Captain of USS Theodore Roosevelt fired - 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

#15081224
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/n ... 9-n1175351

For failing to follow the chain of command when alerting people to the aircraft carriers predicament.
Seems a bit strange. I’m sure he understood the chain of command, the question is, why didn’t he follow it? Maybe he did for a time but wasn’t getting any traction with official channels.. :hmm:
#15081225
I wish to know whether his removal is related to the row happening in Guam:
Report from the Guardian

Modly undoubtedly tried to minimise possible backlash by approving Crozier's intentions, but I still think the removal is untimely, although I understand that this is the military, and this no-nonsense attitude is compounded by the "Trump style", i.e. firing people at the first sign of mismanagement.
#15081227
Yeah, that’s a definite row :hmm:

Hm, it’s not an ideal situation for the indigenous people there:/

This is a crew of 5000. A total logistical nightmare. Why could they sail back to the US? Someone needs to explain that to me..
#15081228
Patrickov wrote:I wish to know whether his removal is related to the row happening in Guam:
Report from the Guardian

Modly undoubtedly tried to minimise possible backlash by approving Crozier's intentions, but I still think the removal is untimely, although I understand that this is the military, and this no-nonsense attitude is compounded by the "Trump style", i.e. firing people at the first sign of mismanagement.


The Ship's commander having his letter to his superiors in the military chain of command published for all to see is a definite no-no. He got what he deserved.
#15081232
ness31 wrote:Yeah we get that. But what’s the reason for him breaking basic protocol. Did he take one for the team?


Hard to say. There's a lot of things going on these days that don't quite add up.
#15081408
That captain took one for the team and he was removed because he was a good leader. 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. His sailors obviously loved him given that they cheered for him in a show of support to their commander despite his removal. The fact that the Trump administration removed a competent navy commander whose men loved him makes the Trump administration look bad and incompetent. Removing this Navy commander will harm the combat effectiveness of the US Navy, guaranteed:



In ground combat on land, during a time of war, incompetent commanders are quickly killed off (and unfortunately many good men underneath their command) in battle. The competent ones stay alive and end up taking charge. If political leadership outside the military replace these competent commanders with an incompetent commander who toes the party line then the enlisted men that are forced to deal with such incompetent commander might resort to secret fragging (to where it can't be proven the enlisted soldiers did it and make it seem like the new incompetent commander was killed by "enemy fire" when in reality he was fragged by his own men because he was just an incompetent commander who only cared about himself and not his men and who would un-necessarily cost the lives of good men for no good reason just because he was a commander who would toe the party line instead of getting things done that needed to be done) to take out an incompetent commander who replaced one of their competent commanders.

In ground combat, because so many lives are taken frequently in battle, enlisted soldiers have little to lose by secretly fragging incompetent commanders when the alternative is to accept an incompetent commander and get killed anyway for no good reason. So during war time, enlisted soldiers can have a veto power over political leadership when it comes to their commanders who the political leadership puts in charge of them. The political leadership might not realize it is going on unless it is conveyed to them up the chain of command somehow and even if they did know, it can be very difficult to stop that veto power.
#15082216
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/05/us/p ... e=Homepage

This article claims that while the order to fire the Captain didn’t come from Trump directly, he contacted the Navy to voice his displeasure.

And then there’s this :|

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/0 ... ter-165020

He seems unsympathetic to the Captains plight, and apparently doesn’t think letter writing is appropriate :hmm: Makes a valid point though, why were they disembarking in South East Asia in the middle of a pandemic?
#15082245
Politics_Observer wrote:That captain took one for the team and he was removed because he was a good leader. 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. His sailors obviously loved him given that they cheered for him in a show of support to their commander despite his removal. The fact that the Trump administration removed a competent navy commander whose men loved him makes the Trump administration look bad and incompetent. Removing this Navy commander will harm the combat effectiveness of the US Navy, guaranteed:



In ground combat on land, during a time of war, incompetent commanders are quickly killed off (and unfortunately many good men underneath their command) in battle. The competent ones stay alive and end up taking charge. If political leadership outside the military replace these competent commanders with an incompetent commander who toes the party line then the enlisted men that are forced to deal with such incompetent commander might resort to secret fragging (to where it can't be proven the enlisted soldiers did it and make it seem like the new incompetent commander was killed by "enemy fire" when in reality he was fragged by his own men because he was just an incompetent commander who only cared about himself and not his men and who would un-necessarily cost the lives of good men for no good reason just because he was a commander who would toe the party line instead of getting things done that needed to be done) to take out an incompetent commander who replaced one of their competent commanders.

In ground combat, because so many lives are taken frequently in battle, enlisted soldiers have little to lose by secretly fragging incompetent commanders when the alternative is to accept an incompetent commander and get killed anyway for no good reason. So during war time, enlisted soldiers can have a veto power over political leadership when it comes to their commanders who the political leadership puts in charge of them. The political leadership might not realize it is going on unless it is conveyed to them up the chain of command somehow and even if they did know, it can be very difficult to stop that veto power.


So your proof is a CNN fake news anchor and a liberal pundit. The funniest thing about that video is when the pundit says the commander sent an email to over 30 people potentially exposing this information to unauthorised personnel. Sounds a lot like the the libs want to give a free pass like they gave Hillary Clinton. So no doubt they are trying to spin this. The guy got what he deserved.
#15082256
@Finfinder

Finfinder wrote:So your proof is a CNN fake news anchor and a liberal pundit. The funniest thing about that video is when the pundit says the commander sent an email to over 30 people potentially exposing this information to unauthorised personnel. Sounds a lot like the the libs want to give a free pass like they gave Hillary Clinton. So no doubt they are trying to spin this. The guy got what he deserved.


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.
Last edited by Politics_Observer on 06 Apr 2020 18:25, edited 1 time in total.
#15082260
ingliz wrote:The guy got coronavirus.


Are you Zippoing my post?



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 are making that up fabricating that Trump fired this guy. Fake posting.

Trump will never be less popular than Obama was with the military.
#15082265
@Finfinder

Trump is the one in charge, the buck stops with him. The buck always stops with the one who is in charge. The buck doesn't ultimately stop with the Secretary of the Navy. Trump is the one is who is the Commander in Chief.
#15082267
@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.
#15082268
Politics_Observer wrote:@Finfinder

Trump is the one in charge, the buck stops with him. The buck always stops with the one who is in charge. The buck doesn't ultimately stop with the Secretary of the Navy. Trump is the one is who is the Commander in Chief.


I believe you are wrong again I don't think the military runs all of its personnel decision through the president of the United States. Most any place you work has policies that require immediate removal. For example you work for a propane company and decide to smoke a cigarette while filling a tank.

@Spider-Man Who the fuck mentioned Biden? :?:[…]

Trump just wants to improve his approval ratings a[…]

Do you forget the negative stereotype about Asian[…]

He could never have won, skinster. He just didn't[…]