(REUTERS)

During their presidencies, Barack Obama and George W. Bush were sometimes criticized for being overly deferential to their advisers. Some of Bush's allies believed he became much too reliant on neoconservatives; some of Obama's supporters criticized him for being too quick to take advice from Wall Street insiders.

Donald Trump, in contrast, angrily clashed with a long list of traditional conservatives during his first presidency — from former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to ex-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly to former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions to ex-National Security Adviser John Bolton. But during his second presidency, Trump is making a point of surrounding himself with unquestioning loyalists.

In an article published by the conservative website The Bulwark on August 25, retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling — who served as a U.S. Army Europe commander in 2011-2012 — argues that Trump's reliance on "yes-men" is, from a military standpoint, a recipe for "true strategic disaster."

READ MORE: A truly terrifying plot lies hidden in this empty Trump threat

"The peril of yes men is not that they flatter leaders — it's that they betray them," Hertling warns. "That peril was on display recently when Lt. Gen. Jeff Kruse, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was removed, presumably for failing to immediately echo President Trump's 'obliteration' comment about U.S. strikes on Iran in June. At about the same time, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin announced that he would take early retirement — almost unheard of for a service chief — and it's hard not to suspect he was invited to retire after remarking that America's singular focus on China risks leaving the nation vulnerable elsewhere."

Hertling adds, "Their firing and forced resignation send a dangerous message: disagreement is not tolerated."

History, according to Herling, "teaches" the "lesson" that "open disagreement" is not disrespectful, but shows "devotion to the cause" — a lesson that Trump, the retired U.S. Army general laments, fails to understand.

"I've learned, in my military career, that disagreement, when voiced respectfully and appropriately, is not disrespect," Hertling argues. "In fact, it is a deeper form of respect, because it demonstrates that an advisor or senior officer cares enough to speak candidly about the mission, about truth, and about the lives of his or her military personnel…. Surrounding oneself with flatterers — has often led to true strategic disaster."

READ MORE: 'Delusional dim-wit' Trump is flailing to avoid his biggest enemy: analysis

Retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling's full article for The Bulwark is available at this link.