Skip to comments.The Military Knows It Has a Morality Problem
Posted on 12/09/2012 8:09:14 AM PST by DJ Taylor
It has not been a good year for Americas armed forces. David Petraeuss extramarital affair dominated headlines; 25 instructors are under investigation for systematic sexual abuse of cadets at Lackland Air Force Base; and a rash of senior officersat the rank of colonel or higherhave been reprimanded for serious misconduct. Last month, Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote to all four-star generals and flag officers asking for institutional soul-searching. Has the militarys behavior, he seemed to be asking, threatened the sacred trust among top officers, the men and women they lead, and the American people? I know you share my concern when events occur that call that trust into question, Dempsey wrote in the memo obtained by National Journal. We must be alert to even the perception that our Nations most senior officers have lost their way.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
If our military has in fact been damaged by a moral injury as this writer believes, it occurred long before these service men/women entered the military.
There is no will in this country to say, "You're offended? Well, deal with it -- and know that you are on the wrong side of this issue."
The military is just a reflection of the greater problem: We are afraid to pass judgment on moral behavior.
You’re going to see more and more of this.
True to a point, but where are the resignations of generals and admirals?
Instead of taking off their uniforms and going on television, they are “all in” for the gay agenda, gay and straight “troops” sleeping around right and left, women in combat, women on submarines, etc etc.
The generals and admirals are nothing but power-hungry whores, who are riding the military down to destruction.
In 1950 the U.S. Army very nearly “broke” in Korea. It was very close to a total rout, and those were some very tough men, many WW2 combat vets.
Imagine our military of today, full of “diverse” affirmative-action promoted officers, open homosexuals, militant feminists, etc, facing a 1950-like retreat.
They will utterly shatter and break. It will be a terrible defeat for our military and country when it happens. I’m not referring to “remote control” drone wars “fought” from command centers in Nevada, dropping missiles on Yemen or A-stan. I’m talking about something like Korea, 1950.
Our military will shatter and be destroyed under those conditions.
Ditto our warships, after being torpedoed or struck by missiles, on fire and in danger of sinking. Picture 1/4 of the crew dead, 1/4 badly burned or wounded, and the other 1/2 fighting to keep the ship afloat and in the fight.
THis happens in “real” naval warfare, not the clean “television version” we think is reality today. Imagine it happening with 10% of the crew made up of young girls: burned, dead, surviving, the ship on fire, listing.
It’s going to be a total nightmare, when (not if) our military is forced to fight a “real” war, and not a clean “drone war.”
Take a look at the President who leads the Military. He advocates homosexuality.
Dempsey is an obama ferret trying to get other four stars to compromise their integrity so they too can be thrown out of the military.
CS Lewis: what a brilliant mind. Timeless lessons.
The rot starts at the top and the military reflects the society it defends.
I see a very good chance of the US Navy facing a "Jutland" scenario. We don't have many ships today. Each ship costs a huge amount. If we have a real naval battle (even if we "win") we are likely to pull our navy into port and just wait until the fighting stops -- can't risk such valuable stuff!
The military is not the problem....however their leadership is the problem
We have too many Generals and Admirals concerned with gays and political correctness. We need military leaders, not military benders
A few courts-martial of flag officers will return discipline and morale in our Armed Forces
A picture is worth a thousand vile words.
At the time that the Army needed leadership, there wasn’t any. The drawdown, the Peace Dividend, accelerated the problems the Army had from the 1970s. The Army was a big organization. With the drawdown, retention decisions had to be made. The Army’s policy of “Up or out!” was used to decide who to retain. In a huge organization, how do you decide who to promote and keep? The people on national promotion boards, and all promotions from First Lieutenant and up were national promotion boards, can’t possibly know every Major being looked at for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel. They could look at the written evaluations , but those tend to look the same after reading the first dozen of them. There is no IQ score for Officers. There is no skill test for Officers. But there is a physical fitness test and a height weight test. You can put numbers on those. And the thinking became that the really good Officers would exercise harder and get ahead. That has turned out to be a mistaken assumption. Some people’s physiology gives them an automatic advantage. Are skinny people automatically smarter and harder working? I haven’t seen the proof of that. And for every hour you are out running, that is an hour spent not perfecting the warrior’s craft. There is a level of fitness required for close combat, but even our generals admit that there is not much of that going on. The most important thing in a promotion packet of an Officer going before a promotion board became the official photograph. The promotion boards would project the Officer’s photo on a large screen for all to see and then begin criticizing. Maybe the insignia wasn’t on quite straight. Were her ribbons in the proper order? A mustache? Does his face look heavy? With the full length photos, does he look heavy? So, the Army ignored intelligence and job skills and performance, and started promoting people based on how fast they could run and how skinny they looked. This is why you have General Petraeus out running all the time. That is what is important in the Army. It creates a class of narcissistic and vain and self-serving Officers. You reap what you sow.
I believe that what you describe has been intentional from the get-go. True leaders, moral Patriots, have been quietly purged or diminished so they go voluntarily so as not to lose the pension. Financial incentive to stay quiet is pretty powerful. When is the last time you can remember anyone in power, be it the Govt. or the Military who stood up and said NO - I think it was during Nixon’s reign.
Yeah, that’s very likely.
Petreaus was the ultimate “perfumed prince.” Never heard a shot fired in anger near him as a J.O., no C.I.B, but about 40 rows of “really great guy!” BS ribbons.
I think it’s sabotage from the top, the class of elitists who really are bothered by the USA having “too much” military power compared to the world. These globalists promote generals who think similarly. The Senate is where these globalist perfumed princes are selected from all of the colonels.