Hegseth: Have Plans to Invade Greenland06/13 06:29

   

   WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to acknowledge 
that the Pentagon has developed plans to take over Greenland and Panama by 
force if necessary but refused to answer repeated questions at a hotly 
combative congressional hearing Thursday about his use of Signal chats to 
discuss military operations.

   Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee repeatedly got into 
heated exchanges with Hegseth, with some of the toughest lines of questioning 
coming from military veterans as many demanded yes or no answers and he tried 
to avoid direct responses about his actions as Pentagon chief.

   In one back-and-forth, Hegseth did provide an eyebrow-raising answer. Rep. 
Adam Smith, D-Wash., asked whether the Pentagon has developed plans to take 
Greenland or Panama by force if necessary.

   "Our job at the Defense Department is to have plans for any contingency," 
Hegseth said several times.

   It is not unusual for the Pentagon to draw up contingency plans for 
conflicts that have not arisen, but his handling of the questions prompted a 
Republican lawmaker to step in a few minutes later.

   "It is not your testimony today that there are plans at the Pentagon for 
taking by force or invading Greenland, correct?" said Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio.

   As Hegseth started to repeat his answer about contingency plans, Turner 
added emphatically, "I sure as hell hope that is not your testimony."

   "We look forward to working with Greenland to ensure that it is secured from 
any potential threats," Hegseth responded.

   Time and again, lawmakers pressed Hegseth to answer questions he has avoided 
for months, including during the two previous days of hearings on Capitol Hill. 
And frustration boiled over.

   "You're an embarrassment to this country. You're unfit to lead," Rep. Salud 
Carbajal snapped, the California Democrat's voice rising. "You should just get 
the hell out."

   GOP lawmakers on several occasions apologized to Hegseth for the Democrats' 
sharp remarks, saying he should not be subject to such "flagrant disrespect." 
Hegseth said he was "happy to take the arrows" to make tough calls and do 
what's best.

   Questions emerge on Signal chats and if details Hegseth shared were 
classified

   Hegseth's use of two Signal chats to discuss details of the U.S. plans to 
strike Houthi rebels in Yemen with other U.S. leaders as well as members of his 
family prompted dizzying exchanges with lawmakers.

   Hegseth was pressed multiple times over whether or not he shared classified 
information and if he should face accountability if he did.

   Hegseth argued that the classification markings of any information about 
those military operations could not be discussed with lawmakers.

   That became a quick trap, as Hegseth has asserted that nothing he posted -- 
on strike times and munitions dropped in March -- was classified. His 
questioner, Rep. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat and Marine veteran, 
jumped on the disparity.

   "You can very well disclose whether or not it was classified," Moulton said.

   "What's not classified is that it was an incredible, successful mission," 
Hegseth responded.

   A Pentagon watchdog report on his Signal use is expected soon.

   Moulton asked Hegseth whether he would hold himself accountable if the 
inspector general finds that he placed classified information on Signal, a 
commercially available app.

   Hegseth would not directly say, only noting that he serves "at the pleasure 
of the president."

   He was asked if he would apologize to the mother of a pilot flying the 
strike mission for jeopardizing the operation and putting her son's life at 
risk. Hegseth said, "I don't apologize for success."

   Trump's speech at Fort Bragg raises Democratic concerns about politics in 
the military

   Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who appeared along 
Hegseth, was questioned about Trump's speech at Fort Bragg this week and 
whether the military was becoming politicized.

   The Defense Department has a doctrine that prohibits troops from 
participating in political activity while in uniform. Members of the 82nd 
Airborne Division were directed to stand behind Trump at Fort Bragg, and they 
booed and cheered during his incendiary remarks, including condemnation of his 
predecessor, Joe Biden.

   There also was a pop-up MAGA merchandise stand selling souvenirs to troops 
in uniform.

   Caine repeatedly said U.S. service members must be apolitical but that he 
was unaware of anything that happened at Fort Bragg.

   Hegseth is pressed about policies on women in uniform and transgender troops

   Hegseth got into a sharp debate about whether women and transgender service 
members should serve in the military or combat jobs.

   He said he has worked to remove diversity programs and political correctness 
from the military. He said he has not politicized the military but simply wants 
the most capable troops.

   Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., demanded to know if Hegseth believes that both 
men and women can pull a trigger, cause death, operate a drone or launch a 
missile.

   "It depends on the context," Hegseth said, adding that "women carry 
equipment differently, a 155 round differently, a rucksack differently."

   Hegseth, who has previously said women "straight up" should not serve in 
combat, asserted that women have joined the military in record numbers under 
the Trump administration. He said the military "standards should be high and 
equal."

   He also was asked about three female service members -- now being forced out 
as part of the Pentagon's move to ban transgender troops.

   Hegseth agreed that their accomplishments -- which Rep. Sara Jacobs, 
D-Calif., read out -- were to be celebrated, until he learned they were 
transgender.

   Republican lawmakers jumped to his defense, criticizing any Pentagon 
spending on gender transition surgery.

   Democrats ask about plans for action against Greenland and Panama

   President Donald Trump has said multiple times that he wants to take control 
of Greenland, a strategic, mineral-rich island and long a U.S. ally. Those 
remarks have been met with flat rejections from the leaders of Greenland, an 
autonomous territory that is part of Denmark.

   "Greenland is not for sale," Jacob Isbosethsen, Greenland's representative 
to the U.S, said Thursday at a forum in Washington sponsored by the Arctic 
Institute.

   In an effort not to show the Pentagon's hand on its routine effort to have 
plans for everything, Hegseth danced around the direct question from Smith, 
leading to the confusion.

   "Speaking on behalf of the American people, I don't think the American 
people voted for President Trump because they were hoping we would invade 
Greenland," Smith said.