previous post next post  

Local earthquake damage

The good folks at the Leavenworth VA cemetery are probably out on the grounds right now wondering just what caused a grave to explode.

It was the spinning of the occupant.

Said occupant being the Auld Soldier.

No, really. 

Why would the Auld Soldier be spinning in his too-recently occupied grave?

Simple.

Click.here.and.read.this.

"On any other Thursday, freshman Army ROTC member Ryan Drago would be wearing his uniform in class, but not this Thursday, two days after two members of the Navy ROTC were arrested on suspicion of hate crimes and tampering for allegedly dropping cotton balls Feb. 26 outside the Black Culture Center."

Two Navy middies do something venal and stupid, and the Army ROTC cadets decide to not wear their uniforms... 

So many things wrong with that.

Leave aside the Navy did the proper thing and wore their uniforms - because the actions in question are the actions of two individuals who happen to be middies - not the sanctioned actions of persons acting as students in Navy ROTC.

Leave aside the logical fallacy that would seem to be that the cadets have the idea that if a cop is caught being bad, all cops should take a day off of wearing their uniforms on duty?  I understand that conducting close-order drill in front of the Black Culture Center in the wake of the incident might be a touch inflammatory and a bad idea.

But to not wear your uniform?  Per usual for your normally scheduled classes, being conducted at the normal place? 

Heh.  It's tantamount to accepting collective responsibility for the actions of individuals - individuals who acted contrary to the goals and ideals of the institution.  Oh, wait - it wasn't even your institution...

That itself is enough to have caused the spinning in several graves of former Professors of Military Science.  I suspect that Colonel Donovan was joined in his spinning by Colonel Skelly, too.  And LTC O'Brien. 

Better still, apparently when the Cadets make bad decisions, as long as they do it as a group, the Cadre vets the decision.

"Drago said the decision not to wear uniforms Thursday was one made by the Army ROTC as a whole.

"Not wearing uniforms today was a personal decision for all of us," Drago said. "But what we do, we do together."

This is a teachable moment.  But possibly not with this cadre.

Heh.  I'm a Distinguished Military Graduate of this same ROTC program, and I know I'm embarrassed.  I can only imagine the Auld Soldier's level of annoyance.

35 Comments

Let's see -- two NROTC types pull a stupid stunt, so the *Army* ROTC decides to abjure the uniform while the remainder of the NROTC wear theirs.

To prove what? That the Army kaydets have sympathy and solidarity with the stunt's target? Afraid that the sight of the uniform will be a "provocation"?

What peabrain decided *that* was a mature response, and what peabrain on the cadre thinks "When we do something, we all do it together" is any kind of rationale for it?

PC idiots.
 
Gosh .. imagine the self-loathing and repercussions had it been watermelon and fried chicken instead of mere cotton balls.
 
How incredibly stupid.
 
Nice presumption of innocence there too.  Hey, Drago, why don't you wait to find out if NROTC is guilty before you go around apologizing for it.
 
Even during the anti-Vietnam riots, not wearing uniforms would not have been tolerated by the University of Connecticut Army cadre nor by the Zoomie cadre.  We cadets could have made a case that for our personal safety and to maintain decent grades we should have only worn uniforms in the ROTC building.  This appalling and I wonder if any of the Army Officers their understand how stupid and vacuous they look.
 
On a fateful day, 18 MAR 196-+, I left home for the Military. The night before, I said, "Good-Bye" to everybody and went to bed. I got up early, showered and had a cup of coffee. My ride was due in about 30 minutes. To my surprise, Dad got up with something for me.

Dad said, "When you think you're a smart ass
and you go out and act like a bad ass.
Everybody looks at you like you're a dumb ass,
but what you really are is a garden variety asshole."

It's been quite a few years, but the older I get, the more true it gets.
Armorer, in Memory of Dads
 
Idiots.  They should be worried about learning all they can about leading soldiers into harms way.  I don't think they understand what the real world is like.  Have fun regaling the boys with stories about your social activism out on some dirty POS COP in eastern Afstan.  Clowns.  On the other hand I got to hear a rant about this from my dad the likes of which I have not not heard in some time.  It was loud, colorful and profane.  Even better, it wasn't directed at me.  So, the old timer's blood is boiling too, thanks for the heads up Major.
 
 Greetings:

I wonder how many Major Nidal Hassans there will be in their futures.
 
When I wore a blue blouse on Thursdays as a Freshman and Sophomore, this would not have occurred to any of us. Not having sworn the Oath, the most punishment we could have gotten would have been an F in the course, so fear of punishment was not an issue.
The Vietnam thing was going on at the time, and we had some lively discussions in AFROTC class about it, but to say again, this kind of silliness would not have crossed our minds.

Of course Ga. Tech was out of the mainstream of teh crazy then.  I recall one Thursday when my German prof was on vacation and we had a substitute from Massachusetts or someplace.  I think  80% of the people in the room were wearing a uniform. He looked at us and said something like, "What are all these fascists doing here?"  He may have meant it as a joke, but we were not amused.
 
I'm lost, when did they make the Military, a Democracy? This post, in its own way began to haunt me. Armorer, you're right, this is a teachable moment. Now, what should be *taught?* Now, we've got a rogue cadre, what do we do with it? Before you start, we are *not* talking about political correctness. But we are talking about *Traditions, Codes, and Honor.* The flip side is *Treason and the Hangman's Noose.* Am I trying to get these people hanged? No, I'm trying to get us to start thinking. Question, should we be surprised?  Take a good honest look at our Nation's leadership over the last 40 years, then make up your own minds and come to the table. I'm sure you'll have better answers than me.
 
I mind a fellow student, from an Army family, who told me about the two kinds of ROTC professors. One kind is on the way out, and ROTC is his last post while they are putting the final touches on his walking papers.  The other kind is on the way up, and PMS is a plum assignment, a chance to rest and maybe take some courses, before going on to bigger and better things.  At Ga. Tech when I was there, I think we had mostly the second type, which may be the cause of all my warm-fuzzy feelings about military folks, ever since.
 
This stunt should have blown up prior to launch.  WTH is the leadership?  I don't want that hump Drago or his minions anywhere near my AO.  When word of this coming got out somebody should have jumped and when they landed it should have been on that idiot.  
 
Mike, obviously a ROTC instructor of the first type, there.
 
 Why does the newspaper article make it look like the Army ROTC is responsible? You don't know the alleged idiots were Navy ROTC until you read the article. (Unless the newspaper article was to show the poor judgement of the Army ROTC unit as a whole.) Just wondering...
 
Occam's Razor, Alan.

Because.it's.poorly.written!

8^ )
 
lemme guess here, the two "students' are, what, maybe 20? So they have a childish moment and pull something stupid. In the past, this would have meant, what? Extra duty? More PT? 3 pages "I'm sorry" essay about how stupid it was? Littering? boot from the program? Extra 'sensitivity' training? Now we have "Felony hate crime" attached to a political statement, (offensive, but still free speech). Like I said on Lex, If they'd raised their thumb, extended their index finger, and curled the remaining digits into a fist, they could've been upgraded to "use of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony" and possibly receive life in prison. For political "free" speech. I fear we have crossed the line from "Freedom OF speech" to "Freedom FROM any offensive speech".
 
@Joec  This was not about a "childish moment", but actually an "established pattern of behaviors". Those very same behaviors were not conforming to UCMJ. Now, were these individuals, children? If so, remove them for cause, with an administrative discharge and a written record stating that they should get no benefits. Are these individuals still hoping to become US Military leaders? If so, they stand in need of an "Old-Fashioned Radical Attitude Adjustment."

John, somebody should keep a list of candidates to assist in this "Radical Attitude Adjustment."
 
feh, little putzes will probably apply for AG or Finance, and good riddance to them.
 
Grumpy, I don't disagree. Boot 'em from the program for poor judgment. But their actions don't warrant "Felony Hate Crime" except in the minds of the perennialy offended. I have to go find the collection, but a buddy of mine says it is a Larry Niven story "The Jigsaw Man". In this story of a future time, the demand for organs has become so high, the state has mandated the death penalty for repeat offenders. It is the short story of a felon running from the police, because under the repeat offender law, he will be sentenced to death. His crime? Running a red light. I use that illustration for my point. We now have certain groups of individuals who have persuaded week minded legislators to elevate to "hate crime" status what used to be (even if stupid) political speech. And under that definition, it is a short upgrade of a felon from "20 years, to life, to death for repeat offenders.
 
Those guys are young, without too many miles on their parts. Hang 'em! (The real thesis of the Niven story) I mean, I'd like a nice new liver.
 
I'm still trying to understand what's behind this sentence;

"We're sympathetic to how these things can cause conflict, and we want to make sure we avoid conflict."

Avoid conflict via what?  Being invisible?  Nihilism?  Do they really think no one else in class knows they are in ROTC because they are wearing different clothes for one day? 

There is a sense this uniform act negates the negativity of the cotton ball event.  So this means the army ROTC is responsible for the Navy ROTC who are responsible for the actions of two members?  How?  And not wearing uniforms for one day makes it all better?  And this decision makes better Army leaders?  How?

Then there this one;
"Not wearing uniforms today was a personal decision for all of us," Drago said. "But what we do, we do together."
And that underlines to me one of the core wierdness aspects of this.  Two (cotton ballers) is Many (NROTC) is All (Army ROTC).  Then One (personal decision) is All (we do together).  Do they know the difference between a group and an individual?

This doesn't feel Army at all.  And I'm not even in it.

 
Joe - the argument over the severity of the charges is taking place in Columbia, and is kinda outside the scope of my rant (but hey, how many bloggers can actually *control* a thread?) - but just to be clear - the initial idiots were Navy ROTC midshipmen, but the ones *I'm* ranting about are the incoherent-thinking Army cadets and the #*$)%#@ cadre who allowed them to do this.

Just to be clear.

I'm *really* annoyed with the commissioned officers of the United States Army who allowed this.

Feh.
 

Warning!  Pedant Alert!

Patchwork Girl.  Gil the Arm.  Great story.

/Pedant Alert

 
Hey! I'm the pedant here!  Seriously, though, John, does the "two kinds of ROTC instructors" notion comport with your experience?
 

My company commander and first sergeant told me I'd never be NCO material, so they sent to the next OCS class.  I had a BA and most of an MA when I enlisted in 1976.  Guess they were right. 

We never did dumb shit like that.  We never had time.

 
JTG - your comment is dependent on where in the time-space continuum you are.

More often than not, however, being PMS (especially at the Colonel level, now *very* rare) is a retirement job.

For the Majors and Lieutenant Colonels in those positions, not as bad, but very dependent on the school.

But it all depends on where the current emphasis of the Army is.  Right now, I'm thinking PMS might not be a retirement job, but it's at best career-neutral.
 
All it took was idiots with cotton balls to make those cadets ashamed of the uniform?
 
There was a very sharp Army Colonel PMS at Ga. Tech when I was there. We invited him to a colloquy in the basement of our dorm, that's how I know he was sharp. Mebbe his appointment was an easy-going reward, just before retirement? I dunno,  but it does seem to me that things were more serious back then, the Vietnam thing concentrating our minds, and all.
 
Sorry guys, I think the kids who refrained from wearing their uniforms for one day got it sorta right, possibly for the wrong reasons.

They made a short, silent, but clear statement that they had nothing to do with this, and then got back to business.  Meanwhile, everybody else around them was going nuts -- including, unfortunately, all the adults.   Had there been one adult in the vicinity to call these fools on the carpet, ream them out in style, and require them for apologize for any offense and clean up the mess, this entire incident would have been a non-event.  

 From here it looks like the only people demonstrating maturity and restraint are the ROTC students.  
 
Colonel Bridges, I think his name was?
 
Sorry, Valerie -- they made the short, silent, but clear statement that they were either afraid or ashamed to wear the uniform, for a reason they were uninvolved with.
 
They essentially inserted themselves into a problem they were at best only a peripheral element of.

If anything, they called more attention to it.
 
I was neither an Officer, nor ROTC. However the Uniform, is the Uniform of the Armed forces of America, no matter what Branch they were in. If they wanted a show of solidarity they should have had the 2 numskulls wear their civvies. By removing their uniforms they 1: Cast glances that perhaps the action taken may and or may not have been a sanctioned action for those in uniform 2: They show a willingness to part ways with the very military they are sworn to serving over actions that neither themselves, their chain of command, or even their branch of service had anything to do with. (A good example would be all the O-3's in the Army removing their uniforms because of the Navy's Tailhook Scandal) 3: They show a disrespect not only to their branch of service and its ideals but to those of us who wear or have worn the uniform as well. The Army isn't Marching Band. You don't drop your uniform in the floor because you don't agree with something or because something doesn't go your way. You can't turn in your 2 weeks notice, and it's very rare that you could file unemployment when leaving. Un;ess its a involuntary discharge. I don't like this, I don't agree with it, but then in the interests of full disclosure, I'm of a bias anyway: I've met only a handful of formerly ROTC officers whom I actually liked. Not to say there aren't good ones out there, I just met very few of them in my time in service. And actions like these do not transcend my viewpoint anymore towards them either.
 
I read.  I educated myself.  They are still morons.  While I understand the need to avoid conflict, isn't the whole point of military training being prepared to engage the enemy?  Wearing their uniforms identified them with the perps, not the military, who condemned such acts as committed by the middies. 

*sigh*  We are a nation of wimps.
 
@Cricket, Wrong, the choice to *not* wear the Uniform of The US Military actually identifies these individuals with the perps.

The issue is this, these individuals are all members of  The US Military, therefore are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Yes, they can and should be put through a Court-Martial. The real issue with the Uniform, is in the battle-space, they can be executed without question.

To the leaders, two letters, actually the same, one sent first class mail and the second sent certified mail with return receipt requested.

The body of the letter would read something like this. "You are *ordered* to attend a conference to discuss this situation. We will also discuss your assets, rank, pensions or benefits or lack, thereof. The conference will be held at....."

@BloodSpite, I see somebody has let you out of your cage. I agree with your views. I've seen my share of "90-Day Wonders". After 90 Days, everybody wondered if they knew what they were doing.