Eric_Strattoniii
- 955 comments
- 295 likes given
- 723 likes received
Bio not provided
That is a cultural problem that this won't address though and would in effect undermine the system of CoC and only further damage an already damaged institution. Authority is constantly being undermined by special interests as it is, doing that is only going to continue to move the "goal posts". We currently have two GOs who are openly political as the head of the JCs and the Army, it will only get worse. The line has to be drawn. You are right that things are not the same, but increasing the problem by further undermining the CoC overall does not help. If the do it for this case, a special group, what will follow? Where will it stop? What is next? The military is supposed to be about the institution/s in it and the purpose of those institutions. You serve and sacrifice pay and certain legal freedoms for a greater good, when those same ideals and institutions are constantly undermined to give groups special treatment then it slowly and surely erodes the confidence in that same authority that will eventually be needed in crisis. It is not just one thing, it is a compounding effect of all the special "projects" going on and it will hurt the military and the country long term I think.
All this political posturing by Congress, the Administration and special interests groups does is make me pine for a mandatory draft again, not for the reasons Ducky want's it though, the disconnect between the pols, the average citizen and the continued balkanization of the country are my primary motivations.
@Another Opinion @robertjalberts
I would read the other comments I posted first and then connect them together AO, also remember, there is no such thing as an all male unit really anymore. Even in SOF you have females in every bloody support role there is and you have to live and work with them while deployed on isolated FOBs or other sites. And a fully gender integrated unit would be worse if what I saw is any indicator as far as frat goes, the pregnancy rates for deployment (estimated) and on Navy ships (documented) is a good indicator that frat is a huge problem.
Finally, someone says it! Fraternization! The word that dare not be mentioned in public! ;)
No to the civilian positions. We have too many GS's already who have to much sway in the procurement and programs area already who have no business in it, no need to have people who will become or could become politicized added to the mix. How about just have Victim/Witness Advocates assigned at every MP/MA/SP or DoD Police station or JAG office who is also a Cop or Lawyer or Legal Person, but still in the military? Make is a permanent position instead of a collateral duty?
I think we are better RVN, I know how they get the stats and I have dealt with 3 cases and all 3 turned out to be total BS. I know that the military considers "perceptions" of sexual harassment as actual "harassment", I know that more often than not, buyers remorse is counted too. I simply don't buy the numbers as being that high via the estimates that we see in the press., I would at least see some of this "epidemic" over the years. Oh, I am sure my perceptions of what constitutes harassment are different than most, for instance I do not think a swear or bad joke constitute harassment, but the military does. So, I agree we should hold ourselves to a higher standard, how about we start telling the truth about this "great experiment" of fully integrated genders into units? Let's be honest about that for starters and hold ourselves to that higher standards all around.
No, it's not and undermines the whole system and is another example of double standards, a lack of reading and a lack of understanding of what actually goes on. The CO at a persons command does not have the authority she implies they do, nor is there a requirement to report a sexual assault or rape up the CoC. They are supposed to report it and can or at least should go to the MA/SP/MPs or DoD Police on base or off and report it and file charges, the CoC is then notified of what is going on.
@23rdInf69n70 Sorry, I call BS on that 23rd. The problem is not the "problem" it appears to be. If you do an honest comparison between the military vs. civilian incidence then the rates are about the same. Second, I am sorry, but this unfettered belief that all these women are somehow our total equals in every aspect, but yet we treat, act, interact and give them different treatment in terms of quotas, physical fitness standards, pregnancy, etc...but now you say that this can be easily treated by the commanders stating frequently that this "will not be tolerated"? So, are annual stand downs for a whole day enough of a statement? Are constant General Military Training, open and constant reminders of this not being tolerated in functions, etc...not enough?
"After a couple of years of this kind of action, service members of both sexes and all ranks may begin to believe that this is as much DoD policy as wearing hats out of doors and saluting"-We have been bending over backwards to fight against just this type of thing for decades. I cannot, if I am I am smart, discipline a female troop behind closed doors, I really need a witness with me, that is the way it is. I cannot yell at them if they screw up, do not meet standards, etc...I will quickly find myself the subject of an EO complaint. This happens on a constant basis, yet you seem to think that we are not doing enough already? I honestly do not follow your logic since there is over ten years of evidence that runs counter to this. Most of the people who get fired I know have had it done due to counter feelings of "Sexual harassment" accusations that often amounted to name calling. The "rapid rise" in sexual assaults is bs, go read the link to the manuals I put up, use "Find" and look up what you need and be honest and know that is mostly political BS and a narrative built by the press in the form of sensational reporting.
So, no, our current problem is that far too many in the officer corps consistently avoid ugly truths in the mixing of the genders such as double standards in favor of the women, non-stop, almost relentless re-education for "sensitivity" around females and yet we must protect them and treat them differently, but they are our still our equals in battle too. How will that theory work out in the field when on patrol in the "23rd Infantry" when a group of 12-14 infantryman are out there and a woman says something, doesn't hold up her end and the guys call her a bad name? That is sexual harassment under the guidelines and I have seen EO complaints for less, so what do you do?
Why are you judging Rip Its?????? They are pure nectar, people have been burned at the stake for such blasphemy!!
.
For example, the working poor spend virtually ALL of their income no matter how they get it. Compare this to someone who APPEARS to spend a lot, Paris Hilton yet she has earned (I am loathe to use the term) nearly 1.5 Billion dollars, how much of that is she likely to spend, the answer is a mere fraction. Thus, if we had a straight consumption tax, she would pay a FAR lower marginal rate than a person earning double the minimum wage. In addition assuming that a consumption tax was a simple sales tax the sales tax rate would have to be in the neighborhood of 22%. Thus, a large number of working poor would be paying close to 1/5 of their income in taxes. Can you honestly tell me that is fair. Further, a lot of people complain about the fact that 47% pay no INCOME tax. Who is to blame for this? Them damn Democrats? Think again, it was the Bush tax cuts that truly cut the number of people paying income tax. Under Clinton only about 37% paid no income tax. Also, Romney was only paying about 13% to 14% of his income in income taxes. Since a vast majority of Americans pay Social Security and Medicare tax on their ENTIRE earnings, they effectively pay a higher rate in federal taxes than Romney pays on his Entire income. How so? 6.2% Social Security tax comes off the top, the employer pays another 6.2% all economists would agree that the employer 6.2% effectively lowers the wage of the employee by 6.2% since the employer is simply going to pass the those costs (now hidden) on to the employee. The employee then pays 1.45% in Medicare tax and the the employer also pays 1.45%, again passing this cost onto the employee. Add this together and the employee is paying a rate of 14.69% in taxes. But you don't recognize them since 1/2 are hidden and the other half isn't "INCOME" tax. The reality is that a large segment of the America pays a FAR higher tax rate than Romney et. al. For you to not recognize this is unfathomable."-
Sorry, wanted to address it down below, but you lose track on this system so I cut and pasted it.
"The key problem with a consumption tax is that it would tax the living snot out of the poor while barely touching the uber wealthy"-It actually doesn't, MA has a tax that exempts food and clothing with the exception of restaurants and luxury items for clothing. So, it is does not overtax the poor and I usually despise MA tax policy, but they do the sales tax right, if only they would drop the rest of their taxes.
A flat tax works when combined with a form of a national sales tax. A graduated flat income and corporate tax of 5,10, 15, 20 and maybe up to 25%, but no more than that as the max combined with a SMALL national sales tax at between 2-5% would do a lot to make things better. The flat income tax would ensure that EVERYONE pays a percentage of into the pot and the sales tax would encourage better spending habits (we hope) and also ensure that even illegals are paying a percentage of the federal taxes. For the sales tax, you would exempt food and clothing, food at restaurants and luxury items such as furs would still be taxed, but even your northface jacket and food at a local mini-mart that is a grocery would be exempt, McDonalds wouldn't be exempt for example. The key to this would be the elimination of ALL write off's and all other taxes to include capital gains, etc...that increases would only be allowed in times of war (declared) and that they would return to former rates post conflict, especially on the sales tax.
The one problem with this model is that it would discourage charitable giving, a solution I have seen would be to allow folks to give up to a certain percentage of their income tax to a charity on the approved list of 501 groups. Before you go off on "Oh, the political groups will get free money!!" lol It is intended for groups like food banks, wounded warriors, etc....so that might be something to be tweaked, but the idea has merit I think.
RD, I think we agree in theory, but that is simply not the system in place and it is harder too get fired for operational incompetence than it is for lack of situational awareness in the new world of military political correctness.
@HUNTERS It is couched in sarcasm, but you are right, why is this not an issue at the NCO level? I would argue that it is not because it is not the issue that it is portrayed as, in other words the "epidemic" of sexual assaults is not real.
We will always be dorking around with the small shit because the GOs and Politicians only care about how things appear and how they can make them appear, not how they are.
RD, it is not the finesse and it is not misogyny, it is the system and it is jacked up. Fired? You are done, period. Enforcement? Nothing outside of the paperwork shuffle and we know how those things remain in their record forever if we do not hold onto them, so guys are loathe to write them. Combine that with the arbitrary silliness that goes on from command to command as far as what constitutes a firing offense and you do not have a good system in place. Then add in the personnel system on top of the PC and you have recipe for a broken system. Things have changed drastically from your day RD, not for the better I might argue.
I think that would be a cooler gift or memento too, but no one really smokes anymore and coins are easy to carry.
No, I am with you, totally hate the "zero" defect policy, but they have gone too far in the other direction Lieber. If you fire someone from a position they need to be counseled a number of times in writing, then there is a review board and then decision. It goes to far and even if you have a "toxic" leader, he/she should be able to fire you, but I am with you, that should not be the end of your career or even slow it down too much. Nimitz would not make it in todays Navy.
You have the zero defect problem/attitude
You have the personnel system which does not make a person effective in the role they should be effective in, but does make them diverse.
You have that same personnel system that due to the 2 years and move, 2 years and move mentality does not lend itself to real mentorship.
You have that same personnel system that lends to policies being rewritten rarely instead of being looked at and discontinued or modified, usually they are rubber stamped or worse have additional things added on and then that person moves on and forgets the ripple effects.
It's not one thing, it is the compounding effect and it is crushing the services long term.
@Lieber @RVN SF VET @HUNTERS @Kriegsakademie
Lieber, we had a case directly here that it was taken up that as soon as she drank she lost the ability to give consent since there is not way to objectively measure what is intoxication in each individual without a test right there. It did not matter that she gave consent, as soon as she got into trouble she claimed she could not give consent and the process rolled from there, people got put through the ringer and people paid for it.
@Lieber @Rubber Ducky It also a problem at the lower levels of NCOs, you cannot just fire someone without cause from their position. It should change back, but our push to the paperwork shuffle for everything and the introduction of UCMJ and Administrative Rules/Instructions/Policies that rarely get looked at for their 2nd, 3rd and 4th order effects are the problem.
Should say "never deployed to combat" and a few other semantic fixes, but I have to go take my BP medication ;)
@RVN SF VET @HUNTERS @Kriegsakademie
It's not the booze, if it was not for booze, 99% of the people on this board would never get laid. It is a social lubricant and hence often used to meet people at bars, on base and off. The problem is that if a women has one, yes one, then even if they do "consent" they could not consent. It is silly and again, not the real problem, it is an excuse unfortunately that many use to get out of a poor, consensual choice and then have buyers remorse.
First, one of the problems is how this whole thing is framed. If you read the DoD Survey that was done, the numbers they got were from the numbers of rape, attempted rape, unwanted touching and then estimated the top numbers and some of the unwanted touching is not based on anything but a perception. These are not 19,20, or 23,000 rapes going on in the military every year. That narrative is getting Freaking, bloody old. It is total bullshit and frames that every male is apparently a rapist, at least that is the media narrative.
Second, you do not have to report assault in your CoC, you can and always could go to the Military Police, DoD Police, NCIS, etc....you CoC will get notified, but you do not have to tell them first if you get raped or sexually assaulted. Only in cases of "sexual harassment" is the CoC usually the first course. Again, I am really f$$king tired of this ignorant narrative in the press and among many people who should know better.
Third, the DoD is attempting to have Victim Witness Advocates at every base and eventually make it a full time position, it should be done as a job in the JAG or MP/SP/MA specialty areas, but I do not know when or if that will happen for sure. The group National Organization for Victim Assistance (NOVA) is heading this up and if it is done right it will help, but I am betting my bottom dollar that it won't be enough for many with other agendas and who constantly advocate that this is somehow proof that opening up combat jobs would prevent this, how that passes for logic I have no idea, but that is who is in charge of us apparently.
http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/annual-reports
It is a lot of shit to read, if a journalist is going to report, criticize and/or advocate for a policy they should at least read SOME information on it. Sorry, I am just tired of vets again being framed as either being:
1.)PTSD Dx and ready to explode (total bullshit, numbers show it, but never framed that way in the press or even in cartoons)
2.) Suicidal from military service, doesn't matter that again the reality is that the majority have never deployed and most likely had a pre-existing condition.
3.) Ignorant/Uneducated-again, doesn't matter that most have HS degree or above
4.) Poor and/or mostly minorities-again, doesn't matter that the service currently are pretty spread out among the ethnic groups with the majority being from working and middle class, except in combat arms where the overwhelming majority are white males.
5.) Now, we are also apparently rapists via the stories I read, reality is different, but doesn't matter. Is anyone else sick of it? Or should I just throw in the towel and accept the shit sandwich so many seem to be advocating for?
Now, our macho, hyper aggressive culture must change to fit someone else's needs who apparently now want a troop who does not
-Drink
-Get into trouble
-act aggressive
-go after girls without being 100% sober and has 100% written consent in his hand and knows that no matter what they will still be held accountable.
-And understands that females will always be given special treatment, but must treat them respectfully, kindly and with of course with a witness next to you when talking to them since you cannot apparently act like you are a combat leader when dealing with them. Politics over practical matters I guess.
Good luck with your military folks, Boy Scouts don't fight and win battles, there are a few folks like that, but the majority of your good combat troops are going to fit into the apparently unacceptable mold of someone who drinks, like to fight, chases skirts and takes risks. Try a bloody reflector belt with a GPS tracker and give them all anaabuse, maybe that will keep them in check, I mean, if it saves just one life it is worth it. Where are those fantastic SGM/E9s we all admire so much for their great expertise in knowing what is important, they will fix this, if they cannot I do not know who can. They fixed gloves, PPE, reflector belts and glasses ON base in a combat zone, they can do this. Seriously, with idiocy that goes on, they really wonder why we drink? It ain't the stress of combat folks, it's the stress of the idiots in charge.
@tomricks @Hauptfeldwebel @jelly_donut
Tom, I don't how you can continue to support his domestic policies in regard to health care when his version is going to cost so much, drive away choices and at present rate will add up to 6+ trillion? I don't get it. Medicare and SS are already in trouble as it is, taxing the rich is not going to solve the real problems (spending), SS can still be accessed by Congress for other projects, etc...etc....I don't understand how you can support the push when it is going to break us?