Politics

[VertigoBE]

A question to our (retired or not) professional members of the US military.
Having read through the pages of comments on this gettogether of the top military with their commander, I fail a bit to understand why there would be such a cold receipt and negativity to this. Costs, time wasted, etc.

Granted, I come from the purely private corporate world, but organising once in a while a get together of "our top-brass" across BU's, is not that uncommon. One of the principal ways large and complex organisations can work well, is by having extensive informal (invisible) netwerks between all the top leaders. Especially between those parts (BU's) that often do not work together much. In all those occassions, there will be "The Speech by the leader/CEO", which will set the tone, but the true purpose is all the networking that will happen around it.

As far as I can tell, the US military is one of the least "top-down hierarchical only" militaries out there. Speaking out across rank, division, etc. is stimulated and appreciated (I assume, and within reason of course), more so than in let's say the Chinese or Russian militaries. Hence also the US success.

Why would there then be such a pushback from the military, to participate to such an event? It's probably going to be the highlight of the year, getting the opportunity to speak to so many other professionals from such different theaters and back grounds. The pay-off for whatever few million dollar of cost and time, will likely prove to be far greater.

 

[Red Leg]

My apologies. I'm a few pages behind on this thread. My post wasn't meant to disparage commands that actually do work long hours, and yes I've been around those too (I am taking war zones out of this). I know that "most" of the flag officers get there for a reason. My personal experience, and yes, I was only a lowly NCO with a 10 year career, seen commands who worked their 8 hour a day or less shift. I was tasked at one time to be a driver for an 0-6 who was a deputy commander for this unit. He was an awesome individual who I had the utmost respect for and still do to this day. Typical day: "Hey Sgt. the colonel needs picked up." It's 0930. I pick the colonel up at his house on post. He says we have to go the the airfield and pick up general "Xyz", another man who I got to know in just a short period who I had, and still uphold the most respect for. We pick the general up and I'm engaged in conversation with both the colonel and the general for the drive back to HQ. Their itinerary was a quick meeting and then lunch. After lunch was a 2 hour meeting and then there was time for a round of golf before the general had to fly back to DC.
With the above paragraph, and learning the history of these two fellas (if I recall right they both graduated the same class), I still have the upmost respect for them because of what they accomplished in their career.
Yes, both of these men made it to where they were for a reason. Did they "work" a 12-14 hour day? Not then they didn't. Had they done so before (and probably still did from time to time) I have no doubt!
We have had a presidents in our recent past who have appointed yahoos up in rank in our military because of their political affiliation.
I will give you general Milley who is an absolute disgrace to the long tab!
If the current regime says "Hey, we are going to have a meeting with all of you, so you get it in your heads we are not the same doldrums as before" then, I do not have problem with that.
My good friend @mdwest says he would not like his time wasted. I agree, but, is the time wasted to really make these commanders understand, "Wow, things are different in our military now"? How better to make them understand than I can call your ass to a meeting and you better show up because it is an order?
I got a little long winded with this one. I personally don't see the big hoopla over the big meeting with all of the DOD commands. All of them guys don't have a problem leaving their commands for some sort of branch related convention, so why would this be any different.
From the US Military aspect, everyone has a different view point. I do not disregard that. My experience has been different than others.

I appreciate the response as well as your service.

I will admit that I served in a different army, retiring in 2003. The GWOT and resulting multiple deployments were a different set of factors affecting the force than I experienced. I will simply say that even in the Cold War army I knew very, very few officers, or senior NCOs for that matter, who worked country club hours. I did work for an abusive alcoholic O6 once. That behavior eventually caught up with him as it would anyone showing up at 0900 anywhere I served. Personally, over three decades, other than an ROTC assignment - where I spent a lot of time earning an MA - I never had jobs where that would have been possible without a career ending OER.

Lots of those jobs were in line commands, but others included staff positions, and even diplomatic assignments. The vast majority were essentially 24/7. For instance, as an O6 in CENTCOM, I was launched to Kuwait or Quatar on a few hours' notice numerous times to put out inter-service issues with host governments.

I might add, being in a command track, those jobs changed rather quickly. When our daughter was seventeen, we were ordered to DC. This was her fourteenth move and third high school. The only leave we ever experienced was in route to the next job - if there was time. That is not a complaint, but I simply note that pace was not in the least unusual for officers that were on track for eventual consideration for GO.

Milley is an interesting case. Up to assuming the chairmanship, he had a superb career and was well respected by superiors, peers, and subordinates. He did what he had to do, other than retire, to support the defense related initiatives of his presidents. I think he was genuinely appalled by the actions of Trump and his personal loyalists between 5 November and 6 January 2019/20. I think reasonable and informed people can honestly debate the wisdom of Trump's actions. For instance, I firmly believe calling for demonstrations on 6 January was the most willful and incendiary act of personal hubris ever committed by a president in the history of the republic

I think Milley really lost his way during the Biden administration. Yes, he was required by the constitution to defer to civilian leadership. But he was also tasked with defending the institution which he has been chosen to lead. In that role, he failed miserably.

Finally, if a battalion, brigade, or even division commander wants to gather his officers and NCOs together to offer direction then fine. I think it was ridiculous to waste the valuable time of those GO's and NCO's to haul them halfway across the planet in many cases, to a single place to be lectured for 45 minutes by a tatted up National Guard major and former talking head with bad hair. That said, I am glad that he intends to fix height and weight standards and fitness. I wish I had more faith he has a clue about the other 90% of his job.

Look forward to sharing a beer sometime.

 

[mdwest]

My greatest hope for the War Dept is DEPSECWAR, Steve Feinberg..

Feinberg is a BRILLIANT human being and has 40+ years of success in leading large organizations, with many of those years focused on defense.. He's a bit of an oddity having been the CEO of a couple of different multi-billion dollar firms, while at the same time somewhat reclusive and introverted (not common traits for people in those sorts of positions)..

There is zero doubt about his effectiveness and ability to get shit done though..

He's a behind the scenes sorta guy... which seems to pair well with Hegseths "front man" persona..

Hegseth can keep "talking".. It will be Feinberg that makes sure shit gets done, and done to standard..

And no one will speak his name publicly, ever..

 

[Red Leg]

My greatest hope for the War Dept is DEPSECWAR, Steve Feinberg..

Feinberg is a BRILLIANT human being and has 40+ years of success in leading large organizations, with many of those years focused on defense.. He's a bit of an oddity having been the CEO of a couple of different multi-billion dollar firms, while at the same time somewhat reclusive and introverted (not common traits for people in those sorts of positions)..

There is zero doubt about his effectiveness and ability to get shit done though..

He's a behind the scenes sorta guy... which seems to pair well with Hegseths "front man" persona..

Hegseth can keep "talking".. It will be Feinberg that makes sure shit gets done, and done to standard..

And no one will speak his name publicly, ever..

I hope you are correct. I know almost nothing about him other than by his reputation which mirrors what you have just written.

 

[PARA45]

What I saw and experienced during my 4 years working at the AF Reserve Command, was basically E-9s, 06s & 07s, etc, not making a decision for the best of the wings or the troops, but to not go against the wind and protect their career. I remember an old crusty Chief say that sometimes that best answer is not the most popular answer, and when you reach those ranks, you have to stand up for the troops and not your career. I believe in the last 10-15 years we have lost most of that. Not saying all, but a good 50% of them care more about their careers than the welfare of the troops and the wings they are responsible for. The ones who stood up for the best of the Air Force, their Wings, and troops, unfortunately did not make the next rank and end up retiring. If you are not in the click, you are out.

The Air Force height and weight standards and fitness is and has been a joke. I'm surprised (not really) to see obese individuals walking around in uniform. At 63 years old, I look better and probably fit better in my uniform than some I've seen around. I'm glad this is being fixed, and if they do not meet standards, then there is the door.

 

[Red Leg]

A question to our (retired or not) professional members of the US military.
Having read through the pages of comments on this gettogether of the top military with their commander, I fail a bit to understand why there would be such a cold receipt and negativity to this. Costs, time wasted, etc.

Granted, I come from the purely private corporate world, but organising once in a while a get together of "our top-brass" across BU's, is not that uncommon. One of the principal ways large and complex organisations can work well, is by having extensive informal (invisible) netwerks between all the top leaders. Especially between those parts (BU's) that often do not work together much. In all those occassions, there will be "The Speech by the leader/CEO", which will set the tone, but the true purpose is all the networking that will happen around it.

As far as I can tell, the US military is one of the least "top-down hierarchical only" militaries out there. Speaking out across rank, division, etc. is stimulated and appreciated (I assume, and within reason of course), more so than in let's say the Chinese or Russian militaries. Hence also the US success.

Why would there then be such a pushback from the military, to participate to such an event? It's probably going to be the highlight of the year, getting the opportunity to speak to so many other professionals from such different theaters and back grounds. The pay-off for whatever few million dollar of cost and time, will likely prove to be far greater.

When I left the military, I moved to the defense sector and ran a BU of around a thousand employees (primarily engineers ) in a corporation of a hundred thousand. I learned to absolutely loathe the annual corporate offsites. We were simply too big and with too broad a product line and customer base, even though it was nearly all DOD, to benefit much from that "collegial" atmosphere. I found it much more effective to travel to my four different business groups once a quarter to offer a state of the company message to those smaller teams than haul them all together.

DOD employs 2.8 million people of which 1.8 million wear a uniform.

Have a teleconference or send an email with an attached directive.

 

[VertigoBE]

When I left the military, I moved to the defense sector and ran a BU of around a thousand employees (primarily engineers ) in a corporation of a hundred thousand. I learned to absolutely loathe the annual corporate offsites. We were simply too big and with too broad a product line and customer base, even though it was nearly all DOD, to benefit much from that "collegial" atmosphere. I found it much more effective to travel to my four different business groups once a quarter to offer a state of the company message to those smaller teams than haul them all together.

DOD employs 2.8 million people of which 1.8 million wear a uniform.

Have a teleconference or send an email with an attached directive.

Ok, fair enough.

 

[Hunt anything]

When I left the military, I moved to the defense sector and ran a BU of around a thousand employees (primarily engineers ) in a corporation of a hundred thousand. I learned to absolutely loathe the annual corporate offsites. We were simply too big and with too broad a product line and customer base, even though it was nearly all DOD, to benefit much from that "collegial" atmosphere. I found it much more effective to travel to my four different business groups once a quarter to offer a state of the company message to those smaller teams than haul them all together.

DOD employs 2.8 million people of which 1.8 million wear a uniform.

Have a teleconference or send an email with an attached directive.

The travel to each command definitely makes more since to my simple mind, have a more personal meeting and interact with each. Yesterday seemed more like a college history 100 level class than what it could’ve been.

 

[Tanks]

Speaking of that speech, here is a further take on it.

Opinion | Pete Hegseth and the Generals — The Wall Street Journal

The Defense Secretary’s talk of a ‘warrior ethos’ is welcome, but where are the weapons?

apple.news

 

[mdwest]

Speaking of that speech, here is a further take on it.

Opinion | Pete Hegseth and the Generals — The Wall Street Journal

The Defense Secretary’s talk of a ‘warrior ethos’ is welcome, but where are the weapons?

apple.news

The WSJ is asking the wrong question IMO...

The weapons are there.. and there are plans and dollars already allocated to increase the stockpiles, purchase new platforms, etc..etc..

The question is.. "where is the training?" and "where is the support"?

To @Red Leg 's earlier point.. roughly 1M people that work in/for/with the pentagon to ensure the military is capable of executing its mission are NOT in uniform.. and those positions are being slashed like crazy..

Im not saying that there isnt/wasnt fat to trim.. there certainly is.. but the shermans march to the sea approach that the DoD has been taking (Im sure at the direction of the white house) is starting to create some serious issues with the operational elements being able to meet mission readiness requirements and/or be able to properly function..

Lots of new weapons, systems, and tools would be great..

But if the troops arent trained on them, dont have adequate support for them, etc.. then all we're doing is creating a big pile of pretty new toys that cant be deployed or used properly when needed..

 

[rookhawk]

I had a very interesting encounter yesterday at the airport. Two encounters actually. The first was when I was just past the ticket counters where I see Michael Knowles having a conversation with someone. I politely wave and extend him a compliment, leaving him to his conversation.

About 20 minutes later I'm in the Delta lounge and there are about 500 people in the lounge and very few seats. Knowles recognizes me and I gesture for him to sit next to me. He strolls over and we have a very nice conversation "dad to dad". He asked me why I was traveling, where I lived, why I live where I do. (For the kids, for a civil society, to reject liberal urbanization, etc.) We bonded a bit over anecdotes of our kids, being providers, and our moves where he went from L.A. to Tennessee, and me from Chicago to rural Wisconsin. It was a very nice, brief conversation amongst two humans.

As our conversation was coming to a close, I felt I had built enough goodwill to ask him if he'd stay two more minutes for a tough but friendly request, he said sure. I stated I knew he was a Christian mentor to Candace Owens and godfather to her children. I asked in good faith, if he has any influence over Candace if he could suggest to her to lay off the Charlie Kirk conspiracy theories for 60 to 75 days until the FBI, DA, coroner, and other authorities present their evidence rather than uttering so many conjectures absent official facts. I stated that all this chatter about the Charlie Kirk assassination is distracting to Charlie's life and mission while also being very upsetting to Kirk's family.

He was a true gentleman taking such an awkward request from a stranger in stride. In good faith, he said he was going to reach out. Michael commented that the concerns I'm expressing are not anti-Candace or anti-conservative, they are concerns from an ally. My final response was "absolutely, but this isn't a political piece of feedback, its purely a Christian one that is concerned that good people's impulsive actions are eroding a miraculous thing that is happening in response to Charlie's martyrdom."

I can't help but think yesterday's brief interactions were more than coincidence and I was honored to meet Mr. Knowles in person. If any of the readers are unfamiliar with Michael's work I encourage you to watch his youtube videos. Truly, he's one of the great thinkers of an American generation.

 

[mdwest]

I had a very interesting encounter yesterday at the airport. Two encounters actually. The first was when I was just past the ticket counters where I see Michael Knowles having a conversation with someone. I politely wave and extend him a compliment, leaving him to his conversation.

About 20 minutes later I'm in the Delta lounge and there are about 500 people in the lounge and very few seats. Knowles recognizes me and I gesture for him to sit next to me. He strolls over and we have a very nice conversation "dad to dad". He asked me why I was traveling, where I lived, why I live where I do. (For the kids, for a civil society, to reject liberal urbanization, etc.) We bonded a bit over anecdotes of our kids, being providers, and our moves where he went from L.A. to Tennessee, and me from Chicago to rural Wisconsin. It was a very nice, brief conversation amongst two humans.

As our conversation was coming to a close, I felt I had built enough goodwill to ask him if he'd stay two more minutes for a tough but friendly request, he said sure. I stated I knew he was a Christian mentor to Candace Owens and godfather to her children. I asked in good faith, if he has any influence over Candace if he could suggest to her to lay off the Charlie Kirk conspiracy theories for 60 to 75 days until the FBI, DA, coroner, and other authorities present their evidence rather than uttering so many conjectures absent official facts. I stated that all this chatter about the Charlie Kirk assassination is distracting to Charlie's life and mission while also being very upsetting to Kirk's family.

He was a true gentleman taking such an awkward request from a stranger in stride. In good faith, he said he was going to reach out. Michael commented that the concerns I'm expressing are not anti-Candace or anti-conservative, they are concerns from an ally. My final response was "absolutely, but this isn't a political piece of feedback, its purely a Christian one that is concerned that good people's impulsive actions are eroding a miraculous thing that is happening in response to Charlie's martyrdom."

I can't help but think yesterday's brief interactions were more than coincidence and I was honored to meet Mr. Knowles in person. If any of the readers are unfamiliar with Michael's work I encourage you to watch his youtube videos. Truly, he's one of the great thinkers of an American generation.

I was aware of Knowles, but honestly had never listened to him prior to now.. after reading your post I went to his youtube channel and listened to his video from 4 days ago where he speaks with a student group about Charlie Kirk...

He is well spoken, and makes some solid points.. and seems to work in a very similar manner to Kirk (well thought out debate points, fact based, and more of a centrist than an extremist)..

Thanks for the information.. I'll be listening to Knowles a bit more moving forward..

 

[Tanks]

The travel to each command definitely makes more since to my simple mind, have a more personal meeting and interact with each. Yesterday seemed more like a college history 100 level class than what it could’ve been.

Trump would be out of the office by the time he would have finished traveling to each command of every flag officer that was at that meeting. Not an efficient way of running a major organization.

A "zoom" call equivalent might have been better, but probably would not have had the same impact as people being there.

 

[Hunt anything]

Trump would be out of the office by the time he would have finished traveling to each command of every flag officer that was at that meeting. Not an efficient way of running a major organization.

A "zoom" call equivalent might have been better, but probably would not have had the same impact as people being there.

I wasn’t implying going to each base, more like Central Command, Northern Command, Southern Command and on down the line.

 

[Altitude sickness]

Hegseth should have worn jodhpurs and tanker boots in front of that flag. and have a riding crop under his arm. Then add in the World War II
helmet.

 

[PARA45]

 

[Altitude sickness]

I’m shocked no one has photo shopped his head on Patton in front of the flag.

“ We’re gonna go through em’ like shit through a goose”

 

[HookMeUpII]

I never thought I'd see the day where Senator John Fetterman is the person on the other side of the aisle making the most sense.

Weird world we live in.

 

[rookhawk]

I never thought I'd see the day where Senator John Fetterman is the person on the other side of the aisle making the most sense.

Weird world we live in.

I can’t wait until the GOP hires Fettermen (and Manchin) into a “big tent” Republican administration. The faster we peel off sane democrats into our big tent, the better off we are. As long as we poach all the sane democrats, the DNC continues to be unelectable Marxist lunatics. (E.g. of great recruitments: Tulsi Gabbard and RFK2)

Let’s keep it going! Make the GOP the party of diverse opinion, tolerance, and 80% agreement versus the party of lunatic antifa!

 

[deewayne2003]

I opened the USDA website and this popped up..... I find it hilarious