Guest Column: Mackubin Owens, “Tim Walz, Blue Falcon”

Guest Column: Mackubin Owens, “Tim Walz, Blue Falcon”

by Steven Hayward in 2024 Election, Tim Walz

Our friend Mackubin T. Owens, retired professor from the Naval War College and several other things—included multiple decorations for his service as Marine in Vietnam—sends along additional reflections on Tim Walz’s military service exclusively to Power Line:

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s defenders are crying foul over claims by his opponents that he chose to retire as the senior non-commissioned officer (NCO) of his National Guard unit just when it had been alerted that it would likely be mobilized for a deployment to Iraq. The defense of Walz takes two forms. First, that he retired before the unit was alerted and second, HOW DARE YOU QUESTION THE PATRIOTISM OF THIS PATRIOT!

Regarding the first, it is true that his unit’s alert order was issued two months after Walz’s retirement but according to a press release from Walz’s campaign office, in March 2005, the National Guard had issued a warning order announcing a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard.  Walz had officially filed the paperwork to run for Congress with the Federal Election Commission on Feb. 10, 2005. Walz retired on May 16, 2005. Having received the alert order in May of 2005, Walz’s unit, 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery was mobilized in July in preparation for a deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The battalion trained at Camp Shelby, Mississippi and subsequently deployed to Iraq as a motorized security task force.

It is clear from Walz’s own May 2005 press release that he was aware of the pending mobilization, writing “I do not yet know if my artillery unit will be part of this mobilization and I am unable to comment further on the specifics of the deployment….As Command Sergeant Major I have a responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on. I am dedicated to serving my country to the best of my ability, whether that is in Washington DC or Iraq,”

It is the timing of Walz’s decision to retire on the eve of his unit’s pending deployment to Iraq that created understandable resentment on the part of other members of the unit. For instance, in a letter posted to Facebook in 2018 when Walz first ran for governor, retired Command Sergeants Major Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr claimed that Walz retired from the National Guard after learning that his battalion would be deployed to Iraq, despite allegedly assuring his fellow troops he would join them. As Behrends and Herr wrote: “On May 16th, 2005, [Walz] quit, betraying his country, leaving the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion and its Soldiers hanging; without its senior Non-Commissioned Officer, as the battalion prepared for war.”

Why does it matter? The fact is that by retiring when he did, Walz violated the trust of his soldiers, and trust is a critical component of the military “ethos” that underpins unit cohesion and thereby military effectiveness. This ethos, which has served the Republic well, depends on mutual trust, both among soldiers and between superiors and subordinates. Anyone who has served in the military, officer or enlisted, knows that the backbone of any unit is the NCO. For an NCO, especially the unit’s senior NCO to abandon his troops as they are preparing for a combat deployment seems to me to be a violation of trust. Some have accused Walz of “cowardice” and “treason” which is nonsense. But the fact is that by placing his personal interest above loyalty to his soldiers, he revealed a serious character flaw.

Regarding the second, I remember this defense well from two decades ago when I addressed the stench of John Kerry’s hypocrisy during his presidential campaign in 2004. You may remember that Kerry “reported for duty,” proudly touting his service in Vietnam, while having previously used a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April of 1971 to essentially denounce Vietnam veterans as war criminals.

During the 2004 campaign, Kerry tried to intimidate those who criticized his disgraceful 1971 testimony: any criticism of him was an attack on all veterans.  That is what Walz and his people are doing today: treating any criticism of his behavior at the end of his time in the National Guard as criticism of his honorable service and therefore of veterans in general. That is certainly not true in my case. I have no issue with the bulk of Walz’s service. My criticism is limited to his decision to place his interests above his duty to the men he commanded as the senior NCO of his unit, to the detriment of morale, unit cohesion, military effectiveness, loyalty, and honor.  In the Marine Corps, we call one who behaves in this manner a “blue falcon.” You can look it up.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/08/guest-column-mackubin-owens-wim-walz-blue-falcon.php