Talk:United States Secretary of Defense

Should OSD Staff have a section?

I came here to find out about the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics which is a member of the OSD staff. Should there be a list of positions under the OSD on this page (like the president has for his cabinet)?

The staff can be found here: http://www.defenselink.mil/osd/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.116.57.137 (talk) 20:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2019

Please change the party affiliation of William Perry from Independent to Democratic. Dr. Perry is my father; he is now and has always been a registered Democrat. Dcperry (talk) 17:56, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:09, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Space Force missing from lede

There is also the Space Force in addition to Army, Navy and Air Force. ☆ Bri (talk) 12:49, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Bri, this article, both now and as it was when you commented, mentions the Space Force in the lede as part of the "Department of Defense forces – the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Space Force – as well as the U.S. Coast Guard when its command and control is transferred to the Department of Defense" over which the SecDef "is in the chain of command and exercises command and control" (see ¶ 3 in either version). Where the Space Force is (correctly) not mentioned is in the "three military departments (the departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force)", because much as the United States Marine Corps is part of the United States Department of the Navy, the United States Space Force is part of the United States Department of the Air Force. -- ToE 23:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

"Command"

"The secretary of defense's position of command and authority over the military"

In some places the U.S. Code Title 10 , the word "command" isn't used: § 8011 "The Department of the Navy is separately organized under the Secretary of the Navy. It operates under the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense."

The President is the "Commander-in-Chief" but the Secretary of Defense is a civilian (as prescribed by law) and so could not be court martial-ed, despite being in "the chain of command" § 162 (b) Chain of Command "the chain of command to a unified or specified combatant command runs— (1) from the President to the Secretary of Defense; and (2) from the Secretary of Defense to the commander of the combatant command." This is the only subsection which uses the word command to refer to the Secretary's role. The Secretary is also very much not second in command as far as the succesion of the preidency is concerned

Is there a contradiction in the U.S. law code - between the civilian requirement for the Secretary of Defense and the description of the Secretary as second in the "chain of command," ? I don't like how the second sentence reads, it even seems to imply that in the event of a succession of the presidency, the control of the armed forces would fall to the Secretary of Defense, which is untrue, or that forces are commanded by the Secretary of Defense at all, which I think implies an inappropriate military role. This comes down to "civilian control" vs. "civilian command" the first term being the one I believe to be accurate. The chain of command being inviolable, and the Secretary of Defense not being a subject of the Martial Courts, there is a problem here, originating in the U.S. law code concerning "command." 23.30.7.222 (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2022

Secretary Austin's number still shows in a brownish color, which is intended to indicate that he is still "ACTING". He was confirmed in September of 2021. I recommend changing his color to Blue to match his current status. Ironchefbeats (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: It's that color because he's an independent. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2023

I am submitting a request to change William Perry's political affiliation from undefined to affiliated with the Democratic Party. In his memoir My Journey at the Nuclear Brink, Perry states that he was and is a Democrat.. MTPIII (talk) 21:55, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I can't verify this source :( Does someone else have access to it? Actualcpscm (talk) 13:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 22:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

References

"Increased to ten years in the case of a general". Is this accurate?

"To ensure civilian control of the military, U.S. law provides that the secretary of defense cannot have served as an active-duty commissioned officer in the military in the preceding seven years, increased to ten years in the case of a general. Congress can grant waivers in such cases."

Someone with more time than me should look into this. The cited source says that "The National Security Act of 1947 originally required an interval of ten years after relief from active duty, which was reduced to seven years by Sec. 903(a) of the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act." 130.225.165.50 (talk) 20:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

10 U.S. Code § 113 - Secretary of Defense:

(2) A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense—

(a) within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force in a grade below O–7; or

(b) within 10 years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force in the grade of O–7 or above.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/113 Fredmdbud (talk) 16:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)