MG (R) Walt Huffman: “Excessive focus on physical fitness to the exclusion of other ‘warrior’ qualities is overly simplistic”

Our guest post today is from my former boss at U.S. Central Command, MG Walt Huffman, USA (Ret.), one of the greatest officers with whom I had the honor to serve. 

After Secretary’s Hegseth’s address to senior military leaders on September 30th, I asked MG Huffman about his reaction. With his permission, I’ll share his thoughts further below in this post. But first, here’s some current and historical context…

The Secretary’s pronouncements

During his speech Secretary Hegseth raged against, among other things, what he called “fat or unfit” troops.  He said: “Frankly, it’s tiring to look out at combat formations, or really any formation, and see fat troops.” 

Hegseth told the assembled officers and senior enlisted personnel that at his direction “each service will ensure that every requirement for every combat MOS, for every designated combat arms position returns to the highest male standard only.” 

Moreover, he also said that “every member of the joint force at every rank is [now] required to take a PT [physical training] test twice a year, as well as meet height and weight requirements twice a year every year of service.”

He further decreed that “every warrior across our joint force is required to do PT every duty day.”  (Though it isn’t clear what will be sacrificed to accomplish the daily “PT”, Secretary Hegseth has “ordered a cutback on mandatory cybersecurity training.“  Additionally, on his watch, the Army made law of war training for combat troops and others “optional.” )

The Nelson example

Of course, physical fitness is a very important aspect of military service, but does history show us that, as General Huffman warns below, excessive “focus on physical fitness to the exclusion of other ‘warrior’ qualities is overly simplistic”?

Here’s an example:  One of the most renowned combat commanders of all time, Vice-Admiral Horatio Lord Nelson, the victor at the Battle of Trafalgar, the pivotal conflict that ended Napoleon’s hopes of invading England, could never have met the “highest male standards” Hegseth is insisting upon.

As historian Ben Johnson points out, Nelson was a “small sickly baby” who never consistently enjoyed good health.  Johnson says:

Sent to sea aged 12, he soon found that although he loved the ships and the sea, he would suffer from terrible seasickness all his life.

Nelson was a small man, just 5 ft 4 in tall, of slight build and with a weak constitution. He was frequently very ill with recurrent bouts of malaria and dysentery, relics of his time in the tropics, Madras, Calcutta and Ceylon.

Johnson adds:

From 1793 until his death at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805 he was involved in battle after battle. He suffered serious injury during these years, losing the sight in his right eye at the Battle of Calvi in Corsica and his right arm at Santa Cruz in Tenerife.

Another expert reports:

Nelson was so damaged by a life of naval service it has been calculated that he would have received a total degree of disablement at 140% if assessed for war pension today: his right eye was damaged by flying earth at siege of Corsica in 1794; he developed a ‘fist-sized’ hernia when hit by flying timber at the battle of St Vincent in 1797; his arm was amputated after being hit by a musket ball at Tenerife, also in 1797; his forehead head was struck so hard, and cut so badly by flying debris at the battle of the Nile in 1798 that he thought he was gong to die. And then, at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805 he was shot by a French marksman, the ball breaking his spine and puncturing a lung.

Something to think about?

In Britain, Nelson is a national hero for his legendary victories.  If subjected to today’s U.S. military fitness standards, Nelson would have been long gone before his triumph at Trafalgar.

General Huffman’s observations regarding the Secretary’s comments on physical fitness

Now, here are General Huffman’s reflections on some impactful military examples from his wartime service:

I served 33 years in the Army starting as a private and retiring as a Major General – including service in two wars – Vietnam and Desert Storm. In my experience, [the Secretary’s] focus on physical fitness to the exclusion of other “warrior” qualities is overly simplistic. Three examples:

Example 1: When I was an artillery lieutenant in Vietnam, my Chief of Firing Battery (chief of smoke as they are called) was Sergeant First Class (SFC) Johnson.  He was a Black man, but he made clear to all parties that Army Green was the only color he could see.  

A veteran of both the Korean and Vietnam wars, he knew everything there was to know about Field Artillery and  he tried hard to share his hard-earned expertise with the rest of us.  

He could pick up a 98-pound artillery round with one hand, and he was an unquestioned and respected leader of a combat unit.  Not a gymnasium “show pony,” but a great soldier with the record to prove it. 

But in [the Secretary’s] view, he should be put out of the Army because he was a big man – not sloppy fat, but overweight by [the Secretary’s] standard.

He taught me how to be an artilleryman, and how to be an Army officer – both of which served me well during my time as an artillery Battery Commander in Vietnam.

Example 2:  During Desert Storm I was the senior Judge Advocate for VII Corps. While in the wastes of the Saudi desert, I was also a perimeter security sector commander for our headquarters location.  

One dark night, when our intelligence said an attack on our location was imminent, I asked for volunteers for what was expected to be an extremely dangerous mission, and the first hand that went up was a woman’s- Captain Denise Lind.

Thankfully, we all survived that night and that war, but the obvious lesson is: courage is not measured by weight lifting and pushups.

Example 3:  The VII Corps Commander with whom I served during Desert Storm was Lieutenant General Fred Franks.

He had lost one leg below the knee in Vietnam, and he operated with two prosthesis so that when sand got in one he simply replaced it and kept moving.

He both devised and expertly executed the “left hook” that surprised and defeated the Iraqi forces, winning that war in 100 hours with minimal US casualties.

Aren’t we fortunate that General Franks was not cashiered as a young officer following his wounds in Vietnam. He probably could not run as far or as fast as proposed “combat physical tests” require, but he was the best combat leader I have ever known.

Onward, Ever Upward, Walt Huffman

You decide

The questions today are these: in the age of increasingly sophisticated drones, cyber warfare, artificial intelligence-driven warfighting, and the ready potential for space warfare, is “combat” taking on a new meaning?  Are there other qualities beyond physical fitness that are as–or more–important in 21st century warfighting? 

Is America at risk of scaring off those who have the very combat skills we most need–today’s “Nelsons”–simply because they cannot meet “the highest male standard”?  Don’t we need the courage, dedication, and resilience demonstrated by SFC Johnson, Cpt Lind, and LTG Franks today?

Again, physical fitness is important, but a too simplistic approach to it can leave us without the “warriors” we need for the complex security challenges the U.S. is now facing around the globe.

About the author

MG Walter B. Huffman, USA (Ret.) is  a professor at Texas Tech University School of Law and was the dean from 2002 to 2009.  At Tech he earned his Bachelor of Science Degree in 1967 and his Masters of Education Degree in 1968. In August, 1968, MG Huffman entered active duty and served as a Field Artillery officer for six years, including commanding firing batteries in Vietnam.  In 1974 he attended the Texas Tech University School of Law, graduating in 1977 with the highest honors.  As a Judge Advocate, he served in varied assignments including a tour as Staff Judge Advocate, VII Corps, during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm, and later at U.S. Central Command. He served as Army’s Judge Advocate General from 1997-2001.

The views expressed by guest authors do not necessarily reflect my views, those of the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security, or Duke University. See also here. 

Remember what we like to say on Lawfire^®: gather the facts, examine the law, evaluate the arguments – and then decide for yourself!