Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Politics Affecting Professionalism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Politics Affecting Professionalism

    One of the first things taught to me, and brow-beaten into me since, is that the military is a professional organization. We are a profession of arms, and the people of the United States that we serve expect us to be proficient in our duties and responsible in our actions. However, within the past few years, I have seen shocking changes in that professional attitude, and it seems to be a product of the current political rift.

    The first example is of an Army Lt. Col. who, because of "birther" logic, is refusing orders to deploy. Thankfully, according to this article, he's being courts-martialed. My idea is that he would be tried under Articles 85, 88, 89, 92, 133, and 134.

    The second example is the recent story of General McChrystal's remarks. What I find surprising are the number of people (including Fox's Geraldo) defending the man. I'm a no-rank cadet, but even I know better than to bad-mouth the Big Boss.

    My last subject is that of a fourth-year's challenge of a decision to replace four commanders at the Air Force Academy. I especially like the remarks of then-Chief of Staff. Gen. Jumper.

    The point of these, is I believe each one is politically motivated, with the individual offenders placing their misguided political beliefs ahead of their sworn duties as officers in the US Armed Forces.

  • #2
    a slightly off-topic but (I feel) relevant question, Hobbs

    would this include those higher-ups/commanding officers that use religious beliefs in the same manner? cause it seems to me that politics and religion are about the same thing.
    Last edited by Racket_Man; 07-12-2010, 07:27 AM.
    I'm lost without a paddle and I'm headed up sh*t creek.

    I got one foot on a banana peel and the other in the Twilight Zone.
    The Fools - Life Sucks Then You Die

    Comment


    • #3
      IF you can cite a specific example, have at it, though I see religion and politics as two separate entities.

      Comment


      • #4
        To paraphrase Bill Maher, "If Donald Rumsfeld wants you to skateboard across a minefield to deliver a Zagnut bar, sorry, that's the deal with the Army." (This is obviously from several years ago.)

        What I personally love is that if an officer in the military had dared to criticize President Bush, they probably would have been publicly lynched. Then it was "Don't you dare criticize our wonderful President; he's doing God's work!" But Obama, of course, is a Muslim heathen....why, he's not even American! How dare he actually try to end the wars that we're in and improve our international image!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Hobbs View Post

          The point of these, is I believe each one is politically motivated, with the individual offenders placing their misguided political beliefs ahead of their sworn duties as officers in the US Armed Forces.
          Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are "misguided".

          Originally posted by AdminAssistant View Post
          But Obama, of course, is a Muslim heathen....why, he's not even American! How dare he actually try to end the wars that we're in and improve our international image!
          How is Obama improving our international image and ending the wars we're in? By sending more troops overseas and pretty much doing away with any kind of border security and letting anyone and everyone into the country document or not?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by daleduke17 View Post
            Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are "misguided".
            The Lt. Colonel's reasoning behind refusing orders is because of the "birther" bullshit. That is misguided, misinformed and just stupid.

            The cadet's reasoning that the only merits of one of the officers sent as a replacement is that she is a woman is also misguided and latently sexist. As Gen.Jumper says, he knows the merits of the officers he's sending a lot more than a C/4C.

            As for Gen. McChrystal, he is misguided into thinking that he can project his political beliefs upon his Commander-in-Chief.

            How is Obama improving our international image and ending the wars we're in? By sending more troops overseas and pretty much doing away with any kind of border security and letting anyone and everyone into the country document or not?
            We are withdrawing from Iraq, and focusing on Afghanistan like we should have all along. Your statement shows a clear misunderstanding of applying military power within the Middle East (and abroad) and a lack of tactical, operational and strategic planning. Obama's directives towards success within Afghanistan and Iraq are designed to stabilize the nations and to make their governments strong enough for self-rule without outside intervention (ie. having US troops in the country).

            Your second comment has a blatant disregard and misunderstanding of the border situation. Just because he hasn't militarized the border doesn't mean he isn't doing anything. He hasn't abolished the INS or the Border Patrol (in fact, their numbers have increased).

            Admin, they should have been chastized and punished for criticizing Bush. I didn't like him, but he was still my Commander-in-Chief. That means he's Big Boss.

            Comment


            • #7
              Not at all. While the birthers and Hobbs certainly disagree, theirs are political beliefs based on basically nothing. If that doesn't constitute misguidance, then it must not exist.

              Furthermore, Obama's direction when it comes to the two wars is a step in the right direction seeing as how we now have a concrete set of objectives to meet and a strategy for force reduction once those goals are met. To simply pull out cold turkey would be, if anything, more irresponsible than starting the wars in the first place. Getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan means setting those countries up such that they can take care of themselves, which isn't going to happen without adequate manpower.
              All units: IRENE
              HK MP5-N: Solving 800 problems a minute since 1986

              Comment


              • #8
                Hellsing, despite your choice of names, you're perhaps the most logical on this board.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I have no idea what the hell that cadet was thinking in questioning the change of command decided upon by the chief of staff. I mean, the commander that was being replaced in question would not obey his chain of command and obviously either is unable to read or is an incompetent moron, either case meaning he should not be that high in command. And it is certainly NOT a cadet's place to question the chief of staff's opinion when the cadet obviously knows nothing about what he's whining about.
                  Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Its all good to say that you shouldn't chastise or bad mouth Big Boss, but then all of a sudden he's deploying Metal Gear and starting trouble in Outer Heaven and everybody is left wondering why nobody spoke up earlier.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What the hell are you talking about Red? Do you even make relative posts here?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Red Panda View Post
                        Its all good to say that you shouldn't chastise or bad mouth Big Boss, but then all of a sudden he's deploying Metal Gear and starting trouble in Outer Heaven and everybody is left wondering why nobody spoke up earlier.
                        There are times to question ridiculous orders and there are times when to shut up. These are clear cut cases where there was no reason to question your superiors. Especially when your reasoning is to "that the guy that was fired would make a good poker buddy".
                        Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Red Panda View Post
                          Its all good to say that you shouldn't chastise or bad mouth Big Boss, but then all of a sudden he's deploying Metal Gear and starting trouble in Outer Heaven and everybody is left wondering why nobody spoke up earlier.
                          For once I agree with you. I'm very concerned about Obama's recent giant robot related statements. If he were the Prime Minister of Japan, I would hope that some untrained kid with a user's manual would save us. I don't know what to do here though.










                          The thing is, as far as I know, the military's job isn't to make statements about the President, its to take orders. You can't refuse orders, you can't say "He's wrong about everything." Even if he is, he's the boss. There ARE people speaking out. But you shouldn't speak out as a member of the military. A friend of the family explained it to me like this (I'm paraphrasing)

                          "Its fine if you don't like the President. I don't like the President. I'll happily say to you, or even my friends in Afghanistan that I don't like the President. But if someone said they were a reporter, and were asking what I think, I'd either not respond or tell them I approve. I"
                          "Nam castum esse decet pium poetam
                          ipsum, versiculos nihil necessest"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Hobbs View Post
                            The Lt. Colonel's reasoning behind refusing orders is because of the "birther" bullshit. That is misguided, misinformed and just stupid.
                            So, just because he has an opinion differing than your's, it is stupid?

                            How is the birther movement bullshit?

                            You do realize there are different opinions out in the world, right? And your "Big Boss" is a worthless piece of Chicago garbage.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Dale - Hobbs never said he liked Obama. He was complaining about a lack of professionalism. We have a professional army. It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask that they act like it.
                              "Nam castum esse decet pium poetam
                              ipsum, versiculos nihil necessest"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X