previous post next post  

I got my scalp for Walter Reed.

By The Armorer on March 1, 2007 | | Comments (23) | TrackBacks (1)

Remember that scalp I asked for?

I got it.

Pretty nice one, too.

Major General George Weightman, formerly Commanding General, Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Good.

No, I don't think that me griping about it affected things one iota, in case you're wondering about a burgeoning megalomania around here.

Read about it here, at Fox News.

There's probably a few others that need to dry in the sun with this one, however.

H/t, Leavenworth Centurion

There have not been enough GO scalps during this war. LTG Sanchez lost his chance at a 4th star, sure, but it's not the same. Col (formerly BG) Karpinski lost her star, but administratively. Colonel Pappas got spanked, but not hard enough, over his role in Abu Ghraib. But there's been enough functional incompetence (Reserve pay system, anyone?) that has seemingly gone unpunished that it's just aggravating.

And if scalps *have* been taken - then they should be done so publicly, not with a quiet "shoo!" to the exit. Leadership by example. Many of those examples should be... public.

Update: Heh. As Barb noted in her comment - Weightman's successor is his predecessor, LTG Kiley - on whose watch much of this was also extant. Perhaps this is his chance to atone. Certainly, he'll have the flaming wreckage of Weightman's career to light his path.

Share This Article:

Categories:

1 Trackbacks

TrackBack this entry at http://www.thedonovan.com/cgi-bin/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/6884

Command Responsibility at Walter Reed from Foreign Object Damage on March 2, 2007 3:43 PM

This was not something hidden. This was not some corrupt supply officer cooking the books behind closed doors. It was not some senior NCO quietly boinking soldiers he should have been taking care of. It was known. It wasn't fixed. It was accepted as ... Read More

23 Comments

By Chuck Simmins on March 1, 2007 1:46 PM
Jeez, first Karpinski and now this. Was that his permanent rank, or will he retire as a BG?
 
By Barb on March 1, 2007 1:47 PM
I just saw the item on MSNBC, and thought the same thing. I hope that no one thinks this action sweeps the rest under the rug, though. Not just in more heads as appropriate, but concrete and shared action plans for correcting the issues. No - we can't expect immediate redress for everything, things take time. But I want to know that there is a plan and people are going to be held accountable for managing the corrections.
 
By Barb on March 1, 2007 1:58 PM
Hey John - I just noticed that the temporary replacement (Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley) is mentioned in other articles (like this one) as having been informed about the problems when he was in charge of WR in 2003. So we've replaced the Current commander who failed the solders with the Previous command who failed the soldiers? That doesn't make very good sense.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 1, 2007 2:13 PM
True enough, Barb. He does have the benefit of looking at the wreckage of his successor's career for motivation. Perhaps this is his chance to atone.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 1, 2007 2:21 PM
Chuck - as far as I'm concerned, not enough Generals have gone home failures. Weightman's grade upon retirement will be administratively determined, with several considerations applied, and it could go either way. His previous quality of service would, and should, certainly factor into the decision. I won't be bothered if he retires in grade. I also won't be bothered if he's retired at a lesser grade, but I would be surprised. If that happens, things at WRAMC were possibly worse than we've come to believe, in terms of the leadership.
 
By MaryAnn on March 1, 2007 3:07 PM
Nice call, John. And nice scalp, too ;-)
 
By AFSister on March 1, 2007 3:45 PM
Glad you saw this, John. I was going to put the link in H&R comments if you hadn't posted on it already. Like you, I'm glad to see the Army is taking some action in the officer ranks, but I'm still curious as to how Bldg 18 got in such bad shape without anyone but the residents and WaPo noticing.
 
By kat-missouri on March 1, 2007 3:58 PM
Crud...when I emailed that earlier re: "sacremento bee", I thought I scooped you. Being at work makes it a little difficult to keep refreshing and checking for info on this site. ;) The sacremento Bee actually said:
Last week the Army took disciplinary action against several lower-level soldiers at Walter Reed, but officials have declined to publicly confirm any details of those actions.
Yeah, interesting Kiley is back in place. Though, last night as I sloughed through several hundred pages of Medical Retention Processing, etc, I noted that a working plan and presentation had been made to congress in 2003 and 2004 regarding an investigation and plans to fix the system (many problems of which are still complained about today). Possibly Kiley came up with a plan and then left before implementation or had implemented with success and then it fell apart. But, I will bet you he has a fire under his jodhpurs right now.
 
By Cricket on March 1, 2007 4:15 PM
If the problems were spotlighted in 2003, then they were ongoing under the previous command. Which means it kept getting broker and broker. What I would like to know is if he 'had a pwan' back then, what happened? Budget? Change of command? And did it get passed to his successor who is now history? And if it did get passed to Weightman, why didn't he do anything?
 
By kat-missouri on March 1, 2007 4:25 PM
Cricket...actually, it was spotlighted in 2001, 1996, 1992, 1988...that is why I had to "slough" through all these documents. It seems that every time the last process didn't work, they tack on some more people, move some stuff around, call it a fix and then get all shocked when it still doesn't work. If I did that at a company I worked for I'd be sh*tcanned faster than speedy gonzalez on frijole night. Of course, part of the problem is trying to work around legislation and other crud that tries to keep the services separate, the reserve, guard and regular army separate, etc, etc, etc. Another funny thing as I read, I kept seeing how often the generals were talking about saving the DoD money by insuring overpayment for things like "hazardous duty" were significantly reduced once a soldier was MedEvaced or redeployed back to the states. I thought that was funny because the example give in 2003 were 87 soldiers in a med hold unit, of which 23 might have received overpayment, but the rest were underpaid or not paid at all. And this was talked about as if the 23 were representative of a much bigger problem that far outweighed the other 64 who were not paid or were underpaid. That was not "funny" (hahaha) but "funny" shocking. Again, any other employer would have a resignation shoved up their noses. Of course, no other employer can have you arrested and the rest of your life jacked for not showing up to work.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 1, 2007 4:29 PM
Don't get me started on the pay system. Don't.even.
 
By TheNewGuy on March 1, 2007 4:37 PM
One scalp down, but I can't help feeling like Weightman is just the fall guy. I think he took over command in August of 2006, and to be fair to him, I'd bet that it takes 3-6 months in an organization or position like that to really get your feet on the ground and figure out who's who and what's what. These problems at WRAMC have been going on a lot longer than that. Maybe some people can hit the ground running in a couple of weeks, but it's always taken me at least 1-2 months, and that's within my small area of purview. I can't imagine it takes less time for a position with more responsibility and a zillion things to delegate. Ironically, this is probably more the responsibility of the previous commander. Irony of ironies, he's now been tasked to take over the job from Weightman. It strikes me as mighty convenient that all these problems were ongoing during the several YEARS of Kiley's command, and were apparently left as a present for the subsequent commander, who now takes the fall. I've seen this happen more than once. MAJCOM "promotes" or PCS's somebody into a commander position over an unsat unit shortly before an ORI, only to have the unit fail (naturally), and the new commander take the fall. A lot of this heat needs to be directed at Kiley as well... it's a pity he's apparently getting a free pass.
 
By TheNewGuy on March 1, 2007 4:50 PM
Here's another post article detailing how far back the neglect goes... note that Kiley is quoted prominently (and his quarters are right across the street from building 18). Here's the money paragraph: Kiley lives across the street from Building 18. From his quarters, he can see the scrappy building and busy traffic the soldiers must cross to get to the 113-acre post. At a news conference last week, Kiley, who declined several requests for interviews for this article, said that the problems of Building 18 "weren't serious and there weren't a lot of them." He also said they were not "emblematic of a process of Walter Reed that has abandoned soldiers and their families." How hard would it have been to walk across the street and stroll around?
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 1, 2007 4:51 PM
NewGuy - not around here he won't. But we've got to have something to work with - which Kat seems to have at least a partial handle on. However, there's this whole having a job thing getting in my way, too, so I'm dependent on outside sources.
 
By kat-missouri on March 1, 2007 5:48 PM
Dude, I've got stuff from the Navy, the Army, the Marines and the air force. Guess which service is swinging last on the management of benefits scale and processing folks from unit to unit, managing reserves, etc? I have to look it up, but some top brass just gave an oversight last year to Congress re: this issue and said that their rating on this was 89%. First, I think he was full of ca-ca and that was overly generous. Second, in a 1 million or more force, 11% unsatisfactory is 110k unsatisfied, screwed up active, reserve and guard component. Can you imagine having 110k employees with screwed up benefits and pay? I realize, of course, the military is the largest employer ever, but seriously, how much money and resources do you need to make it work? And, I swear if I read another "we're going to add this form to fix this" kind of thing, my eyes would have popped out of my head and I would have been launching the laptop. Primary recommendation: the next guard unit returning from Iraq or Afghanistan should be asked to testify in front of congress about pay, benefits, processing, wounded, etc. At least the arm forces committee would have something useful to do with their time.
 
By jim b on March 1, 2007 9:31 PM
He assumed command in August. He died for the sins of others. CSI can tell you how long it too for that building to deteriorate. Gates....... I hope you work for someone like you. A**H*t
 
By Cricket on March 2, 2007 8:00 AM
Excuse my ingnernce here, but what is an ORI? And I was sort of wondering about Wieghtman... it didn't seem like he had been there all that long. I certainly hope he fights this, as he should.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 2, 2007 8:38 AM
First - ORI, Operational Readiness Inspection. Second - Weightman. Certainly he is a scapegoat. That said, his obvious cluelessness about the situation when it broke, and the handling of it, argues for the relief, regardless. I am more disturbed about recycling LTG Kiley back into the position. Strikes me that he may be the guy I want to have the amended OER. Given that Kiley was Weightman's predecessor, and some of his asinine comments about Building 18, I have to wonder just what they are thinking over at the Puzzle Palace. The clear answer to me would have been to bring in someone from, oh, Brooke Army Medical Center at Fort Sam Houston to take over, not bring back a commander under whose watch this stuff was also going on. Feh.
 
By Cricket on March 2, 2007 8:51 AM
Fair enough but even so..he was trying to fix some of the problems until the story broke...after a four month investigation into the problems. That was right about the time Kiley left and Weightman took command when this story was being investigated. *grumps off to the castle kitchen to fix lunch*
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 2, 2007 9:24 AM
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, Cricket. I've got no per se problem with MG Weightman's relief. I've got strong issues with LTG Kiley as his replacement, given this all happened on his watch, too. But until I develop a source inside the E-ring, I'll just have to speculate.
 
By Fod on March 2, 2007 11:21 AM
John - Getting the "pinging too fast" error again when trying to trackback this article via haloscan. my post is http://foreignobjectdamage.blogspot.com/2007/03/command-responsibility-at-walter-reed.html
 
By Cricket on March 2, 2007 2:34 PM
Well...yes I agree with you on Kiley. And since I don't have the command perspective that you and Cass do, I concede the POV re: Weightman. *feeds moat monster and set out scruple snacks*
 
By Glenn M. Cassel, AMH1(AW), USN,RET on March 2, 2007 6:56 PM
MSNBC? and personal accountability and responsibility? Doesn't match. The civilian media does not have a clue. The individual in command is responsible for everything that happens. I had a CO in an A-7 Squadron at NAS Lemoore, CA relieved by Commander-in-Chief, United States Pacific Fleet. In early 1985, USS Enterprise returned home to NAS Alameda after a deployment to the IO/WESTPrks for the most part.AC. The ship ran aground in San Francisco Bay. He was relieved when Enterprise finally moored pierside. The system wo
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.