WASHINGTON — A rare and pointed rebuke from a retired three-star general has reignited an increasingly heated debate in Washington over President Donald Trump’s posture toward Venezuela, with military veterans, lawmakers, and foreign-policy experts warning that the administration may be repeating the very mistakes that defined America’s most costly conflicts of the 21st century.
Lieutenant General Mark Hertling (Ret.), a highly decorated Army officer who served multiple combat tours in Iraq and later commanded U.S. Army Europe, issued a stark public warning following President Trump’s recent remarks suggesting that U.S. involvement in Venezuela could proceed without a clear long-term plan — and potentially without congressional authorization.
“When the United States treats regime change as a discrete military option rather than a whole-of-government, generational commitment,” Hertling wrote in a widely shared post on social media, “it repeats mistakes we have made very recently and ignores lessons we have paid dearly in blood, treasure, and reputation to learn.”
The comment quickly gained traction across political media, amplified by veterans’ advocacy accounts, former Pentagon officials, and national-security analysts on X (formerly Twitter), where many noted that such blunt language from a retired senior commander remains uncommon — particularly when directed at a sitting president.
“You Cannot Import Legitimacy”
In a subsequent televised interview, Hertling expanded on his concerns, drawing directly from his experience overseeing stabilization efforts in Iraq.
“One of the hardest lessons we learned,” he said, “is that you cannot import legitimacy. Governments derive legitimacy from their own people — through trust. And trust is not something you deliver from the outside.”
Hertling pointed to President Trump’s recent press conference, in which the president appeared to imply that unnamed officials standing behind him would “run” Venezuela after the fall of its current regime. According to Hertling, the reaction from senior Cabinet members present — including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — suggested that the remark had not been previously discussed.
“You could tell by the look on their faces,” Hertling said. “They had not heard that before.”
Clips of that moment circulated widely on YouTube and political commentary channels, fueling speculation that internal divisions may be emerging within the administration over how far U.S. involvement might go.
From “No Boots” to Boots on the Ground
What most alarmed Hertling, however, was the president’s casual dismissal of concerns about deploying U.S. forces.
“The hairs on my neck stood up,” he said, recalling Trump’s assertion that there would be “no problem” putting boots on the ground if needed.
Drawing parallels to Iraq, Hertling warned that Venezuela’s size, population of more than 30 million, and combined security forces — estimated at roughly 300,000 personnel — make any post-conflict scenario inherently volatile.
“This could be very tough,” he said. “There could be opportunities for remnants of the old regime to start an insurgency, to do things that are unexpected.”
Such warnings echo concerns raised by numerous defense analysts on Substack and former intelligence officials on cable news, many of whom argue that the administration appears to be underestimating the complexity of stabilizing a fractured petro-state with deep internal divisions.
Jason Crow: “We’ve Seen This Movie Before”
Those concerns are not limited to retired generals. On Capitol Hill, Representative Jason Crow, a Democrat from Colorado and a three-time combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, offered one of the most forceful critiques yet.
“All I can think about is the 20 years, trillions of dollars, and thousands of American lives we spent in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Crow said in a televised interview that quickly spread across social media. “Trying to nation-build, without accountability, without Congress stepping in to stop it.”
Crow emphasized the political disconnect between Washington and the public.
“This entire thing is deeply unpopular with the American people,” he said, pointing to voters struggling with rent, healthcare costs, and groceries. “And here’s Donald Trump, who promised to fix all of that, engaged in the very thing we just spent 20 years failing to do.”
Crow’s most biting remark focused on Trump personally.
“I’m a combat veteran,” he said. “And when I hear a five-time draft dodger talk casually about putting boots on the ground, it gets under my skin. Because when elites bang the war drums, it’s not them who pay the price.”
A Growing Veteran Backlash
Across social media, veteran communities have responded with notable intensity. Prominent military commentators on X, including former officers and enlisted service members, have drawn stark contrasts between Trump’s rhetoric and the lived experiences of those who served in prolonged counterinsurgency campaigns.
Hashtags referencing Iraq, Afghanistan, and “regime change” trended briefly following Hertling’s comments, while several viral threads compared Trump’s Venezuela posture to early Bush-era justifications for the Iraq War.
Though the White House has pushed back, insisting that any actions would be “limited” and “strategic,” critics note that similar language once preceded America’s longest wars.
History’s Shadow
For many observers, the debate over Venezuela is less about one country than about whether the United States has truly absorbed the lessons of its recent past.
Hertling framed it bluntly: regime change is never just a military operation.
“It takes a coalition,” he said. “A tough coalition of key people, sustained over time. Not improvisation.”
As Washington debates its next steps, the unusually public warnings from veterans who once carried out U.S. policy on the ground have added a sobering dimension to the conversation — one that resonates far beyond partisan lines.
Whether those warnings will alter the administration’s course remains unclear. But as memories of Iraq and Afghanistan loom large, the voices urging caution are growing louder — and harder to dismiss.
