixed structures of regular Army divisions by emphasizing adaptability to emerging threats such as those arising from Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.[97][86] A prominent example is Task Force Marne, the current rotational division-equivalent headquarters under Operation Atlantic Resolve in Poland and the Baltic states, assumed on October 29, 2025, from Task Force Iron. Commanded by Maj. Gen. John W. Lubas of the 3rd Infantry Division, its mission focuses on multinational training, deterrence against Russian aggression, and integration with NATO allies through exercises like Defender-Europe 25, involving over 40,000 troops across the region. This task force’s temporary deployment structure allows for nine-month rotations of brigade combat teams from U.S. bases, enhancing forward presence without long-term basing commitments.[98][86][99] In Africa, the U.S. Army Southern European Task Force, Africa (SETAF-AF), serves as a division-equivalent operational headquarters under U.S. Army Europe and Africa, led by Maj. Gen. Andrew C. Gainey. Headquartered in Vicenza, Italy, SETAF-AF executes security cooperation, crisis response, and partner capacity-building across 54 African nations, including leading the annual African Lion exercise in 2025, which involved over 10,000 participants from 50 nations in Tunisia, Ghana, Senegal, and Morocco to improve interoperability and regional stability. While maintaining a core permanent staff, it incorporates rotational elements from Army National Guard and Reserve units for missions like Justified Accord in East Africa, addressing counterterrorism and humanitarian needs.[100][101][102] Post-2022 Ukraine response, the Army established additional ad hoc task forces, such as enhanced rotational deployments to Europe, directly impacting major general assignments by prioritizing experienced leaders for hybrid warfare scenarios. For instance, the creation of Security Assistance Group-Ukraine in 2022, now supporting NATO’s Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine, has drawn on major generals to coordinate training for over 100,000 Ukrainian forces since inception. These formations underscore the Army’s shift toward expeditionary, partner-focused operations in contested environments.[103]

Task Force/Unit Commanding Major General Mission Scope Key 2025 Activity
Task Force Marne (Europe Rotational) John W. Lubas Deterrence and NATO integration in Eastern Europe Assumed command October 29; supports Defender-Europe 25 with 40,000+ troops[98]
SETAF-AF (Africa Focus) Andrew C. Gainey Security cooperation and crisis response across Africa Led African Lion 25, training 10,000+ personnel in four nations[100]

Army National Guard Divisions

The Army National Guard (ARNG) divisions form a critical component of the U.S. Army’s reserve forces, consisting of eight modular infantry divisions headquartered across multiple states and capable of mobilizing up to 15,000 soldiers each for federal or state missions. These major generals, who command ARNG divisions, hold federally recognized ranks and serve in billets that emphasize readiness for rapid deployment, with headquarters typically located at state National Guard facilities such as Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania, for the 28th Infantry Division. Unlike commanders of active duty divisions, ARNG major generals operate under a dual-hatted authority structure: they report to their state’s adjutant general for state active duty (SAD) and Title 32 missions, such as disaster response, while transitioning to Title 10 federal command when mobilized for overseas operations, enabling seamless integration into the Total Army force. ARNG divisions routinely mobilize for domestic emergencies, including flood control, wildfire suppression, and hurricane recovery, as well as combat and stability operations abroad, with recent examples including support for Hurricane Helene recovery efforts involving over 6,300 guardsmen from multiple states in 2024 and ongoing storm response activations in 2025. This dual-role capability distinguishes ARNG units, allowing major generals to lead part-time soldiers in high-intensity training exercises like Warfighter while maintaining state-level responsiveness. Recent promotions from brigadier general to major general have filled these billets, reflecting the Army’s emphasis on experienced ARNG leaders; for instance, Brig. Gen. Martin M. Clay was promoted in August 2025 prior to assuming command of the 35th Infantry Division.[104][105] The following table lists the current major generals commanding ARNG divisions as of November 2025, including their primary state affiliation and assignment details:

Division State(s) Commanding General Headquarters Assignment Date Citation
28th Infantry Division Pennsylvania Maj. Gen. Michael E. Wegscheider Fort Indiantown Gap, PA March 2024 [106] [107]
29th Infantry Division Maryland, Virginia, DC Maj. Gen. Christopher J. Samulski Fort Belvoir, VA August 2025 [108] [109]
34th Infantry Division Minnesota Maj. Gen. Joseph J. Sharkey Arden Hills, MN July 2025 [110] [111]
35th Infantry Division Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska Maj. Gen. Martin M. Clay, Jr. Fort Leavenworth, KS September 2025 [112] [113]
36th Infantry Division Texas Maj. Gen. John B. Bowlin Austin, TX Prior to 2025 (ongoing) [114] [115]
38th Infantry Division Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio Maj. Gen. Joseph Gardner Indianapolis, IN September 2025 [116] [117]
40th Infantry Division California Maj. Gen. William J. Prendergast IV Los Alamitos, CA November 2024 (ongoing) [118] [119]
42nd Infantry Division New York Maj. Gen. Jack A. James Troy, NY November 2024 (ongoing) [120] [121]

These commanders oversee training for certifications like the Army’s Evaluation Program, ensuring division readiness for joint operations under the National Guard Bureau.

YET THEY HAVE NOT FIGURED  TO NOT USE $4 MILLION each cost PATRIOT MISSELES  TO SHOOT DOWN $20,000 drones!!!.

 

CARMEL INDIANA CHOSEN AS THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE!!!

Why Carmel, Indiana, Is the Best Place to Live in 2026-2027

Carmel’s high marks for quality of life helped propel it to No. 1 in the U.S. News Best Places to Live rankings.

U.S. News & World Report
Aerial view of walkable residential neighborhoods in Carmel, Indiana.

Getty Images

Whether its walkability, good schools or access to quality healthcare, Carmel offers a little bit of something for everyone.

Key Takeaways

  • Carmel, Indiana, is the No. 1 Best Place to Live for 2026-2027.
  • Among more than 850 cities analyzed, Carmel ranks in the top 2% for quality of life. Carmel also earned high marks across all other scoring categories, including desirability, job market and value.
  • Residents of Carmel describe this small city as friendly and welcoming, with a walkable downtown and top-tier public schools.

Just about 20 miles north of Indianapolis is Carmel, Indiana, a fast-growing suburb of more than 100,000 residents that manages to retain its small-town charm. After earning the runner-up title last year, Carmel has taken the No. 1 spot in the 2026-2027 U.S. News Best Places to Live rankings.

Carmel is No. 1 thanks to its high scores across all the metrics we consider. Out of the 859 cities we analyzed, Carmel ranks No. 15 for quality of life, No. 40 for job market, No. 90 for desirability and No. 114 for value. Within these categories, scoring factors include quality of education, quality of healthcare, cost of living, climate, crime rates and other factors.

In earning the No. 1 spot, Carmel has shown it has a little bit of something for everyone.

Carrie Holle, a real estate agent and mother of three who has called Carmel home for over 30 years, refers to the city as “our little utopia.” She notes that people move to Carmel from all over the country. “They really are able to make a life for themselves here seamlessly,” she says.

“People are friendly, and it’s clean, and it’s safe, and the schools are wonderful, and the streets are well-kept and maintained,” Holle says.

The Distinctive Appeal of Life in Carmel

Suburban cities in the Midwest aren’t typically known for being pedestrian-friendly, but Carmel is an exception, designed with walkability in mind. Thoughtful civil engineering gives Carmel a vibe all its own.

Take the Monon Trail, for example. Affectionately abbreviated to “the Monon” by Carmelites, this 28.5-mile paved trail functions as an artery that transports pedestrians and bikers through the heart of Carmel.

“It goes all the way through downtown Indianapolis and well north of Carmel, but Carmel’s done a very good job developing our portion of the Monon with beautiful neighborhoods and restaurants and shops,” Holle says.

When you do have to drive, you’re not likely to hit much traffic. Although Carmel is one of the fastest-growing cities in America, getting across town is a breeze thanks to its network of more than 150 roundabouts. The city government even has a page on its website dedicated to roundabouts.

Carmel’s roundabouts don’t just save residents time behind the wheel. According to a report from Indiana University, the infrastructure in Carmel has improved pedestrian conditions, reduced traffic collisions, cut down on emissions and even translated to real fuel savings for drivers.

Of course, when talking about what makes Carmel such a desirable place to live, it’s less about the roundabouts themselves and more about the careful planning they represent. Holle says that in the late 1990s and early 2000s – a time of growth, but also of sprawl in many similarly sized cities – Carmel city officials were already thinking about creating density.

“Our downtown area is vibrant with these mixed-use developments that have created housing, office space, retail, and created activities and entertainment,” she says.

Photos: Carmel, Indiana

The Carmel water tower in Carmel, Ind., on May 14, 2026.

Why Families Are Drawn to This Indiana Suburb

To understand why Carmel has such a high quality of life for its residents, U.S. News analyzed the data on academic standards, access to healthcare and air quality. Unsurprisingly, Carmel excels in all these categories.

In practice, though, perhaps no one has better insights into the quality of life in Carmel than Tim Phares, principal at Carmel High School, who has lived in Carmel for about 25 years. Not only is Phares the school’s top administrator, but he has three daughters currently enrolled at the high school and a son who recently graduated.

“You have everything you need within this community to raise a family,” Phares says. “From an academic setting, from a community setting, from an amenity setting, there really is no greater place in my opinion.”

Carmel High School is ranked as one of U.S. News’ Best High Schools, thanks in part to high scores for college readiness. Many families choose Carmel over other cities in the Indianapolis area specifically to enroll their children in the highly rated Carmel Clay School District, Holle says.

While Carmel’s academic prestige is a primary draw, the city’s appeal extends far beyond the classroom. “There is always something to do as a family,” Phares says.

Residents rave about the Carmel Christkindlmarkt, an authentic German-style Christmas market centrally located in downtown that’s been hailed as one of the best in the country.

Another draw in the heart of the city center is the Palladium, a 1,600-seat performing arts center that’s hosted acts all across the entertainment spectrum – from Yo-Yo Ma to Weird Al Yankovic. The Palladium is built in the style of the Italian Renaissance, and it’s worth a visit if only to admire the architecture.

“It’s drop-dead gorgeous,” Holle says. “They’re very strict on the aesthetics of how the downtown was built, and it has a very European vibe to it.”

All Carmel Has to Offer Comes at a Tremendous Value

By Midwestern standards, Carmel isn’t the cheapest place to live. In fact, Carmel is one of the more sought-after Indianapolis suburbs with a median home cost of $477,625.

Compared with the other 850-plus cities that U.S. News analyzes in the Best Places to Live rankings, however, Carmel comes in at No. 114 for affordability. That puts it in the top 15% for value, which includes cost of living and housing affordability.

Still, there’s no question that the housing market in Carmel is competitive, Holle says. Land is scarce, and the city is “pretty much built out. So because of that, appreciation does well in Carmel, because the demand is always high.”

Considering the educational, safety and entertainment offerings, life in Carmel is a worthwhile investment for those fortunate enough to call it home.

“This place is bigger than any one individual,” Phares says. “We all have a role. We all have a part in it.”

 

XI JUST THREW PUTIN UNDER TE BUS!!!OPINION…

Newsweek
Xi Warns Trump That US And China ‘Should Be Partners, Not Rivals’
China and the United States both stand to gain from

A major outcome of President Donald Trump’s Beijing summit this week with Chinese President Xi Jinping had little to do with semiconductors or rare earths. According to the White House readout, Xi Jinping made clear China’s opposition to any Iranian effort to militarize the Strait of Hormuz or charge a toll on its use. Beijing’s own readout said nothing about Iran or the strait—and pointedly did not dispute the American account. That tacit acceptance exposed the so-called “axis” of China, Russia and Iran for what it actually is: a partnership of convenience that fractures the moment one partner’s interests get in the way.

The natural question is, what comes next? If Beijing can be pried loose from Tehran, can it be pried loose from Moscow, too? The answer requires understanding something Western policymakers have been slow to internalize: Russia already fears China far more than it lets on.

Since the end of World War II—with a brief, hopeful interlude after the Soviet collapse—Moscow has framed the West as its principal adversary. NATO enlargement, European Union accession, color revolutions and “Western values” have dominated Kremlin discourse. But this fixation avoids the real long-term threat to Russian power, which is, and always has been, to the south.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and China’s President Xi Jinping mark the 80th anniversary of victory over Japan and the end of World War II on September 3, 2025, in Tiananmen Square, Beijing, China.

That threat has accelerated dramatically since the invasion of Ukraine. As Moscow poured men and capital into keeping Kyiv in its orbit, Beijing quietly absorbed the rest of the post-Soviet space into its own. In 2023, China surpassed Russia as Central Asia’s largest trading partner. By 2025, China-Central Asia trade had hit a record $106 billion—more than double Moscow’s regional turnover. Chinese capital now finances Uzbek car factories, Kazakh logistics hubs and Tajik infrastructure that Beijing often happens to hold the debt on.

The South Caucasus tells the same story. In the last few years, China has signed strategic partnerships with Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan, while Chinese railway and infrastructure firms have become increasingly involved in Middle Corridor logistics. Beijing has prioritized the Middle Corridor, which runs from western China through Central Asia, across the Caspian, and through the South Caucasus into Turkey and Europe. Cargo volume along that route jumped roughly 70 percent in 2024 alone. Every kilometer of it bypasses Russia and Iran.

This is the part that should focus minds in Washington. The Middle Corridor is the rare geography where Chinese economic logic and American strategic logic point the same way—both want a trade route to Europe that bypasses Russia and Iran. The Trump administration’s TRIPP corridor and Beijing’s Trans-Caspian investments sit on the same map.

Inside Russia itself, the dependency is now structural. Chinese goods account for around 40 percent of Russian imports, up from roughly 20 percent before the war. China supplies between 60 and 90 percent of goods in key sectors that keep Russia’s sanctioned war economy running, such as machinery, vehicles, telecommunications and dual-use technology. Beijing has become Moscow’s largest creditor and largest energy customer—relationships that have repeatedly forced Russia to accept steep discounts on its oil and gas. China is Russia’s number one trading partner. Russia accounts for a bit more than three percent of China’s trade. The asymmetry is not subtle.

Moscow understands the danger. It simply refuses to say so out loud. Leaked Russian military files reviewed by the Financial Times in 2024—war-game scenarios from 2008 to 2014, still regarded by Western analysts as reflective of current doctrine—show the general staff rehearsing tactical nuclear strikes against China in the event of a southern invasion. One scenario imagines Beijing paying protesters to clash with police in the Russian Far East, deploying saboteurs against Russian infrastructure, and then massing the People’s Liberation Army on the border under the pretext of “genocide.” Russian planners have war-gamed nuclear strikes on Chinese cities. They simply prefer the West not know they think this way.

This is not a new pattern. Americans today have largely forgotten that the “red scare” of the 1950s assumed an unshakable Sino-Soviet bloc, codified in the 1950 friendship treaty between Stalin and Mao. Within a decade, the partnership had curdled—into ideological recrimination, border clashes over Xinjiang, and Mao’s open contempt for Khrushchev’s “weakness.” By 1972, Nixon and Kissinger had walked through the opening and reshaped the Cold War. The two communist giants discovered, as great powers always do, that proximity breeds rivalry.

The roles today are reversed. Russia is now the belligerent, declining junior partner; China is the cautious, ascendant one that prefers stability and trade flows over adventurism. That is precisely why the Hormuz line landed where it did. Iran’s regional belligerence had already collapsed it into near-total dependence on Beijing—China was, until Operation Epic Fury, the destination for roughly 90 percent of Iranian oil exports. When Tehran’s mining and tolling of the strait began to bite into Chinese energy security, Xi’s calculation was straightforward: a junior partner is not worth a tanker route. According to Trump, Xi went further, pledging that Beijing would not supply Iran with military equipment—a “big statement,” in the president’s words, and a devastating one for Tehran.

Beijing’s Eurasian strategy is not alliance-building but asymmetric dependence—leverage to use partners when convenient and to coerce them when necessary. Iran was the purest version of the model: useful while Tehran’s belligerence pressured Western adversaries, expendable the moment it pressured Chinese supply chains. Russia is on the same road, only larger and slower.

The Kremlin’s value to Beijing has always been instrumental: cheap energy, a useful distraction for Washington and a buffer to the north. The moment Russian behavior begins to threaten Chinese economic stability—through wrecked European trade routes, the secondary sanctions risk to Chinese banks, or a broader confrontation that drags in Beijing’s customers in the Gulf—China will recalibrate, just as it did with Tehran.

For Washington, the implication is not a grand reset with Moscow. Russia remains a hostile, revisionist power, and pretending otherwise would be strategic malpractice. But the Hormuz moment is a reminder that the “axis” is held together by Western pressure as much as by genuine alignment. Tighten the right screws—on sanctioned tech, on the Middle Corridor, on Gulf energy architecture—and the seams begin to show.

Joseph Epstein is director of the Turan Research Center and senior fellow at the Yorktown Institute.

The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.

Related Articles

Start your unlimited Newsweek trial