This act of defiance is particularly noteworthy when it is carried out by a member of the military, an institution that often frowns upon independent thought and labels loyal critique as treasonous. Those who prioritize their oaths over the politics of the moment are often subjected to severe repercussions, making public dissent a rare occurrence among those in service.
On October 16th, Marine Colonel Doug Krugman attempted to position himself as a valiant warrior championing the truth by publishing a commentary in The Washington Post titled “I resigned from the military because of Trump.”
ERIC SWALWELL BUSTED TAKING NEARLY $10,000 FROM BEIJING-LINKED LAW FIRM WITH DEEP CCP TIES
October 30, 2025
His central argument was that President Donald Trump was the most inadequate commander in chief he had served under, making continued service impossible for a man of conscience. However, his actions seemed to be driven more by personal ambition than genuine bravery.
TRUMP REVEALS “GREAT HEALTHCARE PLAN” THAT SENDS CASH DIRECTLY TO YOU
Before delving into the points of contention, it is important to acknowledge Krugman's service during the era of the post-9/11 war industry chosen by our policymakers. Like many other Americans, he made sacrifices for the nation, and for that, he deserves recognition. However, the timing and wording of his commentary suggest that the now-retired colonel had nothing to lose.
END OF A NOT-SO-GREAT ERA: KATHLEEN KENNEDY OUT AT LUCASFILM AFTER TURBULENT DISNEY ERA
Although Krugman's service may have been characterized by patriotism, his protest, as reported by RedState, appears to be more indicative of partisan loyalty. His essay, he stated on LinkedIn, reflects his "strengths in strategic communications." While his admiration for the Constitution is not in question, the timing and nature of his argument raise doubts about his sincerity.
SCHUMER BEGS FOR FUNDING IN WHITE HOUSE SIT-DOWN WITH TRUMP—THEN TAKES SWIPE AT ICE
If Krugman's allegiance was solely to the Constitution and the rule of law, he could have voiced his concerns about the 24 years of war without a Congressional declaration. He might have spoken out about the illegality of the COVID mandates, the effects of which are still being felt across the veterans' community.
LEAKED MANUAL REVEALS HOW MINNESOTA MILITANT NETWORKS PLAN TO TAKE THEIR WAR ON ICE
Perhaps we would have heard him criticize the double jeopardy of the military justice system that deprives American citizens in uniform of constitutional rights in legal proceedings. A principled military leader seeking to highlight injustice might have spoken out about the scourge of unlawful command influence plaguing the ranks, which imposes legal terror on military service members to satisfy the political ambitions of certain lawmakers.
In his editorial, Krugman did not mention a single illegal order issued by President Trump, nor did he cite any instance of being forced to participate in missions that violated his ethical compass. His piece appears to be an attempt to garner national attention, reminiscent of the Vindman-style.
DESANTIS LOWERS THE BOOM AFTER SHOCKING ASSAULT ON FLORIDA TROOPER
His reasons for deeming Trump an unqualified commander in chief include allegedly denying sanctuary to Afghans who assisted U.S. forces. Yet, he continued to serve under President Biden, who ordered the hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan in time for the 20th anniversary of 9/11.
THE LEFT ISN’T SILENT ON IRAN BY ACCIDENT—THIS IS EXACTLY WHO THEY’VE ALWAYS BEEN
Interestingly, Krugman remained silent on the moral injury suffered by military members under rules that prohibited them from intervening in inhumane practices in Afghanistan—including child rape—by many of our so-called "partners," a tragic reality well explained by Lt. Col. Adam D’Ortona. Then-Lt. Col. Stu Scheller was left to face the Pentagon's institutional wrath alone for speaking out about the lethal consequences of the hastily-ordered, chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan that left many of those who had assisted U.S. forces behind.
HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT TRUMP WILL MAKE ENDORSEMENT IN TEXAS SENATE GOP PRIMARY
Krugman's essay also reminds us that many military officers are trained to believe that American forces are best used as pawns in overseas missions that lack a tangible connection to our own nation's security. He adheres to the belief that it's morally wrong to use U.S. military forces to help secure the U.S. homeland from—as the oath states—enemies foreign and domestic.
BRIT HUME’S HAS BLUNT MESSAGE FOR THE VOTERS WHO MAY ABANDON TRUMP
The timing of his protest also raises questions. What risk did Col. Krugman take to criticize the president as unfit for command? The answer is none. He wrote this rebuke safely in retirement, having decided to conclude his military career several months ago, under a presidential administration that is itself months old. Krugman "gave up" his military career as a full colonel to take a lifelong pension.
MINNEAPOLIS IN CRISIS: CITY ATTORNEY HOSTS “HEALING CIRCLE” WITH THERAPY GOATS AS CRIME SURGES
This is a high rank for most military officers to retire from, with only a small percentage ascending to the rank of general. It's hard to imagine a safer place from which to conclude one's military career. Krugman's military and veterans' benefits will provide comfortably for the rest of his life, not including what he might earn over the course of a second career.
In stark contrast to Krugman, thousands of morally principled troops were either expelled or chose to leave voluntarily due to clearly illegal mandates not so long ago. These include leaders like former Air Force Capt. Daniel Knick, Col. Brandi King, Former Army Major Brendan Regan, Former Army Capt. John Frankman, and former Army Lieutenant Mark Bashaw. Some were expelled, some left to preserve their conscience, but they all departed military service without the benefit of a pension.
TRUMP ANNOUNCES FORMATION OF INTERNATIONAL 'BOARD OF PEACE' FOR GAZA RECONSTRUCTION
Over 8,000 troops were forcibly terminated, many receiving negative discharge characterizations written by commanders who not only wanted to end their military careers but also wanted to make it much more difficult for them to start over. These patriots left under harsh conditions due to true conscience. In contrast, Krugman departed in a state of convenience and turned his farewell into a public relations stunt. Predictably, the editorial staff was all too eager to provide a platform for such a performance.
GUN-CONTROL POLITICIANS PANIC AS QUIET NEW NUMBER EXPOSES A SURGING SECOND AMENDMENT REBELLION
Readers should always be wary of protest actions that cost nothing to the individual involved. While Krugman has every right to voice his objections to administration policies, true bravery is found among those who have something to lose, the kind of people whose cost is their lives. Col. Krugman served and is most deserving of the fruits of constitutionalism for it. However, his ideological swipe should be recognized for what it is.
True profiles in courage are found in patriots whose principles demand sacrifice. But these profiles are not found in the editorial pages of The Washington Post.
