USNS Harvey Milk is renamed after a WWII sailor in the latest Pentagon diversity purge
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced Friday that the USNS Harvey Milk will be renamed after a World War II sailor who received the Medal of Honor, stripping the ship of the name of a slain gay rights activist who served during the Korean War.
In a video posted to social media, Hegseth said he was 'taking the politics out of ship naming.'
The ship's new name will honor Navy Chief Petty Officer Oscar V. Peterson, who was awarded the highest military decoration posthumously for his actions during the 1942 Battle of the Coral Sea in the Pacific.
The decision is the latest move by Hegseth to wipe away names of ships and military bases that were given by President Joe Biden's Democratic administration, which in many cases chose to honor service members who were women, minorities, from the LBGTQ community and more.
It follows earlier actions by Hegseth and President Donald Trump, a Republican, to purge all programs, policies, books and social media mentions of references to diversity, equity and inclusion in the military and elsewhere.
Hegseth's announcement comes during Pride Month — the same timing as the Pentagon's campaign to force transgender troops out of the U.S. military.
'We're not renaming the ship to anything political. This is not about political activists,' said Hegseth, who earlier this month ordered Navy Secretary John Phelan to put together a small team to rename the USNS Harvey Milk replenishment oiler.
He said Peterson's 'spirit of self-sacrifice and concern for his crewmates was in keeping with the finest traditions of the Navy.'
When Hegseth announced the decision to rename the ship, officials defended it as an effort to align with Trump and Hegseth's objectives to 're-establish the warrior culture.'
Peterson served on the USS Neosho, which also was an oiler. The ship was damaged during the Battle of the Coral Sea, and even though Peterson was injured, he managed to close the bulkhead stop valves to keep the ship operational. He died of his wounds.
The Navy in 1943 named an escort ship after Peterson. The USS Peterson served for more than two decades and was decommissioned in June 1965.
The USNS Harvey Milk was named in 2016 by then-Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who said at the time that the John Lewis-class of oilers would be named after leaders who fought for civil and human rights.
Harvey Milk, who was portrayed by Sean Penn in an Oscar-winning 2008 movie, served for four years in the Navy before he was forced out for being gay. He later became one of the first openly gay candidates elected to public office, in San Francisco. He was assassinated in 1978 by a disgruntled former city supervisor.
Baldor writes for the Associated Press.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Satellite images appear to show excavators and bulldozers at work at Iran's bombed-out nuclear site
New satellite images appear to show Iran starting excavations at one of its nuclear sites hit by US bombs. In the images, Iran looks to be filling craters at Fordow and digging out access roads. Fordow was one of three facilities targeted during the US strikes on Iran's nuclear program last weekend. New satellite images show construction equipment at Fordow, one of Iran's bombed-out nuclear sites. Efforts appear to be underway to repair damage and dig out new access paths. In the images, which were captured on Friday by the US commercial satellite imaging company Maxar Technologies and obtained by Business Insider, new activity was documented near the tunnel entrances, as well as the points where heavy US bombs struck Fordow over the weekend. One image captured excavators and bulldozers apparently moving dirt near craters and holes on the northern mountain ridge at Fordow. The main strike points for the bombs, the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bunker-busters, per the Pentagon, were exhaust shafts that allowed the weapons to penetrate deep into the underground complex. Other images capture what looks like construction equipment digging new access roads to the facility, as well as engaging in efforts to repair damage on the main access road. Iran may be attempting to restore access to the underground site in order to assess the condition of it and its equipment, though that's not explicitly clear. A Royal United Services Institute report from March of this year noted that if there wasn't a long-term strike campaign that prevented Iran from doing so, "efforts to dig down to the facilities to re-establish access and supplies would likely begin almost immediately" after a strike on its nuclear program. With the recent ceasefire, US and Israeli efforts to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities have ended. President Donald Trump has said the strikes "completely obliterated" the facilities, and Israel has determined that the strikes set Iran's program back years. Fordow was one of three nuclear sites targeted by the US in the strikes last weekend aimed at destroying Iran's nuclear program. The US also struck Natanz and Isfahan, the first with air-dropped bombs like Fordow and the second with sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles. The full damage to these sites and how degrading the strikes were to Iran's overall program, stockpiles of enriched uranium, and equipment are unclear. The extent of the damage to the program is still being assessed. RUSI experts previously speculated that a crippling strike on the Fordow fuel enrichment plant "would likely require multiple impacts at the same aiming point to have a good chance of penetrating the facility." At a Pentagon press briefing Thursday, Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shared that during the "Operation Midnight Hammer" strikes, MOP bunker-buster bombs were dropped one after another down exhaust shafts. The general also shared that Defense Threat Reduction Agency personnel spent roughly 15 years studying Fordow and working on how best to destroy Iran's nuclear program. US President Donald Trump has said Iran will never be able to rebuild the facilities. That is unclear. Other US and Israeli officials, as well as nuclear arms experts, have said the strikes set Iran's ambitions back by a few months to years, but this is not the same as determining whether Iran can still build nuclear weapons. It's difficult to bomb a country's knowledge out of existence, and there have been assessments that Iran may now be more eager to develop a nuclear weapon than before. The US strikes came after Israel launched a new campaign earlier this month intended to degrade Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran argues is for civilian use. The US had been seeking to reach a nuclear deal with Iran through negotiation; however, it opted for an alternative approach this past weekend, hitting Iran instead and then calling for peace. In retaliation for the US strikes, Iran fired ballistic missiles at a large US air base in Qatar this week. The US said none of Iran's missiles hit the base. US leadership has said it had advanced notice about the strikes. A ceasefire has since gone into effect, stopping the exchanges of fire for the time being.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Republicans echo Trump's absurd claims justifying Iran bombing
'Peace through strength.' It's one of those deliberately vague phrases that sounds like both a euphemism and a paradox, repeated so many times that it's practically lost all meaning. President Donald Trump insists that his bombing of Iran is a perfect example of this so-called strategy, despite the fact that it stands in stark contrast to the anti-interventionist image he cultivated on the campaign trail, and to the 'peacemaker and unifier' he promised to be. Republicans are happy to defend him. The most absurd of the defenses came Monday when Rep. Pat Harrigan, who represents North Carolina's 10th congressional district, appeared on Fox News to discuss the strikes. 'We're trying to lower the temperature of global conflict while simultaneously kind of raising it here in order to lower it,' Harrigan, who is a former Army Special Forces officer, said. What? When you're trying to cool down your house, do you turn up the heat before you blast the AC? When your friends are fighting, do you intentionally inflame the situation before trying to diffuse it? The answer to that, of course, is no. So it stands to reason that raising the 'temperature of global conflict' may not be the best strategy if the goal is actually to lower it. In theory, 'peace through strength' is meant to be a strategy of deterrence. The idea is that if you build up a strong enough military that's capable of delivering a swift and devastating retaliatory response, it discourages other countries from messing with you. Whether or not it's actually a good strategy, however, depends on how you define strength. If strength means investing more into the military, that's one thing. But if you define it as deliberately escalatory and violent actions, such as bombing your enemy or floating the idea of regime change on social media, that doesn't sound like a means of achieving peace. It sounds like diving into a conflict instead of trying to avoid one, especially when there was no imminent threat. Trump and his fellow Republicans have touted the strikes as a victory because of what they supposedly 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. That contradicts early Pentagon assessments that reportedly found that the strikes likely only set the program back by months, so the actual success is yet to be determined. Trump also helped negotiate a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which he claims is 'unlimited' and will 'go forever.' A Georgia congressman has even nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Another example of Republican word salad: Vice President J.D. Vance claimed in a recent interview that 'we're not at war with Iran — we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' That's some awfully crafty language that sounds like something straight out of '1984.' 'Peace through strength' can too easily shift into the Orwellian paradox of 'peace through war.' Rather than lauding Trump's decision, Republicans should take a more cautious approach. They should be troubled that the strikes occurred without consulting Congress and therefore may not have even been legal. They should be skeptical of Trump's claims that Iran is actively building a nuclear weapon when his own intelligence director testified that it is not. And they should be concerned about the fact that the attack may now incentivize Iran to actually develop such a weapon and make peaceful negotiation all the more difficult. Vance acknowledged the concerns of starting another war in the Middle East, but insists it's nothing to worry about with Trump. 'I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents and now we actually have a president who actually knows how to accomplish America's national security objectives,' Vance told ABC News. But there's a reason why previous presidents never made the choice that Trump did, and Trump's refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of failure is what makes his behavior so reckless. In attacking Iran, Trump took an extraordinary gamble with extraordinary risks. To cheer it on without expressing even the slightest reservation will only embolden him. Cheering, it seems, has become reflexive for Republicans who want to stay on the president's good side. We can't bomb our way to peace, and just because we were lucky enough to avoid disaster this time doesn't mean we always will.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US Air Force to retire all A-10s, cancel E-7 under 2026 spending plan
The Air Force wants to retire its final 162 A-10 Warthog attack jets in fiscal 2026, as part of a plan to divest 340 total aircraft. The Pentagon also plans to cancel the E-7 Wedgetail program over what an official said were 'significant delays' and cost increases. The service released its list of planned aircraft retirements as the Pentagon released its belated 2026 budget plan, which calls for a $211 billion discretionary budget for the Department of the Air Force. That includes a $184.9 billion discretionary budget for the U.S. Air Force itself, and a $26.1 billion discretionary budget for the Space Force. The Pentagon also wants to add another $38.6 billion in 'mandatory' spending as part of the budget reconciliation bill, which would include $24.7 billion for the Air Force and $13.8 billion for the Space Force. If that passes, the department would receive $249.5 billion in total funding, which would be a 17.2% increase over enacted spending in 2025. But if the reconciliation bill does not pass, and the administration's request is enacted unchanged, the Space Force would see an 8.7% cut in spending from 2025, while the Air Force's spending would be virtually flat from the $184.1 billion enacted in 2025. If Congress grants the Air Force all of its requested retirements, it would be the biggest aircraft retirement in years. The service said earlier this year that, in response to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's order to cut and reallocate about 8% of defense spending, it planned to accelerate its plans to retire old and outdated aircraft. The plan to completely shutter the A-10 program would be a dramatic acceleration of the service's previous timeline, which would have retired all Warthogs by the end of this decade. And while lawmakers have in recent years acquiesced to Air Force requests to retire some Warthogs — after years of bitter disagreements between the service and Capitol Hill over the future utility of the jet — it remains far from clear whether Congress has the appetite to mothball all of the attack jets. In addition to the A-10s, the Air Force wants to retire 62 F-16Cs and Ds, 21 F-15Es, 13 F-15Cs and Ds, 14 C-130H Hercules cargo planes, and 3 EC-130H Compass Call electronic warfare planes. The service's retirement list also includes 14 KC-135 Stratotankers, 11 HH-60G combat rescue helicopters, 35 T-1 Texan trainers, 4 UH-1N helicopters and a B-1 Lancer. But the proposed retirement list does not include Block 20 F-22A Raptors, roughly 32 of which the Air Force has tried to retire in recent years over concerns that they are not combat-capable. Congress has repeatedly blocked those efforts. In a June 26 briefing with reporters, an Air Force official said the cost of an E-7 airborne battle management aircraft had grown from $588 million to $724 million, helping prompt its cancellation. The official said the department had concerns over whether it would survive in a contested environment. Instead, the Pentagon is looking for ways to accomplish the mission that would have been done by the Wedgetail with space-based assets, and adding more Northrop E-2D Hawkeye aircraft. This would be a major shift for the Air Force, which is retiring its aging E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control, or AWACS, aircraft and has for years seen the E-7 as the best successor. The budget would also call for $10.3 billion in spending for the B-21 Raider, the Northrop Grumman-made stealth bomber that will be capable of carrying nuclear weapons, and $4.2 billion for the LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile, which will replace the aging Minuteman III. Northrop is also building a Sentinel. Procurement funding for the B-21 would grow from $1.9 billion in 2025 to $2.6 billion in 2026, plus another $2.1 billion in reconciliation spending. If all spending is enacted by Congress, that would more than double the procurement budget for the Raider. The budget calls for $3.1 billion to keep procuring the F-15EX Eagle II, which the Air Force had previously considered winding down after 2025. The Pentagon next year wants to buy 21 of the Boeing-made jets, which are an updated version of the fourth-generation F-15E, up from 18 in 2025. The military plans to sharply cut its purchase of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to 47 across the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps in 2026. That would be down from 74 in 2025. For the Air Force, the F-35A procurement would be cut nearly in half, from 44 tails in 2025 to 24 next year. Air Force spending on the Lockheed Martin-made jet would drop from $4.5 billion this year to $3.6 billion in 2026. This would mean the Air Force would get 45 new fighters in 2026, which is below the benchmark of 72 annual fighter procurements the service says is necessary to modernize its fleet. The Pentagon said money that would have been spent on procuring more F-35s will instead go to sustainment of the jets, and ensuring it has a strong enough supply base to support all the needed operations and maintenance. The Pentagon also wants to dedicate money to ensuring the jets' Block 4 upgrades will stay on track. The Air Force's budget also includes $807 million in funding for its drone wingmen program, called Collaborative Combat Aircraft, which it hopes will accelerate development of platforms and autonomy. The service is also requesting a $73.2 billion discretionary budget and a $4.5 billion mandatory — or reconciliation bill — budget for operations and maintenance, $44.3 billion in discretionary spending and about $200 million in mandatory spending for personnel. The research development, test and evaluation budget would total $46.4 billion, including $36.2 billion in discretionary spending and $10.2 billion in mandatory spending. The F-47 fighter, also known as Next Generation Air Dominance, would see its R&D budget increase from $2.4 billion in 2025 to nearly $2.6 billion in 2026. If another $900 million in spending requested as part of the reconciliation bill passes, that would bring the Boeing-made F-47's budget to almost $3.5 billion. The service's total procurement budget request would reach $36.2 billion, or $26.5 billion in discretionary spending and $9.7 billion in reconciliation bill spending. With reconciliation spending included, the Air Force's procurement budget would include $24.8 billion for aircraft, $6.1 billion for missiles and $784 million for ammunition. The Air Force wants to buy 14 Boeing-made T-7A Red Hawk trainer aircraft for $362 million in 2026. But there would be no new funding for the E-7 airborne battle management aircraft, also made by Boeing, amid a disagreement between the service and top Pentagon leadership over whether space-based target tracking would be better than an airborne platform. The proposed budget would restore $387 million in funding for Lockheed's hypersonic AGM-183A Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon. This could resurrect a program that once seemed doomed after several failed tests in recent years. Procurement spending on the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP — which was used for the first time last weekend to strike multiple Iranian nuclear sites — would be slightly lower in 2026. The Air Force has nearly $8.6 million budgeted for the MOP in 2025, which would drop to $6.8 million in 2026.
