US Navy crew monitoring North Korea says ship is a ‘floating prison’
This isn't good...many cuases, from questions as to how much strain a "common sailor" can take, given the current education system that "protects the younglings" from anything more harsh that a loud voice, to poor material exiting colleges that do not teach anything remotely related to real leadership, to a dysfunctional political system and 8 years of a structure that haed the very idea of the miltary. All adds up to a real mess on ships and the 7th fleet. Firing is not the answer, unless you have a good way to determine the replacements are any better. How much patronage and politics have played in senior officers and enlisted may also be part of it. Given the last 2 ship crashes have yet to have a decent explanation, this is not a good scenario.We had it a lot rougher than they do today, with internet access and real time communications and connections.
Quality service cannot be generated from poor morale.
I mean, that Navy crew is only monitoring a rogue nuclear power run by a crazy immature dough boy for a "rocket man," who says he wants to nuke the USA. No biggie there!
This has to be only a small part of O's precious legacy of taking his worthy of only being apologized for despised USA down a notch or two or three.
In order to understand this situation, I need to know what the actual dangerous situations on board were; I would need a statistic on those people who made traceable legitimate complaints about dangerous conditions and whether they were restricted to ship; I would need to know what tools and options the officers had to remedy any dangerous situations.
Just going from this article, I can come to no valid conclusions.
Jan
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-n...
Now, this may not be the objective truth, but it probably represents what the captain and officers think and if there is no place in the article for 'the other side of the story' then I think it is manipulative. Take another look at the structure of the article: it is an officer sandwich. The first half and the last paragraphs are all 'crew', then there comes a bit on the officers, the the summation is all crew.
I kinda think that the article is more accurate than otherwise, but I also think that it intends to be manipulative and make sure that the 'stupid little people' who read it come to the correct conclusion.
My spidy sense is tingling.
Jan
During WWII, my father went from Lt to Lt Col in 9 months because of the upward mobility caused by peacetime officers dying when they contacted enemy action. Once WWII was over, he remained a Col until he retired. I think that it may be inescapable that the talents needed to secure rank and advancement in a peacetime military differ from those when war is declared.
Jan
Absolutely true! Politics as opposed to combat.
BT
Leadership (starting with the Clinton White House) is where the fault lies. Bush the younger tried to repair the budget damage, but he was dealing with Democrat led Congress, and Obama just compounded the neglect. Trump has promised to do everything he can to recover, but he isn't getting much help from an establishment that hates him, and doesn't give a rat's ass about our servicemen.
This the content of this entire comment sounds like crap, and so does the original article.
I don't take the article seriously because it comes off as sensationalism rather than reporting.
But when I read people commenting on it as Ayn Rand fans, I try to give it the benefit of the doubt. I accept that even in a large organization with millions of people, a strong leader can set the tone that flows down layers of management.
My baloney radar goes off in a big way though:
- The president has an overwhelming impact on things like ship maintenance and the ratio of missions to ships.
- The presidents are cast as either saints or sinners.
- The saints/sinners, at least in this small sample, fall along partisan lines.
- A vague "establishment" "hates" the POTUS and does not care about people working in the military.
Assuming for the moment my "baloney radar" is actually right, her explanation of politics (not sure that's the right word) is what drew me to Ayn Rand. I'd seen politics, and I always thought that it was caused by people seeking an end goal for themselves but using deceit to get there. Fountainhead and AS got me inside the villains heads. They weren't playing politics out to get what they wanted. Rather they didn't have an end goal, and politics was an end in itself.
One reason I'm interested in policy is I'm far enough away from it that I'm not even tempted to think about politics. For the people in the thick of it, making one set of politicians look like saints and the other sinners is their entire life.
The NY Post article and some of the comments remind me of talking to someone with an agenda at a company after a merger. Everyone who came from one company is a saint, and the people from the other company are sinners. In an extreme case, they don't even hide the politics. It doesn't ring remotely true. They're not giving evidence, and don't expect anyone to believe the whole thing. They have some plan to get paid or to get whatever Peter Keating was after in life, and they're just going full-on naked politics, hoping some of it sticks.
So basically I think it's not only crap, but it seems to be evil too. I apologize for making a judgment based on my "radar", which could easily be wrong. 20 years ago I thought some really stupid things; so this could be something else I'm wrong about. Maybe some presidents push the Joint Chiefs to do more with less. They also might signal they want to cut corners, thinking they're cutting through red tape, not understanding the procedures are there for a reason. I don't know. I've only had remote connections to people and projects for the gov't. As an outsider, though, reading this, it's sounds like a window into a world of the evil manipulating the unsophisticated, reminding me of Toohey mentoring people to give up on their dreams.
Yes, CG, there is an "establishment" that hates POTUS, it is all the establishment politicos, who suddenly have no leverage, it is all the whiner liberals who suddenly have no one in the white house throwing them crumbs and favors, and yes, they do hate the military. Hilarry Beast was famous as a bitch, but she was a Royal Bitch to the military.
I scored an 83 on ASVAB cold, unaware of what it was for.When I reported to my ship I met folks (got to know them, drank with them, and stood by them for years) who scored 38 on the ASVAB.
I trust that Navy personnel, my brethren, can assess a threat regardless of their level of intelligence or common sense because they, the large majority, actually give a damn about this country and, more so, they care if they live.
It was a shameful display of O's pussification of the USN.
https://navaltoday.com/2016/07/01/riv...
Since when in potentially hostile waters does a naval patrol boat not have weapons on board.
I was on assault craft and in friendly waters we always had at least one rifleman and someone with a pistol. A patrol boat would have had to be armed not only with personal arms but something mounted as well, until ordered otherwise (in hostile waters that would constitute dereliction of duty from the local command and, if it was an order, TREASON. Considering Benghazi......
Absolutely true! BT
“The disrespect shown to Sailors in this ship was unforgivable,” said Wallace Lovely, a retired Navy captain and surface warfare officer who led Destroyer Squadron 31 after serving as the commander of the Frigate Samuel B. Roberts.
That seems pretty damning.
Rick Hoffman, a retired Navy captain whose years in uniform included command stints on the frigate De Wert and the cruiser Hue City, said he was “flabbergasted” by portions of the surveys and how they were “uniformly focused on the Captain and his leadership style.
“Almost all were negative and suggested he was insensitive to the crew’s needs,” Hoffman said. “It certainly appeared he was increasingly toxic over time.”
The reports depict a poster child for bad surface warfare officers, he said.
“Long hours, no communication, CO is a micromanager, chain of command is not functioning unit,” Hoffman said. “Crew pushed to exhaustion with no end in sight.”
Not just snowflakes, but aholes in charge.
Let's ask Carl.
My G.P. doctor's secretary who runs the business part of his huge practice has two sons in the navy. Their stories are far different than those of the "prison ship."
Did you read the Navy Times article:
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-n...
"These comments are not unique. Each survey runs hundreds of pages, with crew members writing anonymously of dysfunction from the top, suicidal thoughts, exhaustion, despair and concern that the Shiloh was being pushed underway while vital repairs remained incomplete."
"Frequently in focus is the commanding officer’s micromanagement and a neutered chiefs mess. Aycock was widely feared among sailors who said minor on-the-job mistakes often led to time in the brig, where they would be fed only bread and water."
"While government watchdogs have warned of such issues for years, the Navy’s problems have come back in to the spotlight in the wake of this summer’s at-sea collisions involving the destroyers Fitzgerald and John S. McCain, disasters that killed 17 sailors. The Shiloh belongs to the same chain of command as those two ships, where several top admirals were recently fired."
I have NEVER, in 20 years of service, heard of anyone going to the brig, or bread and water, for ANYTHING. If you got that far, you were discharged. There is something seriously screwed up, if that is what they are doing today.
This sounds like typical Washington BS crap: "
Navy officials declined to discuss survey details, but acknowledged that Aycock’s superiors at Task Force 70 were aware of problems after the first negative survey taken two months into his command.
Aycock’s bosses were tracking the dysfunction and counseling the captain, officials said, yet Aycock remained on the job and rotated out in a standard change-of-command ceremony on Aug. 30."
You do NOT have a CO show up, take command, and THEN get "counseling" on how to be a commander, and ruin a ships crew, and then be allowed to go away gracefully. That sounds a lot like all the crap from DC, where Hillary breaks the law, gets away. Comey lies to congress, gets away. Money is exchanged for half of our uranium, enriching Clinton's, gets away. No accountability, just the "good ol boy gang". The Command Master Chief must have been a puss.
Out of fear of sounding harsh I think the best I can say is it appears some "Snowflakes" are melting.
The USN gets 3 squares a day and a bunk so how does this compare to our Army and Marines sleeping in a desert and dodging bullets. Fing cry babies.
This was happening to front line units in West Germany in the later 1950s and 1960......in 1961 it changed to rational......"you need it, you order it and you get it" and pretty quickly (thankfully).
Save the same sex for the bunk and not the bridge!