HIGHLIGHT: Gen. Mark Hertling and Ruth Ben Ghiat

Summary

---

The Jim Acosta Show: HIGHLIGHT – Gen. Mark Hertling and Ruth Ben-Ghiat

Date: June 9, 2026
Guests: Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Mark Hertling, historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat
Summary Prepared by Podcast Summarizer

---

Episode Overview

This episode brings together CNN military analyst and retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling and authoritarianism scholar Ruth Ben-Ghiat for a candid discussion with host Jim Acosta. The conversation examines the spiraling consequences of President Trump's aggressive foreign policy moves in the Middle East, deteriorating alliances, concerns about U.S. institutions' resilience, the normalization of autocratic governance, and reflections on leadership and values through Hertling's new memoir. The episode balances current crisis commentary with deep dives into the psychology of power, warning about the long-term impact on American democracy and global standing.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Escalating Middle East Conflict: Unintended Consequences and Lack of Strategy

• Trump's attacks on Iran and wider military moves have triggered oil price hikes and increasing civilian/military casualties, with spillover into Lebanon and potential U.S. homeland risks.
• Gen. Hertling critiques the operation's strategic confusion:
  • “The so called shifting end states – regime change, regime decapitation, destroy the nuclear program, destroy the missile capability, neutralize proxy forces... Each one of those objectives... requires different scale, different time horizons… Conflating these... causes some major challenges.” (Mark Hertling, 01:45)
• Concerns about civilian leadership’s casual use of military force, and lack of clarity in mission objectives.
  • “What I’d say to any civilian leader who’s comfortable using [military forces] – that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re using them in the right way... I’m not sure I want my civilian leaders to be all that comfortable when they send men and women into harm’s way.” (Mark Hertling, 02:50)

2. U.S. Institutional Vulnerabilities & Homeland Security

• Diminished FBI and DHS morale and effectiveness noted; leadership churn and declining cyber capabilities leave U.S. more exposed.
  • “Their capability has... declined, let’s put it that way... the ability to figure out cyber... is affecting other elements within the FBI.” (Mark Hertling, 04:24)
• Fears that Trump’s rhetoric and troop deployments could deliberately stoke unrest as election season approaches.

3. Russia’s Involvement and the Risk of Wider Conflict

• Russian intelligence aid to Iran to disrupt U.S. operations highlighted as payback for U.S. support of Ukraine, illustrating escalating proxy warfare.
  • “If there’s even the potential for a coordination between Iran and Russia, it could be problematic for U.S. forces and other Gulf countries in the region.” (Mark Hertling, 07:02)

4. Civilian-Military Relations & The Free Press

• Pushback against Trump administration figures—Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s dismissals of press scrutiny and framing of casualties as efforts to “make Trump look bad.”
• Hertling’s defense of media scrutiny:
  • “The media was a pain in the ass, of course, at times. And that’s their job... that’s what the important part is.” (Mark Hertling, 11:12)
  • Notable quote: “If you just go around calling people fake news because you don’t want to tell them what’s going on, that’s an abomination in my view.” (Mark Hertling, 12:10)

5. Strategic Drift and Eroding Alliances

• The administration has lost focus on Ukraine and neglected key alliances; isolation increases as partners question U.S. strategy and reliability.
  • “We have thwarted all of our allies... We could count on a whole lot of allies going with us if we had a good strategy... I’m not seeing that right now.” (Mark Hertling, 16:12)
  • “We have not seen ‘one band, one sound’ out of the administration. Every secretary has said something different and usually the President will counter it that night.” (Mark Hertling, 17:33)

6. Leadership Reflections & Hertling’s Memoir, “If I Don’t Return”

• Hertling recounts his military upbringing, commitment to values, and teaching leadership by acknowledging both strengths and failures.
  • “It’s mostly about what I learned about friendship and leadership and culture and all those kind of things.” (Mark Hertling, 25:33)
• Advice on raising sons and leadership:
  • “You gotta love and you gotta teach and you’ve got to discipline.” (Mark Hertling, 26:13)
  • Discusses “MacArthur’s Prayer” as a family and leadership guidepost.

7. Authoritarianism, Psychology, and America’s Political Climate

• Ruth Ben-Ghiat analyzes Trump’s motives—plunder, weakening NATO to favor Putin, and “infantile rage” over the Nobel Peace Prize.
  • “When damaged people are in power, especially at the helm of a superpower... they take it out on their people and also on the world, apparently.” (Ruth Ben Ghiat, 32:06)
• Growing international acquiescence to Trump’s demands; European/NATO leaders’ flattery and appeasement backfiring.
  • “The only thing they respect is standing up to them. But hardly anybody does that.” (Ruth Ben Ghiat, 36:20)

8. Weaponization of Government, Institutional Lawlessness, and Dehumanization

• Trump expanding use of DOJ and ICE for personal vendettas; “authoritarian spectacles” like humiliating citizens in Minneapolis as warning signs.
  • “The public sphere... becomes a theater for their authoritarian spectacles of humiliation.” (Ruth Ben Ghiat, 42:19)
• ICE’s culture compared to fascist militias—unchecked power, lawlessness, and immunity spawn abuses.

9. Are We Already in an Authoritarian Regime?

• Ben-Ghiat asserts the U.S. is amidst “an authoritarian assault that’s gone quite far” but notes courts and resistance are still functioning.
  • “We’re in the middle of an authoritarian assault that’s gone quite far in our democracy now... one of my maxims is that you have to use every space and tool that you have, including elections and voting, including speaking out while you still have it.” (Ruth Ben Ghiat, 47:07)
• Importance of not succumbing to learned helplessness: “That’s what they want you to... to feel that resistance is futile.” (Ruth Ben Ghiat, 48:28)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Strategy and Civilian Use of Force:
  “I’m not sure I want my civilian leaders to be all that comfortable when they send men and women into harm’s way.”
  — Mark Hertling (02:50)

• On Blaming the Press:
  “If you just go around calling people fake news because you don’t want to tell them what’s going on, that’s an abomination in my view.”
  — Mark Hertling (12:10)

• On Alliance Breakdown:
  “We have not seen ‘one band, one sound’ out of the administration.”
  — Mark Hertling (17:33)

• On Plunder and Autocratic Motivation:
  “One is plunder... the second is that Trump is in office in part to solve Putin’s problems... Third, is that this is about his infantile rage at not getting the Nobel Peace Prize.”
  — Ruth Ben Ghiat (31:02)

• On Authoritarian Spectacles:
  “The public sphere... becomes a theater for their authoritarian spectacles of humiliation.”
  — Ruth Ben Ghiat (42:19)

• On the State of Democracy:
  “We’re in the middle of an authoritarian assault that’s gone quite far... but you have to use every space and tool that you have, including elections and voting, including speaking out while you still have it.”
  — Ruth Ben Ghiat (47:07)

• On Leadership:
  “Show people what right looks like. And if you can do that as a leader and you really represented it in your values and your character, then the people around you will catch on to it too and take that with them and build the bench for the future.”
  — Mark Hertling (29:06)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:00-03:28: Trump’s approach to military force and Middle East escalation—lack of strategy (Hertling)
• 04:24-06:20: U.S. vulnerabilities; FBI/DHS under strain; homeland security risks (Hertling)
• 07:02-07:59: Russia’s intelligence support to Iran; increasing risks of wider regional conflict (Hertling)
• 09:48-12:11: Media, civilian-military tensions, and Secretary Hegseth’s “fake news” remarks (Hertling)
• 15:11-16:12: Ukraine war, loss of focus, and fading alliances (Hertling)
• 17:22-18:35: Lack of clear rationale or strategy for current wars; impact on alliances (Hertling)
• 21:27-25:33: The story behind Hertling’s memoir, purpose, and lessons (Hertling)
• 26:13-28:41: On fatherhood, leadership, and “MacArthur’s Prayer” (Hertling)
• 31:02-34:30: Ruth Ben-Ghiat on Trump’s psychology, motives, impact on NATO (Ben Ghiat)
• 36:20-38:36: Authoritarian ruler psychology; appeasement dangers (Ben Ghiat)
• 41:23-43:28: ICE operations, spectacle of humiliation, authoritarian behaviors (Ben Ghiat)
• 47:07-49:17: Are we in an authoritarian regime? Calls for resistance, importance of institutions (Ben Ghiat)
• 49:39-50:23: Trump signals authoritarian intentions, discards need for elections (Ben Ghiat)

---

Final Thoughts

The episode paints a sobering picture of the current American moment, where military adventurism, institutional strain, and the creeping normalization of autocracy threaten both U.S. global leadership and domestic democratic norms. Both guests emphasize the necessity of resistance—through civic engagement, transparency, and living values of leadership and decency. Hertling’s reflections offer both a warning and a handbook for integrity. Ben-Ghiat’s insights insist on recognizing authoritarian patterns before they fully calcify, and to never give up the democratic tools still available.

---

Transcript

[Jim]

That big of a surprise that Donald Trump would do this in the Middle east and go after Iran in this fashion. He's talked about this for a long time and I guess he's made good on that talk. The problem though is that it has unleashed the law of unintended consequences. I mean, you know, oil is soaring. It's around 90 bucks a barrel. That's going to cause problems for people back home as they go to the gas station. But I mean, we're also seeing, you know, Israel unload on Lebanon, we're seeing the United States unload on Iran. And you know, civilian casualties obviously are soaring at this point, some American casualties. But I guess just to get us started, what's been your sense of all of this? Just watching this? Because I mean, this really has the potential to spiral in a bad way.

[Mark Hertling]

Yeah, you use the term unintended consequences, Jim, and I think that's the one that accurately describes what happens when you go to war against a big country, even if you have, you know, a capable military, which we very much do, an effective military to conduct operations. But there's a couple things that have been bothering me about this. The first is, and it's received a whole lot of attention in D.C. the different mission sets, what exactly are we trying to do? Which points to a lack of strategy. The other thing is how do you take the strategic vision from the civilian leaders of the government and employ it into a military campaign plan? What I keep coming back to having been the recipient of civilian orders in the past and having to shape a campaign plan is when you get the changes in mission sets that these two individuals have been given. This the so called shifting end states of let's go through them, regime change, regime decapitation, destroy the nuclear program, destroy the missile capability, neutralize proxy forces in the region, cripple the naval capability. Each one of those objectives from a military standpoint requires different scale, different time horizons, different force resources. You know, the amount of forces you have on, on the ground commitment and conflating these as potentially being just a mission that might change every once in a while causes some major challenges. So when you are striking the so called military targets and trying to, you know, destroy the capability or counter the capability, I got to tell you, there's always collateral damage among civilians. And you're talking about a large city that is now in turmoil. I'm sorry, I'm rambling on a little.

[Jim]

No, no, you're doing great.

[Mark Hertling]

But there's so many things to talk about. One of the other things I just wrote an article about this for the Bulwark, which has to do with the president, the mantra that seems to be going around the Beltway, that he's comfortable with using military forces. And what I'd say to any civilian leader who's comfortable using them, that doesn't necessarily mean you're using them in the right way. It's just that you're employing them. And I'm not sure I want my civilian leaders to be all that comfortable when they send men and women into harm's way. So that's the last thing I'll say. And we can kind of jump off

[Jim]

from there, no question about it. I mean, it sounds like he's a little too comfortable using military forces. And I mean, he's already taken out the leadership in Venezuela and Maduro. Of course, we're striking Iran. Now he's talking about Cuba. But, Mark, one thing that I think we have to talk about is, I mean, if you want to talk about how Trump has been a little too casual about this, I mean, there are his comments that he's been making lately about that's the way it is when it comes to soldiers who die in military conflict. But he also was talking to Time magazine, this is the last day or so we can put this up on screen if we have it. He tells Time magazine, I guess there could be retaliatory attacks in the United States. And he says, quote, but I think they're worried about that all the time. We think about it all the time. We plan for it. But yeah, you know, we expect some things. Like I said, some people will die. And when you go to war, some people will die. Your thoughts on the way he's been communicating on all of this?

[Mark Hertling]

Well, I'll talk about the, the first piece of that commentary, you know, about, I guess there could be attacks in the United States. It's interesting to me, having recently spoken to several FBI agents that who are, who are in the cyber realm of the FBI, they say that their capability has been really somewhat, I don't want to use the word gutted, but it's been, it's declined, let's put it that way. They the ability to figure out cyber, and the guys were telling me that it also is affecting other elements within the FBI. So when you're talking about the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security being the key agencies that prevent any kind of homeland terror, both of those organizations have been in a little bit of churn lately. And that's saying it's kindly, you know, we've just seen the DHS secretary replaced yesterday because of some. Some bad actions on her part. We don't know what that's done inside the agency. I would suspect morale isn't that great in either the FBI or the dhs. I'm not saying it is or isn't. I'm just suspecting that. I know how I would feel if I was working there. And those are the two agencies that protect the homeland from terror attack. The other thing I'd say is just, you know, I don't know if the President was answering a question on this, but. But to imply that he would take care of it, that concerns me, too, because in terms of potentially stoking an attack in the homeland could contribute potentially to what might happen as we approach election day with troops on the street. And kind of the desire that the president has had to have more military focus in the streets of America, which he's repeated multiple times.

[Jim]

Yeah. And Mark, about what the potential might be with Russia. The Associated Press is also reporting that Russia has provided Iran with information that could help Tehran strike American warships, aircraft and other assets in the region. This is according to two officials familiar with the intelligence and all this talking to the Associated Press. But I think there's a real potential here for, I mean, going back to unintended consequences. I mean, just as the US has been helping the Ukrainians fight the Russians, I suppose over at the Kremlin, they're probably thinking, why not help the Iranians strike back at the US and that could have major consequences for assets in the region.

[Mark Hertling]

Yeah, absolutely. Not only within the region, but also in Europe, as you just pointed out. I mean, this is going to be spreading. Jim, that. That's another concern I have. You know, you can't limit. When you go to war, you can't limit the kinetic capability of your enemy. And when you're dealing with a state like Iran, they are going to strike out. And when you have the Russian Federation supporting them and being partners with them, as they have been, as Iran has provided Russia with so many shahed drones over the last four years, you know, this is Russia's payback to them. They're going to give them some intelligence. And we all know that Russia's intelligence capability is pretty damn good. So. And Iran is not in terms of the region. So if, if, if there's even the potential for a coordination between Iran and Russia, it could be problematic for U.S. forces and other Gulf countries in the region.

[Jim]

Yeah. And. And this is how the White House press secretary, Caroline Levitt, reacted to that we should play this because, I mean, they're, they're very blase about this being a problem. I think this could be a major problem. Let's listen to this. We have it having me.

[Mark Hertling]

I wanted to start you off this

[Jim]

afternoon because we have confirmed reports from U.S. officials that Russia is providing intelligence to Iran to help it target US Assets in the region. I'm sure this is something that does not please the president whatsoever.

[Mark Hertling]

Has he spoken to Putin about.

[Ruth Beng]

Well, look, I'll leave that to the

[Jim]

president to answer himself. But what I will tell you, John, we don't comment on intelligence reports that

[Ruth Beng]

are leaked to, to the press.

[Jim]

Whether or not this happened, frankly, it does not really matter because President Trump and the United States military are absolutely decimating the rogue Iranian terrorist regime.

[Mark Hertling]

Wow. Yeah.

[Jim]

I mean, your thoughts on.

[Mark Hertling]

I had not, I had not heard that, Jim. And that's just simply shocking. I mean, it is, it's, it's beyond blase. Are hand waving. This is, you know, there are so many security violations inside the current administration. And for the press secretary to say something as offensive as that, hey, we don't care. And this is another problem I have being a former military guy. They are using the military as a shield because they are performing so well in the operational campaign that nothing else matters. Do you have a strategy? No, we don't need one because the military is doing great. Do you worried about Russia? No, because we're completely decimating the Iranians. Are you worried about the economy? No, because this is going to be over quickly. I mean, it is that repeated mantra, Jim, that is just so offensive to anyone who works in national security and knows how this works.

[Jim]

Yeah. And I mean, to me, the way that the civilian. You call the civilian leadership, the way they've been commenting on all this has been pretty distressing. I mean, the Secretary of. He calls himself the Secretary of War. The Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, you know, the way he was speaking to the press the other day, I mean, first of all, you know, the briefing room is full of, you know, I call them MAGA ringers. They're basically sycophantic outlets that are loyal to Donald Trump. They're not. It's not like having the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Military Times, Stars and Stripes, cnn, msnbc, those kinds of folks in there. And he still has to say, well, the way you guys are reporting on U.S. casualties, you're doing this to make Donald Trump look bad. And I just, you know, how is that a message to be Sending to the American people in this moment, it seems to me. It's just, Yeah, I, I, when I heard that, I just thought, I, I, I get who Pete Hegseth is, but does he have to say that? Like, come on.

[Mark Hertling]

Well, and, and Secretary Hegseth, Secretary of Defense Hegseth, that I will call him, pointed around the room the other day and, and used the term fake news.

[Jim]

Yeah.

[Mark Hertling]

And for a secretary of defense to be doing something like that to, to basically be, you know, there, there, there is, there are a couple of people that are mentioned by name in the Constitution of the United States. One is the army and the other one's the free press. And if, if you don't like what they're reporting, give them a better story in terms of what you're doing. Don't just call them fake news and think that you shouldn't inform the American people. I'll be honest with you, Jim. You know, during the various times I was in combat, the media was a pain in the ass, of course, at times. And that's their job to be my pain in the ass. Because I need to inform and so do they, the American public. And that's what the important part is. You know, I know. You know, Tom Shanker, the New York Times, he was embedded with us in Iraq. And after he was embedded for a very long period of time, he and I wrote an article together called the Media, the military Media relationship, A dysfunctional marriage. But we stay together for the kids. And the kids in both of our cases are the American public and our soldiers. We protect. And if you just go around calling people fake news because you don't want to tell them what's going on, that's an abomination in my view. Yeah.

[Jim]

And for the folks at home who haven't seen it, let's play it and talk about it on the other side. Because I want to just ask you one more thing on this. If we can play it full screen too, that'd be great. Control of Iran's airspace and waterways. Without boots on the ground, we control their fate. But when a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it's front page news. I get it. The press only wants to make the President look bad. But try for once to report the reality. The terms of this war will be set by us at every step. Yeah, I mean, you know, to me, Mark, it makes me wonder, are they going to be able to withstand scrutiny if this grinds on? And I think back to what happened during Iraq and the Iraq war and how I Mean, that was a long. I mean, that was a long engagement that. I mean, it had so many unintended consequences, and it really was so hard on so many military families in the US and it got to a point where the press just had to show what was happening. And, you know, there was a moment in the beginning of all of it when I know the Bush folks were pretty steamed at the press, but then I think at some point they just had to throw their hands up because they realized what a mess things have become. But, right. I mean, to me, reality is reality. How do you not report on reality? And if this thing grinds on, this could be a real problem. If they can't just take regular press criticism and scrutiny.

[Mark Hertling]

I think it's already showing signs of having some real problems, Jim. And, you know, the scrutiny part of what you're saying is exactly right. And that scrutiny, by the way, contributed to Secretary Noem being relieved yesterday.

[Jim]

Well, that's true after.

[Mark Hertling]

After a long period of time. And if Secretary Hegseth continues to say we've got complete control of that, first of all, I would say any defense secretary or military guy that says we have complete control, they haven't studied warfare. You never have complete control. It is controlled chaos. And, and it often gets out of hand. So any civilian secretary who spent maybe a couple of months in combat who claims that he's got complete control because of what we're seeing on the screen of a lot of kinetic activity, you know. Well, one of the things I'll say in those press conferences, it's all about what we're doing. There was no statement of what Iran was doing, and they had some pretty good successes during the first couple of days of this conflict. Right now, it's winding down to a degree in terms of their capability. But, you know, there's always that surprise. That's what Clausewitz tells us. I hate to get geeky here, but Clausewit says be ready for the surprises and be ready for the friction and the fog of war. And I think we're going to experience that probably soon. I hate to be a pessimist, but I've been in too much combat to realize nothing ever goes clean.

[Jim]

Right. And one of the things that will not be clean about this and we can talk about this, and I definitely want to get to the book in a moment, but, I mean, getting back to Russia and Ukraine, I mean, one of the things that the Ukrainians learned was the value of asymmetrical warfare and the innovation of using drones and that sort of Thing, I mean it really did level the battlefield for them with the Russians. And it seems to me that the Iranians may just try to do the same exact thing. The six US soldiers who were killed were apparently killed by a drone. And irony of all ironies, apparently the US, the administration is going to the Ukrainians and saying, hey, help us out with some of this drone technology. We could really use your help. Which, yeah, maybe J.D. vance will thank, you know, Zielinski, about that. But I mean that, you know, remember that whole thing. But yeah, I mean this, this, this could be something. I mean this is part of the, part of the deal. If you let the genie out of the body bottle, if you open up Pandora's box, this, this can happen.

[Mark Hertling]

Yeah. And you know, you bring up the Zelensky piece, I think that is critical to talk about as well because we have taken our eye completely off the Ukrainian ball over the last eight months or so because of Venezuela and Greenland and the Epstein files and now, now Iran. The interesting things to me is we have thwarted all of our allies, Jim. And as you know, I'm a big believer in alliances and security alliances especially who is with us right now. I mean there are some marginal folks that are saying, yeah, we'll help out a little bit, but we, when we used to go to war, we could count on a whole lot of allies going with us if we had a good strategy and if they understood it. I'm not seeing that right now. I mean there are some Gulf cooperation countries that are doing that, the gcc. But how much are they providing? I mean, what is happening other than our shared sorties with Israel? I don't see a whole lot other than them defending themselves against errant missile launches using our equipment in many places.

[Jim]

Well, and part of the problem though is in general is that we don't

[Mark Hertling]

know why we're at war.

[Jim]

We, we, we. Do you think, General, that we have heard a, a solid rationale for why we're even doing this?

[Mark Hertling]

No, it's been an ever changing series of rationales by different people. You know, Jim, one of my all time favorite movies is, is Drumline. I don't know if you've ever heard that. And there's a line or seen that, but there's a line in there that says one band, one sound. We have not seen one band, one sound out of the administration. Every single secretary has said something different and usually when they say it, the President will counter it that night and say something else. So yeah, it's confusing. The allies, they are Trying to be nice, but they, they see it. I mean, I, I was watching Chancellor Merz in the Oval Office the other day. The body language was telling everything. I don't know if you watched that.

[Jim]

I saw that, yes.

[Mark Hertling]

Having been in Germany for 12 years of my career, you could kind of tell what was going through his mind of, oh, my gosh, what, what kind of partnership do we have with these people right now? And it's not very good.

[Jim]

It's not very good at all. And, you know, I mean, that, that's a problem that could, you know, come back and bite us years from now. Absolutely, it seems to me, and I know you have a lot of conversations with folks overseas, across the pond, in Europe, you know, where all the western democracies are that are supposed to be our best allies. And they are, they, I, I think they've just sort of thrown up their hands and they don't know what to do now. I mean, the whole situation with Greenland, I mean, that really pissed them off, frankly. And I think it was the fact that they finally showed that they were pissed off that got Trump to back off of that idea. And, and I just wonder, if something really serious were to happen to the U.S. what would happen then? I mean, 9, 11, we had the world behind us because it was an unprovoked attack and the United States had to respond and the world was with us. If something happens to us this time around, I imagine there are going to be some folks around the world who are going to say, well, didn't you kind of bring this on yourselves because of Donald Trump's behavior? You put him back in office. We told you not to put him back in office. You went and did it anyway. He's spreading this chaos around the world. Chaos can have consequences.

[Mark Hertling]

I, yeah, I, I, I absolutely, no, I absolutely agree with you, Jim. I think there are going to be some people and they, they, most of the Europeans won't say it, but they'll be thinking it, yes, you deserve, you deserve this. You did this to yourself. And that's, you know, I think most of them are, yeah, I know. I mean, I, I, I hope they don't think that way, but I'm sure they do in many cases because they seen how we have not reigned this individual in from doing the kinds of things that don't represent the way America feels. When, when you take a look at the polling, and I'm not a big pollster or anything, but I, I look at them. No one wanted this. Nobody wanted, they saw, they saw how Dangerous. This, this was other than the rabid defenders of the President. And, and again, if you can't give a strategy for why you're doing something that puts Americans in harm's way, it's, it's just, it's boggling. It is mind boggling.

[Jim]

Well, let's talk about the book. Everybody who's watching right now, you got to go out and get General Hertling's book. It's called if I Don't Return, and I Can't wait to pick it up and dive into it. You've had such an incredible military career. You've learned so many great lessons over the years. I imagine that the book is packed with a lot of those lessons. And I know how writing a book is. You probably wish there was stuff in there that you couldn't get in there and got cut on the cutting room floor and so on. But just wax poetic for us for a moment and tell us, you know, why'd you write the book? And what do you want people to get away from it?

[Mark Hertling]

Well, this is, this book, a quick, long story. I'll try and be as short as I can, Jim, but this book was a result of something our son did to me. I had a journal. In fact, it's, it's right here. This was the original journal that I kept during Desert Storm in an army record book with a lot of notes. And before we deployed to Desert Storm in 1990, Desert Shield in 1990 and then into Desert Storm, we were surprised by the deployment. A lot of people don't know this history, but at the time, Saddam's army was the fourth largest in the world. They had just gotten off of a eight year war with Iran. They were battle hardened. He had used chemical weapons against his own citizens in Halabja in the Kurdish region. And when we were told we were going, the second day after we were notified, we were pulled into a intelligence briefing and the intelligence officer said the 11 Cav, the 1st Cavalry Squadron, which I was in, the reconnaissance element of the division, is likely going to suffer 50% casualties. Now, that seems absurd when you think about what happened later in Desert Storm, how it was a quick and almost sanitized war. But we went into it thinking we were going to suffer 50% casualty. So when I saw that we might have a coin flip chance of returning home and the fact that I had a 7 and a 10 year old son, what I wanted to do was leave a journal for them that would teach them how to be men. So it addresses all kinds of issues from the beginning. And when I went home, they were still. They were then 8 and 11 when I redeployed home. And they didn't want to look at any journal that had the thought, the waxing thoughts of their old man. So I threw it into a footlocker and it was. It was recovered a couple of years ago by our youngest son, who had. Both of our sons have had multiple tours in Iraq, so they are now combat veterans themselves. And our youngest son took it out and typed it up, unbeknownst to me. And Christmas morning in 2024, when all the grandkids were opened their presents and were off playing and everything, and he just came up to me and said, dad, this one's just for you. And I wanted to wait for everybody else to be out of the room. And it was the type journal. And he said, my brother and I realized what you were trying to do by telling us about life and leadership and emotions and values, and then a little bit about the combat as well. He said, we realized what you were trying to do. You were trying to prepare us in case you didn't come home. And he said, that was great of you to do that, but now you have to take that book and expand it and write to your five grandsons and two granddaughters and give them more lessons of life. So it was actually, Jim, a very easy book to write because I told the people that were editing it, don't touch any of the journal entries. So there's misspellings and syntax. But the reflections after each one of those on the same subjects are what I learned over the next 35 years. Going back into combat multiple times and making new friends and going into different careers. There's a whole chapter on. On CNN in there and. And the media and so, and hospitals and teaching at a grad school, which I do now. So it is. It's. It's. My publisher says it's not a war book. It's kind of a leadership book, values book, culture book, and reflections of the life lived and. And truly, the last thing I'll say, Jim, I've never wanted to write a leadership book like Here Was My Life, you know, because I've seen too many leadership books that just beat their chest and all that. So this book also has a whole lot of failures and foibles and things that I made mistakes with, but it. It's mostly about what I learned about friendship and leadership and culture and all those kind of things.

[Jim]

Well, a couple of questions come to mind when I hear you talk about this One is when you talk about parenting and being a father and being a dad to young men, I think about, and it's been a subject on my show for some time now, you know, the crisis that we have, or I guess I don't know if we call it a crisis, but a problem that we have with young men in this country.

[Mark Hertling]

Right.

[Jim]

And are we raising them right? How are we preparing them for this world? Are we just letting them be on their phones to learn all the wrong things about life itself? And I guess what are some of your parenting? Fatherhood.

[Mark Hertling]

Oh, gosh.

[Jim]

That I've. Is there a hurtling ism that you would boil it down to a couple of things?

[Mark Hertling]

No, I mean, you gotta love, first of all. You gotta love and you gotta teach and you've got to discipline. And one of the things that that is at the end. I actually did a podcast yesterday with a guy who's doing a podcast called Raising Men. And he's a dad who has two young kids and he wants a bunch of people to tell him these stories. The last, the last chapter of the book, Jim, is a reflection on a thing that sue and I, my wife and I have had on our wall since the kids were born, since our two boys were born. And now both of them, as fathers, have the same thing on their wall. And I'd suggest you and your listeners Google it. It's called MacArthur's Prayer. And I'm not a big Douglas MacArthur fan, although he was a great military leader, but he wrote a prayer that basically starts off, give me a son, O Lord, who does these things. And I take the entire last chapter of the book and take that prayer and dissect every line of it as kind of a guidepost for parents and what they should look for in their children and how they can help them become that. So that's my favorite chapter. Every time I read it, I get emotional. And every time I walk into one of our two sons houses and see that same prayer on their wall, MacArthur's prayer for his sons, it kind of chokes me up a little bit.

[Jim]

Oh, I'm gonna have to check that out. That's. That's terrific. And on leadership, I mean, my goodness, I feel like we could use a Mark Hertling Leadership clinic in Washington D.C. these days. I don't mean to bring it back to the President, you know, I don't want to ruin the conversation bringing him up again, but I just worry about the lessons that are being taught now with his very selfish, narcissistic, self absorbed leadership Style. Yeah, it just seems to be all about him, even when it comes to what's happening in the Middle east right now. And I tell, you know, I tell my son, I, you know, I try to say on this show to younger viewers, this is, you know, I've had young guests on the show who basically said the only president they ever really remember is Donald Trump in their lifetime, which makes, oh my gosh, mind blow up. But, you know, I always go back to JFK's profiles encourage. I mean, there is more to leadership than what we are seeing right now.

[Mark Hertling]

Profiles encourage is back there on my shelf. I love it.

[Jim]

Yeah.

[Mark Hertling]

And, and the what I think you're talking to, and it's what I teach in strategic leadership to a bunch of MBA students and what I've taught doctors, is it really has a model of your character, who you are, which is based on your background and your values and what you grew up with. And then your presence of who other people see in you. And when those, that character and who you are is kind of overlapped with who other people see in you, that usually makes for a good leader. Along with the intellectual capacity and their ability to teach and train others and to, to pay attention to constant self analysis of themselves, to be better every day and then finally to make things happen, all combine to help you influence others to do the right thing. Marty Dempsey, who, you know, always gave me a great line, I mean, he, it was a mantra of his of show, show people what right looks like. And if you can do that as a leader and you really represented in your values and your character, then the people around you will catch on to it too and, and take that with them and build the bench for the future. And you're right, we're not seeing that right now. We're seeing the people with a lot of swagger who want to spike the football, who want to blame other people. And that's not leadership at all. Not even close.

[Jim]

Not even close. Well, the book is if I Don't Return, and it's written by the great retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, U.S. army. And I wish, I hope we can get you back as soon as possible. I know you're very busy with the book tour and everything, but would love to get you back and keep this conversation going because I think it's such an important conversation. I just want the guys out there to start paying more attention to what's right, you know, in front of their nose. And that to me is, it's, it's a, it's part of the whole ball game here. It seems to me a big part of it. But really appreciate the time, Jim.

[Mark Hertling]

It's always a pleasure to be with you. You're a dear friend and a great journalist. So thanks for all you're doing and keeping. Keeping the message going.

[Jim]

Will do. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you, Mark. You always tell me to call you Mark, and I feel my mother raised me right not to call a general by his first name. But you have said this should be taken very seriously.

[Ruth Beng]

Yeah, because there are three elements to it, all of which are part of his thing. One is plunder. And this isn't a new idea in 2019. If you have strongmen, anybody out there, look it up. He started talking about wanting Greenland, and Mike Pompeo, his secretary of state at the time, actually said that climate change was good things because as the glaciers melted, then the US could get all of the precious minerals and undiscovered oil deposits. So we have plunder. The second is that I think that Trump is in office in part to solve Putin's problems. And NATO is a huge problem for Putin. It always has been. And the deterrence it presents and so creating a crisis in NATO and it's like a divide and conquer thing is, who benefits from this aggression? It's Putin. It makes the Europe look weaker and puts them into crisis. And third, is that as absurd as it sounds? I was already thinking that this is about his infantile rage at not getting the Nobel Peace Prize. And then, sure enough, I think the Times and the Post reported that he had written to the head of Norway saying because he didn't get the prize, now he's not interested in peace and linking the two things. And so here we are in the territory of autocratic psychology. And when damaged people are in power, especially at the helm of a superpower, the. And they don't get that what they want. The. They take it out on their people and then also on the world, apparently.

[Jim]

Yeah. And last night, it was very late, I guess he was coming back from the college football championship game. He was asked by a reporter about this link between Greenland and the. The Nobel Peace Prize and the Norwegian prime minister that he wrote, and he denied that that had anything to do with it. And then today at this press conference he was having in the White House briefing room, to recap his first year back in office, he went on and on again about how much he thinks he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. And so, you know, the psychology of this is just so. I mean, it's demented that he would think that he would think he would deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, but that this has anything to do with war and peace and the future of NATO

[Ruth Beng]

is really nuts, unfortunately, when these rulers who have. Especially the ones who are unconstrained, so the more they don't feel constrained by Parliament, by which our Congress, by their parties, by anybody, the more reckless they become, and they give into these fantasies. So stuff happens. Like IDI Amin, whose personal doctor said he was both sane and insane, who suffered from megalomania. He had a dream that he should kick out all of the South Asians who lived in Uganda. And the next day, he issued an order that they had, like, I don't know, 60, 90 days to leave. And because South Asians were the backbone of commerce and business, and in Uganda, the whole economy tanked. And. But they have the power to kind of live out these fantasies. And unfortunately, it seems like that's what's going on now with Greenland and Trump's head.

[Jim]

Yeah.

[Mark Hertling]

And.

[Jim]

And it looks like, you know, NATO leaders, European leaders are trying to talk them off the ledge. Trump actually tweeted out a text he got from Mark Root, who is the UN Secretary, the NATO Secretary General, and he wrote. Mark Root apparently wrote to Trump, although, I guess. Have they confirmed this? We don't know, but we have to presume that this is the case that's been reported on Root wrote Trump. Dear Donald, what you accomplished in Syria today is incredible. I will use my media engagements in Davos to highlight your work there in Gaza and in Ukraine. I am committed to finding a way forward on Greenland. Can't wait to see you. Yours, Mark. I mean, this part where he says, I am committed to finding a way forward on Greenland, the NATO Secretary General saying something like that, it's really. It has this sort of bending the knee feel to it, the sort of acquiescent, you know, posture. You know, how. How is this standing up to Trump?

[Ruth Beng]

It's not. And Root has been doing this for some time, which is a doubly damning toward him because he's. He's been doing this for many months. He, in part, on Ukraine. And what do we see is that far from having a. A calming, shall we call it, effect on Trump, he has become way more reckless. You know, look at what's happened, what he did with Venezuela. And so he's become more lawless and more interested in proving that he's above international law. The more that people like Root flatter him, because that's what has been happening. People are flattering him thinking they'll get on his good side. And they've been doing it with tariffs and. But that doesn't work. That just makes them feel more grandiose. And so the only thing they respect is standing up to them. But hardly anybody does that.

[Jim]

No, there's no question about it. And Trump was sort of at the end of this press conference that he was previewing that, well, they're going to be these talks in Davos. He's on his way to the World Economic Forum in Davos, and he's making it sound as though everything's going to work out, it'll be just fine. And I guess there's some speculation that, well, you know, he was just sort of strong, arming the Europeans into getting a better security deal for the US In Greenland. But we, as I've been saying on the show, we kind of already have Greenland. It's a part of NATO. We have a military base there. So this whole exercise, if that's what we end up with, was a completely dishonest exercise. And I'm willing to bet, Ruth, and we could you, we can mark this date down, if we weren't right here, that he could go to Davos, do a taco on Greenland. Trump always chickens out, do a taco on Greenland. He's not going to acquire. And then in three or four months, he'll start talking again about acquiring Greenland. I mean, some of this is just trying to psychoanalyze the ramblings of somebody who really should not be president of the United States, it seems to me.

[Ruth Beng]

Yeah. Oh, absolutely. He's incompetent. And the fact that it's not even a silver lining, but it is showing, hopefully, more and more Americans that he has zero interest in governance. He's interested in enriching himself and is getting more and more. I mean, somebody who says he's constrained only by his own mind, and look at what his mind is producing. He truly is fixated about the Nobel Prize. And a lot of autocrats are fixated. They can have a fixation. Like Erdogan was fixated on this Muslim cleric, Gulen, and he. So he persecuted him and Gulen went into exile, and then Gulen died, and he keeps persecuting any follower of Gulen. These obsessions for kind of vengeance are boundless, actually. And we see that with domestic politics in the US that the DOJ Department of Justice has become a kind of instrument for pursuing people Trump thinks have wronged him or after him. His enemies are stood up to him. So. So it's the personalization of governance, which is one of the most nefarious things about autocracy, no question.

[Jim]

And we may have some of this sound to play for the viewers, but he was at this press conference, he was railing against Jack Smith, the former special counsel. He was saying, he was claiming that

[Mark Hertling]

Joe Biden's weaponization of our government and removed his hand picked radical left Marxist prosecutors from the Department of Justice like deranged Jack six Smith. He's a sick son of a bitch. They gave me the worst of the worst and here I am. How did that happen?

[Jim]

How did that happen?

[Mark Hertling]

He's a sick guy and Letitia James is sick and Alvin Bragg is sick. They're sick people.

[Jim]

Yeah. I mean, talk about sick people. This is one of those things where, you know, every accusation is a projection. But Ruth, at the beginning of that, it was a little clip at the beginning because I talked over it. But he was saying he ended the weaponization of government that was going on under Joe Biden. And of course, today, I just want to note to our viewers, I mean, this just happened this afternoon. We could talk about this, too. Federal prosecutors served six grand jury subpoenas to Minnesota officials as part of their investigation into whether they obstructed or impeded federal law enforcement during the immigration operation in Minneapolis St. Paul. This is according to the Associated Press. He has not, he has not ended government weaponization, Ruth. He has expanded it and enhanced it and enlarged it. And that's to say, I should say it wasn't even going on under Joe Biden. But he has doubled down on this. Donald Trump has.

[Ruth Beng]

Yes, because again, governance is about amassing power and punishing your enemies. And he's trying to break Minnesota from the horrible things ICE is doing in the streets. They're living under a kind of military occupation in Minneapolis and then trying to break, you know, Waltz and the, and the mayor and, and just go after them with every possible, with brutality, with lawsuits, with investigations so that they can show that they've broken this democratic state. And you know, there have been these test cases, like Los Angeles was a test case in June for bringing the Marines into, you know, a democratic run city, a very big important city, Los Angeles, and seeing if the Marines could work together with the Guard to repress protesters. And so we, it's horrible what's going on in Minnesota and in Minneapolis in particular. But it's a test case. I believe it's always a test case for something larger to expand, to scale it up.

[Jim]

No question, Ruth. And the thing that concerns me is. And you and I haven't talked about the ICE operation, I don't think in all of our conversations or we have. It's been some time. But I mean, the thing that, that concerns me, and I think you're the perfect expert on this, is the way this ICE operation has sought to not just frighten and terrify people in the twin Cities, but humiliate them. I mean, there was video that came out over the weekend of this man from the hmong community and St. Paul. He was pulled out of the house. He was, he's a U. S. Citizen. He was pulled out of his house in his boxer shorts. It was negative 20 degrees with the wind chill in the twin Cities yesterday, and he was paraded in front of the cameras. And this is, this is the part of the dehumanization of immigrants and people who come from the immigrant experience in this country that I should, I think should deeply trouble everybody. And it is one of the hallmarks, is it not, of an autocrat of an authoritarian.

[Ruth Beng]

Absolutely. They all do this. And, and the public sphere, like cities, towns, streets become a theater for their authoritarian spectacles of humiliation. And I just tell people that, you know, long before the Nazis had the holocaust going, they would make, this was 1930s, they would make Jews, and they did the same thing in fascist Italy. Less known case, Jews had to start sweeping the streets. They had to be on their knees scrubbing, and people would form circles around them, including Hitler youth. So you have to humiliate people. And so public space, which is our space, becomes a theater for their spectacles of humiliation. And this has gone on around the world. And one of the reasons they're so enraged is, of course, the very moving and broad based resistance that ordinary people are waging peacefully. Very important that it's been peaceful in Minneapolis and twin Cities against this brutality.

[Jim]

Right. And that takes us to the case of Renee Good, which was obviously, I mean, you know, ICE killed this. An ICE officer killed this woman in cold blooded fashion, shooting her in the face, in the chest. And then they, the administration declared after it was over that there was no accountability, that, that this officer had absolute immunity. And that to me, again, is, I mean, it seems to me another example of what an authoritarian regime does. It can commit acts of violence and there are no consequences, there's no investigation. They've said Minnesota has no ability to investigate this. And I think the Washington Post just today reported that, that an FBI investigation was initiated and then halted.

[Ruth Beng]

Yeah, yeah. So it, the. The way ICE is behaving and its Culture, because every military body, or even, you know, different, different branches within the armed forces, they have a, they have a culture, an institutional social culture. And ICE is the repository for total lawlessness. And so that's why they're not training people. They're accepting almost every, anybody, and they're luring in people. They don't seem to care if you have a criminal record in some cases. And, and so the culture of lawlessness is very important to, to their operations. And so if you look at them comparatively, reminds me a lot of the fascist militia that Mussolini founded because the, the king actually was commander in chief of the armed forces. And Mussolini needed his own people who were lawless. And so all these thugs who were black shirts and many of them had killed people, he put them in this militia and they were loyal to him and they fought in all the battles. I've actually looked at the United Nations War Crimes Commission documents of what they did when they occupied places, Albania, Yugoslavia, and it was these militia who did the worst war crimes because they knew that they would be, they had immunity from Mussolini. So it's very similar. That's how they're acting.

[Jim]

Yeah. And the way that Greg Bovino walks around in this Nazi era trench coat, it's almost as though they're inspired by what, what these fascist dictators did in the 20th century.

[Ruth Beng]

He didn't just, he doesn't only have his fascist style coat. He actually did a very theatrical salute.

[Jim]

Right.

[Ruth Beng]

And so it's pretty direct. What, what. And the way he marched. In fact, there's some video that was going around of him, you know, with a little formation and it's exactly like the squadrost in Italy. And, and he has the swagger and they feel arrogant, they feel full of themselves and they're looking to be lawless and they, they feel this kind of person feels fulfilled when they can demonstrate their power. And that's, that's like autocracy in a nutshell. No, no accountability. And a maniacal need to exercise power. Power, whether it's at the executive level or in the streets.

[Jim]

And so I, I guess it takes me to this question, Ruth. Are we basically at a stage now where the United States can be fairly described as in the midst of an authoritarian takeover? Are we, are we, are we seeing an authoritarian government as we speak? I know we have three branches of government, but we have two, two of those branches not really acting as a check on the executive branch. I mean, I'm just. How do you see it? How does it add up to you?

[Ruth Beng]

Yeah, we're in the middle of an authoritarian assault that's gone quite far in our democracy now. We're not, it's not comparable to what today in Turkey or Hungary. And these are places that have elections, but they, they rig them because you and I couldn't be doing this. We couldn't have our substacks. We couldn't be on television. None of that. And certainly the very robust legal resistance, it's over 320 cases, and many of them decided by Trump, appointed judges that have stopped or slowed down this authoritarian assault. So the courts have not been totally captured. On the other hand, he's only been here for a year. I mean, it takes people years to do what Trump has done. So we're in the middle of this assault. We're slowing it down. In some cases, it's not total. And so one of my maxims is that you have to use every space and tool that you have, including elections and voting, including speaking out while you still have it, because that is, that's what, you know, I've learned this from dissidents. You use everything you still have. You never, you never give up on voting or elections because you think, well, it's not going to count.

[Jim]

That's what they want you, that's what

[Ruth Beng]

they, they want, they want you to just fold, to feel that resistance is futile. And that's why we, we have to recognize and honor those people who are coming out in the cold among ICE agents in the Twin Cities and still resisting. That's very, very important. And I think, you know, a lot of them know they're doing it for themselves, but they're setting an example for others, because it's not going to only be the Twin Cities, and it hasn't been. There have been many other places. Look at Portland, many places. So this is, this is heartening. And I think that the Trump administration is engaging in a kind of overreach. So I think this has a big potential to backfire.

[Jim]

And just finally, I mean, is that why we're hearing Trump sort of opine on whether we need to have midterms in the fall? I mean, it's a, it's a thought that's banging around in his head. And as we've seen with Venezuela and Greenland and so many other things you have, that's a signal. That's a, that's a, that's a warning light, it seems to me.

[Ruth Beng]

Yes. To say. And he's been saying this, you know, he, during his campaign in 2024, he told Evangelicals that he's going to, quote, fix it so good you'll never have to vote again. So whatever. Like, that's Ms. Dictator for a day, a year, four years.

[Jim]

Right.

[Ruth Beng]

But yes, the more he knows perfectly well that there's. There's been a string of Democratic victories and, and you know, he can't stop all the resistors and all the candidates. And so that's why he's, you know, talking about the Insurrection act so nobody will protest. And he's talking about doing things to elections we don't need elections. This, all, this is very predictable.

[Jim]

It is predictable. And when he said a dictator for one day or on day one, that was certainly not the case. Not the case at all. Ruth Beng, thank you so much as always. It's great to speak with you. Great to catch up. Let's keep doing this as these, as these days and weeks grind on, because I have a feeling we're going to have more to talk about between now and the midterms.

[Ruth Beng]

Absolutely.

[Mark Hertling]

Yeah.

[Ruth Beng]

Pleasure to do it. We'll do it again.

[Jim]

Hey, if you enjoyed this, hit the like button. Subscribe right here. Just do it now. That little button right there. Hit that. Subscribe.