Captain of USS Theodore Roosevelt fired - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15082269
Politics_Observer wrote:@Finfinder



Bull fucking shit man. Trump keeps on replacing these competent military commanders he is going to harm the combat effectiveness of the military. That's a guarantee and I speak from a position of experience who has had incompetent commanders killed in combat (along with good men underneath their command who didn't need to die) and with incompetent commanders replaced by competent leaders above some of these incompetent commanders too who couldn't get the respect of their men to be an effective leader in combat.

I promise you and you take this to the bank my friend and mark my words, the Trump administration isn't going to get anything out of our enlisted men in the armed forces if they insist on firing competent commanders and replacing them with incompetent commanders who toe Trump's party line. And if the military can't get anything out of our enlisted men because they don't respect the commanders Trump puts in charge of them, the military might as well hang it up when it comes to being an effective fighting force. EVERYTHING starts with good leadership when it comes to being effective.

War doesn't care about any party line or your opinion. War judges you solely on your merits and your merits alone. It's an equal opportunity employer and it will give a fair shake to everybody in deciding who lives and who dies. It doesn't care if you are white, black, Hispanic, Asian or Democrat or Republican. The only thing war cares about is if the commander is competent and if the commander is incompetent then he is killed off along with his men underneath him or by his men if his men has seen enough combat and their fair share of good and bad commanders.

It doesn't care what Trump or the political leadership in Washington wants. I'm just telling you reality from a position of real world experience as a former enlisted man myself who has combat experience. Trump can't make enlisted troops respect the commanders who he puts in charge of them and he isn't doing any favors for himself by replacing commanders who have the respect of their enlisted men. If you don't have the respect of your men who you command, you might as well just resign from your command before you do serious harm.


You think Trump is taking the military vote for granted?
#15082271
ingliz wrote:@Finfinder

The captain has a duty to his crew. If the chain of command is not listening, he must do what he has to do and damn the consequences.


fair enough opinions very.......

what does that have to do with you insinuating I wanted the guy to get Coronavirus? War is tough business though better than a bullet to the head right?
#15082277
Finfinder wrote:War is tough business

America is not at war with China.

The embarked Carrier Air Wing aircraft serve as outstanding instruments of peace.

Commander, Naval Air Forces
Last edited by ingliz on 06 Apr 2020 19:13, edited 2 times in total.
#15082278
@Rancid

Trump shouldn't be leading based on the military vote anyway. He should be leading based on what is in he best interests of this country. And the best interests of this country is having commanders in the military who have the respect of their men. That way the military is more combat effective in defending our national interests.
#15082289
ingliz wrote:America is not at war with China.

The embarked Carrier Air Wing aircraft serve as outstanding instruments of peace.

Commander, Naval Air Forces


You are dodging the question. You tried to make me look bad by saying the commander got Coronavirus and I said its better than a bullet to the head war is tough. Did he die from Corona ? Did he knowingly break military policy?

You still haven't answered the question is it normal for military around the world to condone its officers to work outside the chain of command? It is simple question?
#15082312
@Finfinder

Despite knowing the likely consequence of his action, he did his duty as he saw it.

The only good to come out of this is his crew are getting the medical care they deserve.
#15082319
ingliz wrote:@Finfinder

Despite knowing the likely consequence of his action, he did his duty as he saw it.

The only good to come out of this is his crew are getting the medical care they deserve.


Yes and I guess that is unfortunately part of the job truth is we don't know why he broke the chain of command but that also doesn't diminish the importance of it.
#15082356
You are making that up fabricating that Trump fired this guy. Fake posting.


It is about time that everybody understand that Trump is ultimately responsible for whatever happens in his cabinet. Further. Trump wrote a letter to the Sec Navy complaining about this commander.

Trump will never be less popular than Obama was with the military.


He already is. Polls show he is very unpopular with the military.

He has a 42% approval rating. For a republican that is awful. Over 45% said Very unfavorable.

Having been a professional soldier my view is probably different from yours. Behind my desk was a sign on the wall. "A commander is responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen in his command".

In wartime, in the face of the enemy a commander may order any or all of his men to their deaths. He may do this even if he disagrees with what he has been ordered to do. In peacetime a commander is responsible for the welfare of his people first and foremost. The very idea that he should be fired because what he did potentially embarrassed someone is absurd. He was the commander of a nuclear armed ship with a great many of his people in harms way. He did exactly what he should have done.

This is the least thing Trump should be embarrassed about. If he was smart he would have made a great opportunity to ride to the rescue of those sailors and win the approval of a great many military members. Instead he showed every member of the military that he considers them simply expendable. And for no good reason.

And the commander does have Corona Virus.


https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2019/12/17/half-of-active-duty-service-members-are-unhappy-with-trump-new-military-times-poll-shows/
#15082370
@ness31 So can all you military men explain why they disembarked in Vietnam in the middle of a pandemic?


I don't know why you would ask us. The question should be asked of Trump supporters who have information from inside the State Department.

Carrier strike groups do not just drive around and pick their ports of call at the whim of the senior officer afloat. I will hazard a guess as to why they were there.

Vietnam is an increasingly important ally in the region. It is allied with the US in its opposition to Chinese expansion in the region, particularly its claim to increasing bits of sea space. Since Duarte is likely to kick the US out of the PI soon, and the Trump administration seems to have little stomach in deposing him, I suspect that they will rely on a friendly (and they are very friendly) Vietnam for ports in the region.

As to why it happened on the 4th of March? Well the visit would have been planned many months or even a year or more in advance. But you may well ask why President Trump didn't stop the visit. Well. Less than 10 days before the visit Trump said this:

Feb. 27: “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” — Trump at a White House meeting with African American leaders.


So putting two and two together it goes like this. We have a commander and chief who was seriously downplaying the danger. In fact, he did not believe the virus was serious despite what all of the experts in the world were telling him. On March 4, the day the ship arrived in Vietnam, IIR, there had been only a total of 16 cases in Vietnam and no deaths. Clearly the Trump administration felt that the risk benefit calculation was in favor of the visit.

I hope you were looking for a serious, non partisan answer. Because that is what you got.
#15082373
I can appreciate that these ports of call are calculated well in advance, but these crafts are in their positions to cater to fluid and dynamic situations that arise in the area. Vietnam’s proximity to China should have been a no brainer for everyone, not just Donald Trump.

I guess my question is, do Commanders or Captains or whatever you call the gentlemen in control of the aircraft carrier, do they not have any discretionary power as to how these ports of call go ahead? A craft can berth and refuel, get supplies etc, but it doesn’t mean everyone has to get off (no pun intended).
#15082382
@Drlee

I was an enlisted man who served on multiple deployments with the Army National Guard one of them in the recent wars. I had one friend from my high school days who served as an officer in the Air Force and retired. Based on what he was telling me it sounds like some officers are retiring (those who are eligible to retire) because of issues related to Trump being the commander in chief. Now, in the Army, among white enlisted soldiers, it would seem that Trump would enjoy some popularity initially after Trump was initially elected (I had already been discharged from the Army National Guard for several years when Trump was elected in 2016).

However, I have no idea if that is the case today given I have been out for many years. I know soldiers were not happy about abandoning our Kurdish allies in the Middle East. They had no choice but to do as they were told but I could tell that harmed morale in the Army when Trump gave the orders to un-necessarily and foolishly abandon our Kurdish allies in the Middle East and leave them to the fate of the Russians, Syrians and Turks.

I also don't know how officers would perceive Trump but my hunch is that many officers both from a minority background and some from a white background would probably not have a favorable view of Trump given that education levels for the most part between officers and enlisted men differ. However, officers don't share those opinions and keep those opinions to themselves given they have to serve under Trump as their commander in chief and lead their troops form whatever orders are given to them by the Trump administration.
#15082394
Politics_Observer wrote:That captain took one for the team and he was removed because he was a good leader.

You think telegraphing to the enemy that your ship isn't battle ready is good leadership? Seriously?

Politics_Observer wrote:But his political leaders (Trump administration) are incompetent and incompetent political leaders in a lot cases either remove competent leaders or run them off because competent commanders don't want to work under incompetent leaders or incompetent political leaders who will un-necessarily cost lives.

He's an officer. He's free to retire his commission and return to private life.

Politics_Observer wrote:The fact that the Trump administration removed a competent navy commander whose men loved him makes the Trump administration look bad and incompetent.

No it doesn't. It makes it look like it takes the chain of command seriously and doesn't appreciate grandstanding when someone is the captain of a nuclear powered aircraft carrier.

Politics_Observer wrote:Removing this Navy commander will harm the combat effectiveness of the US Navy, guaranteed:

It won't harm combat effectiveness at all. Coronavirus will however. Germ warfare is part combat too.

Obama fired General Mattis, General McChrystal, General Allen, Maj. General Baker, Maj General Carrey, General Flynn, etc. Obama fired 197 high ranking officers in his first five years.

The Obama era is over. Here's how the military rates his legacy

foxdemon wrote:Did Trump sack the captain? I can only find that higher command removed him from his posting.

The acting SecDef criticized the Captain's actions publicly too.

Politics_Observer wrote:Trump keeps on replacing these competent military commanders he is going to harm the combat effectiveness of the military.

You think there is no competent person ready to take his place as captain of the Roosevelt? There's a lot of competition for those positions.

Politics_Observer wrote:That's a guarantee and I speak from a position of experience who has had incompetent commanders killed in combat (along with good men underneath their command who didn't need to die) and with incompetent commanders replaced by competent leaders above some of these incompetent commanders too who couldn't get the respect of their men to be an effective leader in combat.

What in your mind is so competent about sending an email to so many people about the battle readiness of a carrier strike group such that it gets leaked to the press and thereby to US military adversaries?

Politics_Observer wrote:War judges you solely on your merits and your merits alone.

Right. So broadcasting to the enemy, "Hey! Come attack me now, because I'm not battle ready due to coronavirus" is not meritorious. That's the kind of officer who gets fragged. That's essentially what happened to him, except it came from above rather than below.

ingliz wrote:The captain has a duty to his crew. If the chain of command is not listening, he must do what he has to do and damn the consequences.

So he can deal with the consequences. His oath and his duty is to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. That may involve getting his crew killed in combat--even in germ warfare.

Drlee wrote:It is about time that everybody understand that Trump is ultimately responsible for whatever happens in his cabinet.

As a leader, he is accountable for what happens, but he's not necessarily responsible for what happens. You're a military guy. You known the difference.

Drlee wrote:The very idea that he should be fired because what he did potentially embarrassed someone is absurd. He was the commander of a nuclear armed ship with a great many of his people in harms way.

Which is precisely why you never give the battle readiness of your battle group to the enemy. That cannot go unpunished.
#15082401
blackjack21 wrote:even in germ warfare.

Is that a joke or are you one of those stupid Americans who only listens to Fox News?

Whatever, it made me laugh.


:lol:
Last edited by ingliz on 07 Apr 2020 12:15, edited 1 time in total.
#15082405
May I suggest that in future all Navy vessels be equipped with homing pigeons?

I’d love to know what was in the 4/5 page letter..
#15082411
So putting two and two together it goes like this. We have a commander and chief who was seriously downplaying the danger. In fact, he did not believe the virus was serious despite what all of the experts in the world were telling him. On March 4, the day the ship arrived in Vietnam, IIR, there had been only a total of 16 cases in Vietnam and no deaths. Clearly the Trump administration felt that the risk benefit calculation was in favor of the visit.


@Drlee

The WHO declared the SARS-2 a global pandemic on March 11, I believe. I think there were a lot of world leaders and indeed experts who had been downplaying the situation up until that point. At the time, it would have been reasonable to believe visiting Vietnam was safe. Well, in one ignored the experts who didn’t enjoy establishment support by the WHO, CCP and various other governments or institutions. There certainly were experts who could see exactly what was happening from January (December in the case of some Chinese doctors). But, the point is, they were not mainstream at that time.


My own government was still thinking it was not too big a deal at that time. In fact it is quite sickening to see the way they think. Their decision cycle was based on treasury estimates of the impact on the economy. But nay when they realised they couldn’t predict the economic impact (ie: it went of their scale), did they start taking it seriously.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-07/how-treasury-underestimated-coronavirus-like-the-rest-of-us/12126302


I don’t think it is reasonable to claim Trump is somehow exceptional in mishandling a response to the pandemic.
#15082501
I guess my question is, do Commanders or Captains or whatever you call the gentlemen in control of the aircraft carrier, do they not have any discretionary power as to how these ports of call go ahead? A craft can berth and refuel, get supplies etc, but it doesn’t mean everyone has to get off (no pun intended).


Well first let me say that Vietnam is indeed a great place to 'get off'.

So. The admiral commanding the strike group would make that decision with the approval of the CNO and state department. No mere captain would ever do that. Further, this carrier is nuclear and would likely not require refueling. Resupply could be accomplished at sea. So there is no such discretion at sea.

As for the absurd notion that the captain telegraphed the lack of combat readiness to our "enemies". He did not. In his letter he actually said that his ship was combat ready. It probably was not but that is not what he said. It is impossible to keep the fact that there is COVID on board and anyone knowing that would know that the ship is less combat effective as a result. And only in the most dire of emergencies would any leader send such a ship into combat anyway. So that won't do.

You people really don't have any grasp whatsoev[…]

May the heavens partition and announce God's holy […]

Donald in the Bunker

lol I doubt Hitler ever picked up a philosophy bo[…]