USS Theodore Roosevelt

[Whiskey]

What a cracker-jack sh@t show this really has turned out to be. 

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32916/trump-doesnt-want-to-destroy-former-captain-of-covid-19-plagued-carrier-over-a-bad-day

 

What does that make POTUS, the hero? Didn't he say 24 hours ago that  he agreed "100%" with the Navy's decision to fire the commander?

 

 

Just days ago, Modly told The Washington Post's David Ignatius that his decision was, at least in part, driven by a fear that President Donald Trump would insert himself into the process, making it even more politicized.

 

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by Whiskey

[habu2]

IMO the Captain did the Right Thing, but evidently did it the Wrong Way.

 

This article covers both sides of the argument pretty evenly, just don't read the comments if you lean to the right.

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/aircraft-carrier-captain-lost-his-command-because-of-catch-22-covid-19-dilemma/

 

I still can't tell if he literally wrote a "letter" (e.g. pen to paper) or an "email", all account I have seen state the "letter was leaked" but don't explicitly say if it was paper or electronic.  Not that it makes any difference...

[GreyGhost]

Just curious, did crew from any of the other ships in the CSG get infected?

 

-Gregg

[ElectroSoldier]

Ive been following this news since it broke with a report of 3 crew members catching the virus.

 

It seems odd that the captain broke the story to the mass media.

Is that something that would normally happen? Is that something a captain would normally do?

[habu2]

44 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

It seems odd that the captain broke the story to the mass media.

 

From what I have read he did not break the story directly to mass media, he wrote a four page letter to "Senior US Military Officials".  It was leaked to the media by someone who received the letter.

 

A copy of the letter is embedded in the article at this link:

 

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Exclusive-Captain-of-aircraft-carrier-with-15167883.php#

 

The letter starts with what I assume is an acronym, "BLUF:"  Anyone know what that means?

.

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by habu2
added link

[Whiskey]

39 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

Ive been following this news since it broke with a report of 3 crew members catching the virus.

 

It seems odd that the captain broke the story to the mass media.

Is that something that would normally happen? Is that something a captain would normally do?

 

There has been nothing (that I've read) that has proven that Captain Crozier released his letter to the media. In fact if I recall correctly the SecNav already stated they know it wasn't him.

[Zactoman]

Whoever leaked it to the San Francisco Chronicle is the one who should be court martialed and hung out to dry.

 

 According to Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly:

Quote

"The facts are that Capt. Crozier’s direct chain of command, up to the Commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, had been communication with him well before (and after) he sent the email. So had my office. I asked my Chief of Staff to call him just after the ship pulled into Guam.  He did so twice, and Capt. Crozier expressed no alarm to him at all.  Bottom line, the public disclosure of Capt. Crozier’s letter had no impact on the flow of support to the ship. None. The crew of the ship was already being tested as rapidly as possible, isolated as necessary, and moved off the ship to quarantine. That was all happening to the greatest extent possible while still providing for the safety of the ship and all those still aboard."

 

To me that paragraph justifies this:

Quote

“If he didn’t think ... that this information wasn’t going to get out into the public, in this information age that we live in, then he was too naive or too stupid to be commanding officer of a ship like this, The alternative is that he did it on purpose.”

 

Modly wrote in his apology:

Quote

“I believe, precisely because he is not naive and stupid, that he sent his alarming email with the intention of getting it into the public domain in an effort to draw public attention to the situation on his ship.”

 

The captain should have never sent the letter, should be investigated and disciplined as found appropriate by his superiors.

The operational readiness (especially lack there-of) of one of our most powerful weapons systems is not something that should be disclosed to the public in times of war or peace.

 

[Whiskey]

19 minutes ago, Zactoman said:

Whoever leaked it to the San Francisco Chronicle is the one who should be court martialed and hung out to dry.

 

 According to Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly:

 

To me that paragraph justifies this:

 

Modly wrote in his apology:

 

The captain should have never sent the letter, should be investigated and disciplined as found appropriate by his superiors.

The operational readiness (especially lack there-of) of one of our most powerful weapons systems is not something that should be disclosed to the public in times of war or peace.

 

 

Ok. Why wasn't any of that communicated earlier when Modly's office specifically stated that CPT Crozier was not in danger of being relieved on April 1st? Why did he even say he wasn't going to relieve him, then did it? 

 

Y'all may think that the CO of this vessel violated OPSEC by writing this letter, but I don't believe for one instant that this kind of information wasn't going to get out eventually. Someone on that boat or related to that boat would have said or done something that would then have put the spotlight on it. This is the equivalent to a division commander doing something similar. There is no way in hell you can keep a lid on it. 

 

Lastly, show me where in the UCMJ where someone can get punished for doing what he did?

[Zactoman]

1 hour ago, Whiskey said:

Ok. Why wasn't any of that communicated earlier when Modly's office specifically stated that CPT Crozier was not in danger of being relieved on April 1st? Why did he even say he wasn't going to relieve him, then did it? 

No idea. I haven't been following this in the news except for skimming a few articles before my post.

 

Quote

Y'all may think that the CO of this vessel violated OPSEC by writing this letter, but I don't believe for one instant that this kind of information wasn't going to get out eventually. Someone on that boat or related to that boat would have said or done something that would then have put the spotlight on it. This is the equivalent to a division commander doing something similar. There is no way in hell you can keep a lid on it.

It may well have eventually been released but it would have needed authorization, otherwise it's a crime.

Edit: I'd add that if officially released, that they likely wouldn't have released the info until the ship was fully operational.
You don't disclose that your fighter has broken ribs and blurred vision until after the final bell.

 

Quote

Lastly, show me where in the UCMJ where someone can get punished for doing what he did?

I just fixed helicopters when I served, but I'd guess:
10 U.S. Code § 892. Art. 92. Failure to obey order or regulation
or
18 U.S. Code § 798. Disclosure of classified information

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by Zactoman

[Mstor]

11 hours ago, GW8345 said:

If you want to know what goes on onboard a Navy ship I recommend you go down to your local Navy Recruiter and raise your right hand. There are things that go on onboard navy ships that are none of the public's business, it's call OPSEC.

 

The fatality rate for the virus here in the States is around 2.8% using the number publicly available, an most of those who are elderly, not young fit Sailors. They have more of a chance of getting killed doing their job then from dying from the virus.

 

The Captain disclosed sensitive/classified information, went outside the CoC, blindsided his boss, and acted irrationally, not something a Skipper of an Aircraft Carrier should be doing.

 

As for him being popular with his crew, a good CO shouldn't be popular, he should be RESPECTED.

 

There has been a lot written here about this. What I take offense at sir, is your combative and holier-than-thou tone. I tried to make some, to me, reasonable observations about what was happening and you jumped down my throat. I've never served, sorry. I don't belong to the elite club of vets here. I was a nurse for 25 yrs, taking care of the elderly. It may not have been as glorious a job as serving in the armed services, but I am proud of the work I did caring for the weak and infirm. Nursing home work is different from hospitals where doctors are there every day. We had to know our patients intimately, and be able to virtually diagnose problems on our own and report accurate information back to doctors so the patients could get proper treatment. We were lucky if we doctor saw a patient once a month. It was a great deal of responsibility and dangerous if you got it wrong. I don't think people quite understand that about geriatric nursing.

Sorry for going on. I am very grateful for the service that the soldiers of our armed services have provided this nation, sometimes giving their last full measure of life to that service. But others have served in their own way. If we don't all understand in intricacies of armed services, it is not license to belittle us.

 

Mods, feel free to delete this post if you feel I'm out of line. I just had to get that off my chest.

 

Mark

[GW8345]

 BLUF = Bottom Line Up Front, gives the key points first

 

https://www.redstate.com/darth641/2020/04/04/opinion-navy-captain-properly-relieved/

Edited April 7, 2020 by GW8345

[phantom]

14 hours ago, Geoff M said:

You should post a picture of it 😀

[Whiskey]

3 hours ago, GW8345 said:

 BLUF = Bottom Line Up Front, gives the key points first

 

https://www.redstate.com/darth641/2020/04/04/opinion-navy-captain-properly-relieved/

 

 

BLUF- a extremely conservative source that is posting an OPINION piece. It does not focus on the facts. Most of how this will play out is opinion yes, but you cannot use an article that is titled "OPINION" as a basis for your argument. 

 

I have tried to remove any of my political bias about this, and you called me out on it, do the same for yourself sir.

[GW8345]

37 minutes ago, Whiskey said:

 

 

BLUF- a extremely conservative source that is posting an OPINION piece. It does not focus on the facts. Most of how this will play out is opinion yes, but you cannot use an article that is titled "OPINION" as a basis for your argument. 

 

I have tried to remove any of my political bias about this, and you called me out on it, do the same for yourself sir.

The only thing that I posted that could be considered "political" is the source of an opinion article I posted, I never referred to politics in my posts.

 

Now that opinion piece pointed out several valid points but most here will discount it because it's from a "right wing" site, yet firmly believe everything they read in the NY Times and other sites they link.

 

I think one thing people are failing to understand, especially those who have never been in the military is, you never go outside your lane, this Skipper did. I read his letter is appalling, this Capt thinks he knows better than the entire DoN leadership, he makes it sound like none of them have ever served onboard a ship and that only he knows what's best for his crew. And to use that cruise ship as an example, that tells me he should never have screened for command.

[Geoff M]

4 hours ago, phantom said:

Cool Hat - BONUS Cool Jet too!

now back to our regular programming

[Whiskey]

1 hour ago, GW8345 said:

The only thing that I posted that could be considered "political" is the source of an opinion article I posted, I never referred to politics in my posts.

 

Now that opinion piece pointed out several valid points but most here will discount it because it's from a "right wing" site, yet firmly believe everything they read in the NY Times and other sites they link.

 

I think one thing people are failing to understand, especially those who have never been in the military is, you never go outside your lane, this Skipper did. I read his letter is appalling, this Capt thinks he knows better than the entire DoN leadership, he makes it sound like none of them have ever served onboard a ship and that only he knows what's best for his crew. And to use that cruise ship as an example, that tells me he should never have screened for command.

 

Again you missed my point. You linked an opinion, not an article based entirely on facts. When or if I read something and post it I try to make sure that the information is the same from multiple sources, including your favorite Fox News. The best non-partisan sources of news or information still remain Reuters or the Associated Press. Those two happen to actually produce articles that contain information that probably doesn't align with your way of thinking.

 

And therein lies one of the biggest issues with our society is that they don't vet the information they are being fed and that people typically take opinion as gospel. Even if I read something from a source I don't like (in your case NY Times or Washington Post) if the information is still accurate then you can't dispute it. 

 

I know I'm saying a lot of "you's" or come across as pointing fingers but I am just using yourself as an example. I have to double check myself as well to ensure I am not reading something that has opinion or a underlying agenda in it. 

 

And yes, I think that a Captain of a Naval Vessel does indeed know more than the civilians appointed over them as they are in fact the subject matter experts versus the SecNav. I would say the same about the Army. Now if this was entirely an argument that only contained the JCS, that would be different, but it doesn't. Why do you keep defending a civilian versus a guy that really was trying to do what he thought was best for his ship? You have been entirely dismissive of any valid points that others have made about this.

[GW8345]

30 minutes ago, Whiskey said:

 

Again you missed my point. You linked an opinion, not an article based entirely on facts. When or if I read something and post it I try to make sure that the information is the same from multiple sources, including your favorite Fox News. The best non-partisan sources of news or information still remain Reuters or the Associated Press. Those two happen to actually produce articles that contain information that probably doesn't align with your way of thinking.

 

And therein lies one of the biggest issues with our society is that they don't vet the information they are being fed and that people typically take opinion as gospel. Even if I read something from a source I don't like (in your case NY Times or Washington Post) if the information is still accurate then you can't dispute it. 

 

I know I'm saying a lot of "you's" or come across as pointing fingers but I am just using yourself as an example. I have to double check myself as well to ensure I am not reading something that has opinion or a underlying agenda in it. 

 

And yes, I think that a Captain of a Naval Vessel does indeed know more than the civilians appointed over them as they are in fact the subject matter experts versus the SecNav. I would say the same about the Army. Now if this was entirely an argument that only contained the JCS, that would be different, but it doesn't. Why do you keep defending a civilian versus a guy that really was trying to do what he thought was best for his ship? You have been entirely dismissive of any valid points that others have made about this.

Bold Mine

 

Your disdain for someone who doesn't agree with your "group think" and doesn't share your TDS is telling.

 

Did your "sources" mention who got that letter, here's a hint, it wasn't only the civilian leadership in the DoN. That letter was sent to numerous military leaders in the CoC from CINCPACFLT to the CNO and was then forwarded to the JCS, all of whom wear the uniform and have served numerous years onboard warships, it didn't just go to the DoN civilian leadership.

 

Your ideology blinds you from seeing this subject objectively and your sources are not giving you all of the information.

 

Now, you may not like the ONE source I linked but to discount it solely based on it's ideological leanings shows how partisan you are, and you call the "other side" the problem.

[Da SWO]

2 hours ago, Whiskey said:

 

Again you missed my point. You linked an opinion, not an article based entirely on facts. When or if I read something and post it I try to make sure that the information is the same from multiple sources, including your favorite Fox News. The best non-partisan sources of news or information still remain Reuters or the Associated Press. Those two happen to actually produce articles that contain information that probably doesn't align with your way of thinking.

 

And therein lies one of the biggest issues with our society is that they don't vet the information they are being fed and that people typically take opinion as gospel. Even if I read something from a source I don't like (in your case NY Times or Washington Post) if the information is still accurate then you can't dispute it. 

 

I know I'm saying a lot of "you's" or come across as pointing fingers but I am just using yourself as an example. I have to double check myself as well to ensure I am not reading something that has opinion or a underlying agenda in it. 

 

And yes, I think that a Captain of a Naval Vessel does indeed know more than the civilians appointed over them as they are in fact the subject matter experts versus the SecNav. I would say the same about the Army. Now if this was entirely an argument that only contained the JCS, that would be different, but it doesn't. Why do you keep defending a civilian versus a guy that really was trying to do what he thought was best for his ship? You have been entirely dismissive of any valid points that others have made about this.

The Captain still works for the civilians (appointed/voted in) over him.

[Whiskey]

2 hours ago, GW8345 said:

Bold Mine

 

Your disdain for someone who doesn't agree with your "group think" and doesn't share your TDS is telling.

 

Did your "sources" mention who got that letter, here's a hint, it wasn't only the civilian leadership in the DoN. That letter was sent to numerous military leaders in the CoC from CINCPACFLT to the CNO and was then forwarded to the JCS, all of whom wear the uniform and have served numerous years onboard warships, it didn't just go to the DoN civilian leadership.

 

Your ideology blinds you from seeing this subject objectively and your sources are not giving you all of the information.

 

Now, you may not like the ONE source I linked but to discount it solely based on it's ideological leanings shows how partisan you are, and you call the "other side" the problem.

 

No my disdain is for someone as closed minded as yourself and nothing anyone with a differing ideology as yours says is wrong on not just this but many other topics.

 

I discounted the ONE source you posted not just because of where it came from but 75% because it is an OPINION piece. Missed the point again.

 

My sources are the same as everyone elses. For someone such as yourself that touts being in the "know" so much but is upset about any level of OPSEC violation you sure do teeter on the edge of violating it as well. If the sources you have aren't allowed to publicly speak about it then you probably should not either. And yeah, it's public knowledge that there was a lot of people in the chain of communication when the Captain sent his letter. Nothing new there. 

 

You still haven't answered one of my questions:  

Why do you keep defending a civilian versus a guy that really was trying to do what he thought was best for his ship?

 

38 minutes ago, Da SWO said:

The Captain still works for the civilians (appointed/voted in) over him.

 

Yes he does, as did I when I was in the Army. That does make the civilian the most knowledgeable of the ship and it's crew.

 

[markiii]

Breaking news: the Acting SecNav has resigned amid the uproar.

[Whiskey]

Well that's that then I guess.......

[GW8345]

1 hour ago, Whiskey said:

 

No my disdain is for someone as closed minded as yourself and nothing anyone with a differing ideology as yours says is wrong on not just this but many other topics.

 

I discounted the ONE source you posted not just because of where it came from but 75% because it is an OPINION piece. Missed the point again.

 

My sources are the same as everyone elses. For someone such as yourself that touts being in the "know" so much but is upset about any level of OPSEC violation you sure do teeter on the edge of violating it as well. If the sources you have aren't allowed to publicly speak about it then you probably should not either. And yeah, it's public knowledge that there was a lot of people in the chain of communication when the Captain sent his letter. Nothing new there. 

 

You still haven't answered one of my questions:  

Why do you keep defending a civilian versus a guy that really was trying to do what he thought was best for his ship?

 

 

Yes he does, as did I when I was in the Army. That does make the civilian the most knowledgeable of the ship and it's crew.

 

You do have disdain, you said one of my favorite sources is Fox News, yet I've never used Fox News as a source on this site.

 

As to your question as to why I'm defending a civilian over a uniformed member, because that civilian was correct! It's not a matter of uniform verses civilians, it a matter of right and wrong and in this case, the Captain was wrong, pure and simple.

 

And just because I used an article to SUPPORT my opinion doesn't mean I used it to BASE my opinion on. I based my opinion on 20.5 years of Naval service and 15 years of supporting the Navy as a contractor, and the 18 years I spent as a Navy Brat, basically I based my opinion on experience, not some news articles I pulled on line.

[11bee]

Goodbye Acting SecNav.   Somehow I’m guessing we won’t see a few thousand servicemen applauding you as you walk out of the pentagon for the last time.  

[habu2]

It doesn’t matter if you’re civilian or military (active or veteran) or whether you lean left, right or straight down the middle - the optics on this situation are terrible. This is a PR nightmare for the Navy and it just keeps getting worse. 

[GW8345]

The SecNav held himself to his own standards, he screwed up, allowed his emotions to over rule his judgement, realized he screwed up and resigned. He didn't wait to get fired, he didn't make excuses, he knew he made a mistake and held himself to the same standard he held others to.