"If I Don’t Do What My Bosses Tell Me To Do, I Get fired."

Actions to undermine the chain of command or to subvert President Trump's agenda will not be tolerated at the Department of Defense.

⬇️⬇️ https://t.co/ITFeGw0kUf pic.twitter.com/MO68aje1X2

— Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellATSD) April 11, 2025

The removal of Pituffik. Greenland Space Base commander Col. Susannah Meyers from her position was big news this morning:

Just days after Vice President JD Vance's March visit to Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, the installation commander sent out an email to the base distancing it from Vance’s criticism of Denmark and its oversight of the territory, Military.com has learned.

Col. Susan Meyers, the commander of the 821st Space Base Group who also oversees the Pentagon's northernmost military base, sent a March 31 message to all personnel at Pituffik seemingly aimed at generating unity among the airmen and Guardians, as well as the Canadians, Danes and Greenlanders who work there, following Vance's appearance. She wrote that she "spent the weekend thinking about Friday's visit -- the actions taken, the words spoken, and how it must have affected each of you."

"I do not presume to understand current politics, but what I do know is the concerns of the U.S. administration discussed by Vice President Vance on Friday are not reflective of Pituffik Space Base," Meyers wrote in the email, which was communicated to Military.com.

The emailed remarks, confirmed as accurate to Military.com by the Space Force, mark a rare pushback within the ranks of the Trump administration's repeated criticism and critiques of NATO members and longtime allies. A source familiar with the email said it was sent to all base personnel, including those from Denmark and Greenland on the installation.

The implication of her remarks was that the Pituffik Space Base has a policy vision that differs from the White House and presumably the Department of Defense, and it was her obligation to express that vision. One question I have is why she didn't use words more or less equivalent to this in her letter of resignation from the Space Force instead of waiting over a week to get fired, which she must certainly have understood was what would happen.

This brought me to what seems to be a similar case, the resignation of Melanie Krause, the acting head of the Internal Revenue Service, from her position after only six weeks on the job:

The acting head of the Internal Revenue Service will resign in the wake of a deal struck on behalf of the agency that will see it share tax data on undocumented immigrants.

Melanie Krause, a commissioner at the IRS who is the third person to serve as its chief since the start of the year, will pack up her desk as part of the deferred resignation program offered by the Trump administration, the Treasury Department announced Tuesday.

. . . Krause decided to resign in an apparent protest of the Trump administration’s actions, sources told the Washington Post.

Well, at least she didn't send an e-mail to everyone at the IRS saying the concerns of the US administration didn't reflect the IRS. But Tom Knighton's Substack raises issues over her case that apply as well to Col Myers:

I find it interesting how many people would rather be without a job than do as they’re instructed by the Trump administration. Then they can go on and pretend to be the victim because they couldn’t do what their boss told them to do.

If I don’t do what my bosses tell me to do, I get fired.

. . . Yes, I find it a strange hill to choose to die on, also. Don’t get me wrong on that. Being upset over not being able to protect illegal immigrants’ tax records—if there are any for some of them—and quitting a high-paying job like that seems odd to me.

But everyone can see that. No one needs me to point it out to them.

The fact that there are so many people in the federal workforce who think they’re special, that they’re better than the rest of America, is something that needs to be pointed out.

Col Myers strikes me as the same sort of case. She's worked hard to become commander of a US base in Greenland, which she presumably recognizes is a projection of US power as a factor in its global security strategy, whatever the legal and diplomatic specifics of its presence on Greenland's soil. It's hard to think she wasn't -- or if she wasn't, she should have been -- aware of the consistent US strategic interest since the early 19th century in acquiring Greenland as a territory.

Recent recapitulations of US Gtreenland policy have often put it in the context of the Mexican War of 1846-1848, which was as controversial at the time as the Viet Nam War in the 1960s. A number of US Army officers, including then-Lieutenant U S Grant, were strongly opposed to the war, but they followed orders, carried out their duty, and neither resigned in protest nor made any other sort of public objection. Another well-known US general, Dwight Eisenhower, followed a common practice in the officer corps and simply didn't vote as long as he was in the Army. After all, what if he'd voted for Hoover or Landon or Willkie but had to obey orders from Roosevelt?

Tom Knighton thinks things have somehow changed, and he even ties it to the problem that so many federal workers don't actually do useful work:

They’re workers in a machine, and they’re just as replaceable or expendable as anyone else. Many of them are more so than the rest of us because there are just so many of them currently in place doing absolutely nothing.

This is worth ruminating over. If you're paid to come in to the office -- or, these days, not even to come in -- and do nothing identifiable in return, of course you must be entitled to a permanent job. Why else are they paying you? Did this possibly govern what seems to have been Col Myers's assumption that she could just stay in her position after sending that e-mail?