JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[CU77]

BTW, it's getting immensely tiresome having these posters who whine about "mission" when they clearly have not the slightest clue. Despite all their chest thumping, not a clue.

and why? Because they think they're supporting Trump???

I think you know the answer to that one, MD. It's not so much "supporting Trump" as it is supporting the trumpista regime, not because of a personal affinity for Trump per se, but because they believe that the trumpistas are restoring a lost purity of some imagined "true America" (MAGA!) in which loyalty is the highest virtue. They see themselves as part of the trumpista "us", and anyone who finds any fault with any loyal trumpista (like Modly) as one of "them": the liberals, the slackers, the takers, the leeches (PB's word), the 47%, in short all those who would pollute true-American virtue.

[cradleandshoot]

Everyone acknowledges he violated the chain of command so I don't have any clue why you keep saying people don't understand that. What people don't understand is the specific reaction and behavior of Modly, which OS even said wasn't right. Ever heard of lead by example? I care more about the influence of the people in the top than middle management. But you keep insisting that no one understands or acknowledges the chain of command and I've seen like 15 folks who question the higher up leadership acknowledge the violation, so who are you talking about? Or is this in your head?

I keep saying that because certain people here keep saying the captain was justified in his actions. His first obligation was to his mission and what his orders were. There is even one poster here trying to tell us the good captain had no orders, had no mission he was just sailing around on a pleasure cruise just for the hell of it. i understand why the captain did what he did. i just can't understand his reasoning for doing it the way he did. That is not how an experienced, seasoned naval officer responds to the problem at hand. He took actions that he knew were wrong and took his ship out of the fight for the foreseeable future. If that carrier is NEEDED, it won't be able to respond. For those actions any consequences are all on him.

There is no such poster saying that. Bother to read what I write, please.

Yes, a 'mission', but I'll take Crozier's word for whether a 'wartime mission'. Nope.

You really ought to also read what Crozier wrote too.

and over and over and over again said that I understand how this was outside the chain of command (even though the admirals were insisting otherwise on April 1) given that the distribution was not limited to just the chain of command. I've said that it is quite likely that Crozier understood that his action jeopardized his personal career.

But "justified"? You betcha.
Unless I see a basis that tells me otherwise.

So far, you guys are just puffing your chests and "mission" and took them out of the "fight" and "chain of command", blah, blah, blah, yet are unwilling to tell us the scenario under which that ship did not need to get a large portion of that crew off fast, and ultimately rotate out all or else cleared via testing.

Tell me the scenario where you say, 'guys you're just going to tough it out these next months on board.'

Now, if you want to make that argument because it was 'wartime' and they couldn't be spared from the 'fight' then ok, have at it.

but otherwise, you're all wet

Spoken like a true REMF.

[MDlaxfan76]

Everyone acknowledges he violated the chain of command so I don't have any clue why you keep saying people don't understand that. What people don't understand is the specific reaction and behavior of Modly, which OS even said wasn't right. Ever heard of lead by example? I care more about the influence of the people in the top than middle management. But you keep insisting that no one understands or acknowledges the chain of command and I've seen like 15 folks who question the higher up leadership acknowledge the violation, so who are you talking about? Or is this in your head?

I keep saying that because certain people here keep saying the captain was justified in his actions. His first obligation was to his mission and what his orders were. There is even one poster here trying to tell us the good captain had no orders, had no mission he was just sailing around on a pleasure cruise just for the hell of it. i understand why the captain did what he did. i just can't understand his reasoning for doing it the way he did. That is not how an experienced, seasoned naval officer responds to the problem at hand. He took actions that he knew were wrong and took his ship out of the fight for the foreseeable future. If that carrier is NEEDED, it won't be able to respond. For those actions any consequences are all on him.

There is no such poster saying that. Bother to read what I write, please.

Yes, a 'mission', but I'll take Crozier's word for whether a 'wartime mission'. Nope.

You really ought to also read what Crozier wrote too.

and over and over and over again said that I understand how this was outside the chain of command (even though the admirals were insisting otherwise on April 1) given that the distribution was not limited to just the chain of command. I've said that it is quite likely that Crozier understood that his action jeopardized his personal career.

But "justified"? You betcha.
Unless I see a basis that tells me otherwise.

So far, you guys are just puffing your chests and "mission" and took them out of the "fight" and "chain of command", blah, blah, blah, yet are unwilling to tell us the scenario under which that ship did not need to get a large portion of that crew off fast, and ultimately rotate out all or else cleared via testing.

Tell me the scenario where you say, 'guys you're just going to tough it out these next months on board.'

Now, if you want to make that argument because it was 'wartime' and they couldn't be spared from the 'fight' then ok, have at it.

but otherwise, you're all wet

Spoken like a true REMF.

[LandM]

Far,
Any good officer is relying on his senior NCO's - they know the heartbeat;
As stated if you think you are being given an illegal order - you have every right to jump as high as you want. The SS is NOT the US Military. The US Military does not operate that way nor at least in my lifetime it ever will.
Can we all agree the situation be either was not handled appropriately. I know one dissenting vote.
Being one of the chest thumpers - do I get a medal for that? Can we all also agree that we have young people in COMBAT - Vietnam was never a declared War nor was Korea nor the Gulf......so MD enlighten some of us beaters what you mean by war/battle or whatever noun you are using. Getting shot at is war/combat/military action, did I meet your satisfaction?

MD,
Everything to you if somebodies have experience in this field and has done it and we are trying to rely personal experiences, now we voted for Trump. Trump probably had no clue where the damn thing was headed. Man, leave the politics out of this. I could give you 100 business cases where the same thing would have happened. Two people fired.

[LandM]

Bart,
If you are reading this thread and not the other thread. There are two good examples of people I would not want to be stuck in bad situations with.
BTW CU, the military has operated this was for a very long time. You get no brownie points for coming home dead and you nor MD have any clue where that ship was heading or what its mission was. So let's all go be Sallies and tell the world what a major asset is doing. Yeah that makes a ton of sense.

[MDlaxfan76]

Far,
Any good officer is relying on his senior NCO's - they know the heartbeat;
As stated if you think you are being given an illegal order - you have every right to jump as high as you want. The SS is NOT the US Military. The US Military does not operate that way nor at least in my lifetime it ever will.
Can we all agree the situation be either was not handled appropriately. I know one dissenting vote.
Being one of the chest thumpers - do I get a medal for that? Can we all also agree that we have young people in COMBAT - Vietnam was never a declared War nor was Korea nor the Gulf......so MD enlighten some of us beaters what you mean by war/battle or whatever noun you are using. Getting shot at is war/combat/military action, did I meet your satisfaction?

MD,
Everything to you if somebodies have experience in this field and has done it and we are trying to rely personal experiences, now we voted for Trump. Trump probably had no clue where the damn thing was headed. Man, leave the politics out of this. I could give you 100 business cases where the same thing would have happened. Two people fired.

This ship was not under fire nor was it in a position to fire on anyone with a likelihood to fire upon them.

It was indeed unfortunately conscripted into the 'war' that our 'wartime President" talks so much about, the 'unseen enemy'.

Yes, absolutely we do have people in combat. And I mean the same as you do. And we have ships in the region that has such active combat, in support of those on the ground. Important.

I would assume, and Salty has asserted, that the TR would have potentially rotated into position to support those in combat, with another ship rotating out. No argument from me.

But I lean on Crozier to understand exactly the exigencies of his ships' mission, the timetable, and how that mission could be best executed. He sure as heck knew more about that mission than any of us on here.

I haven't heard anyone (YET) argue that there was a a viable option for this crew not to be rotated off the ship, tested, ship scrubbed etc. "Mission" interrupted for a period, if you will. Crozier apparently wanted this to go way faster than the Navy was executing (or what he believed was the Navy's plan of execution). He wanted to have fewer of his crew infected. In addition to the obvious health aspects, that also would mean more of his crew clearable to return to active duty, sooner. Better for the 'mission'.

I respect the service, sacrifices, of those who put their lives on the line for others, for America. That includes posters on here. But chest thumpers, not so much. I don't care whether they voted for Trump or not.

[MDlaxfan76]

Bart,
If you are reading this thread and not the other thread. There are two good examples of people I would not want to be stuck in bad situations with.
BTW CU, the military has operated this was for a very long time. You get no brownie points for coming home dead and you nor MD have any clue where that ship was heading or what its mission was. So let's all go be Sallies and tell the world what a major asset is doing. Yeah that makes a ton of sense.

Again, Crozier knew the mission.
And he wrote the letter...you know no more than I do, we both can read what Crozier said.

[old salt]

Nope, while certainly the buck stops with the POTUS, and certainly he sets the culture below him, and yes, Modly appears to have been quite concerned about Trump's perceptions...I haven't laid this on 'blame Trump'.

I just think it's ridiculous that all these chest thumpers came out in support of Modly's actions, which were so clearly out of bounds, emotional and based on personal embarrassment, not the best interests of those below.

All while ripping into a captain who put his crew above his own career.

Whether it all would have worked out just fine or not, without the captain acting as he did, who the heck knows.

But as my original comment on this topic said, I know which guy I'd want to be led by into actual battle.
That's all I said.

Had nothing at all to do with Trump.
At least not to me.

BTW, it's getting immensely tiresome having these posters who whine about "mission" when they clearly have not the slightest clue. Despite all their chest thumping, not a clue.

and why? Because they think they're supporting Trump???

What is tiresome is you projecting your TDS paranoia onto every situation. It's particularly offensive when you ignorantly use it to impugn the good efforts of the people in the military & their civilian leadership. Accusing them of acting to please Trump at the expense of the well being of the people they lead.

You showed your ignorance in stating that the Navy was "fiddlin" rather than planning to deploy the Comfort. The Navy showed you & the partisan media second guessers as the biased fools that you are.

If Modly did act because he was influenced by Trump, it was to keep Trump from getting involved, which he did, at the expense of his own career. It was perfectly justifiable for Modly to go to Guam to personally assess the situation & support his people, both ashore & on the ship, as well as on the base & in the local community. His trip to Guam was planned & discussed with Crozier before Crozier sent the email. It was also perfectly ok for Modly to address the crew on the 1MC & say what he said -- his mistake, like Crozier's. was failing to keep what he said within the ship & the CoC & not anticipating how it would be spun when it was inevitably leaked to a partisan media seeking to promote controversy & partisan political division.
obtw -- Navy personnel using social media are subject to the UCMJ.
Recording & releasing Modly's remarks was likely a UCMJ violation.
Modly explains his remarks.

In his message to sailors and Marines, Modly said he understands the anger troops have toward him, though he hoped they would find "a glimpse of understanding, and hopefully empathy."

He said he had been monitoring all COVID-19 cases on ships closely and had personally spoken with commanding officers on every vessel with positive cases.

"When I walked on the quarterdeck of the TR I lost situational awareness and decided to speak with them as if I was their commander, or their shipmate, rather than their Secretary," he said. "They deserved better, and I hope that over the passage of time that they will understand the words themselves rather than the manner in which they were delivered."

Still, he said he doesn't know that if he was given the chance to redo it that he would do anything differently. Modly stressed that sailors and Marines must respect the chain of command.

You show your ignorance every time you try to tell us the mission of a deployed aircraft carrier strike group. It's laughable. You have no appreciation for why we invest the tremendous cost in that capability & why the people who do it endure the risks & sacrifices that come with their repeated & lengthy deployments away from home.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 ... -crew.html

[cradleandshoot]

Everyone acknowledges he violated the chain of command so I don't have any clue why you keep saying people don't understand that. What people don't understand is the specific reaction and behavior of Modly, which OS even said wasn't right. Ever heard of lead by example? I care more about the influence of the people in the top than middle management. But you keep insisting that no one understands or acknowledges the chain of command and I've seen like 15 folks who question the higher up leadership acknowledge the violation, so who are you talking about? Or is this in your head?

I keep saying that because certain people here keep saying the captain was justified in his actions. His first obligation was to his mission and what his orders were. There is even one poster here trying to tell us the good captain had no orders, had no mission he was just sailing around on a pleasure cruise just for the hell of it. i understand why the captain did what he did. i just can't understand his reasoning for doing it the way he did. That is not how an experienced, seasoned naval officer responds to the problem at hand. He took actions that he knew were wrong and took his ship out of the fight for the foreseeable future. If that carrier is NEEDED, it won't be able to respond. For those actions any consequences are all on him.

There is no such poster saying that. Bother to read what I write, please.

Yes, a 'mission', but I'll take Crozier's word for whether a 'wartime mission'. Nope.

You really ought to also read what Crozier wrote too.

and over and over and over again said that I understand how this was outside the chain of command (even though the admirals were insisting otherwise on April 1) given that the distribution was not limited to just the chain of command. I've said that it is quite likely that Crozier understood that his action jeopardized his personal career.

But "justified"? You betcha.
Unless I see a basis that tells me otherwise.

So far, you guys are just puffing your chests and "mission" and took them out of the "fight" and "chain of command", blah, blah, blah, yet are unwilling to tell us the scenario under which that ship did not need to get a large portion of that crew off fast, and ultimately rotate out all or else cleared via testing.

Tell me the scenario where you say, 'guys you're just going to tough it out these next months on board.'

Now, if you want to make that argument because it was 'wartime' and they couldn't be spared from the 'fight' then ok, have at it.

but otherwise, you're all wet

Spoken like a true REMF.

When i was in the Army MD a REMF was the ultimate insult someone could throw your way. We had a few of our own officers that fit the bill. They were they folks way far away from what was really happening but would tell you they understood the situation better than anyone and understood what was happening better than anyone. IMO you are the poster child for everything a REMF stands for. On a personal note if you want to disparage me please up your game. I have never been more insulted than to have you call me all wet. REALLY, SERIOUSLY? i felt like i just got lectured by Mr Freaking Rogers. Kick it up a notch, it won't kill you to tell me to go pound sand or something more out of the box to your sensitive nature . You can even tell me to go screw myself or worse. i know for a marshmallow like middle of the road, moderate don't wanna hurt nobodys feelins type of republican that you are that is hard to do. Just pretend i am yer brother in law in the basement, the hostility will naturally boil in your blood.

[Peter Brown]

BTW, it's getting immensely tiresome having these posters who whine about "mission" when they clearly have not the slightest clue. Despite all their chest thumping, not a clue.

and why? Because they think they're supporting Trump???

I think you know the answer to that one, MD. It's not so much "supporting Trump" as it is supporting the trumpista regime, not because of a personal affinity for Trump per se, but because they believe that the trumpistas are restoring a lost purity of some imagined "true America" (MAGA!) in which loyalty is the highest virtue. They see themselves as part of the trumpista "us", and anyone who finds any fault with any loyal trumpista (like Modly) as one of "them": the liberals, the slackers, the takers, the leeches (PB's word), the 47%, in short all those who would pollute true-American virtue.

hey, I don't even look at this thread but I see my name being bandied about.

Anyway, a "leech" is not the same as Crozier. A leech is an able-bodied someone who doesn't contribute to America.

I haven't followed this naval story that intently. My guess is the truth lay in the middle, as it often does. But I have zero opinion on it.

[old salt]

Latest from the TR :

https://www.cbs58.com/news/sailor-from- ... nsive-care

The sailor tested positive for coronavirus on March 30 and was found unconscious Thursday, he has been admitted to the intensive care unit of the US Navy Hospital on Guam, the Navy said in a statement Thursday.

As of Wednesday, 97% of the Theodore Roosevelt's crew have been tested for the virus and 416 sailors have tested positive, according to the Navy, representing more than 20% of all coronavirus cases within the entire US military.

"We've tested almost the whole crew now. We still have about 1,000 tests to report out. But 3,170 tested negative, 416 tested positive, 187 of those were symptomatic, 229 were asymptomatic. We still have 1,164 pending results," the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten told reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday.

"Sadly this morning we had our first hospitalization of the one sailor," Hyten added, saying that crew members who had been moved ashore and placed in isolation were checked on by military medical personnel twice a day.

Sailors isolated in single rooms, checked on twice daily ? Would this sailor have received treatment sooner if he were not isolated alone in a single room, rather than with other asymptomatic positives, either in double rooms or open bay berthing where social distancing could be maintained ? A roommate or the sailor in the next bunk could go for help as soon as symptoms emerged or began to worsen.

[MDlaxfan76]

Everyone acknowledges he violated the chain of command so I don't have any clue why you keep saying people don't understand that. What people don't understand is the specific reaction and behavior of Modly, which OS even said wasn't right. Ever heard of lead by example? I care more about the influence of the people in the top than middle management. But you keep insisting that no one understands or acknowledges the chain of command and I've seen like 15 folks who question the higher up leadership acknowledge the violation, so who are you talking about? Or is this in your head?

I keep saying that because certain people here keep saying the captain was justified in his actions. His first obligation was to his mission and what his orders were. There is even one poster here trying to tell us the good captain had no orders, had no mission he was just sailing around on a pleasure cruise just for the hell of it. i understand why the captain did what he did. i just can't understand his reasoning for doing it the way he did. That is not how an experienced, seasoned naval officer responds to the problem at hand. He took actions that he knew were wrong and took his ship out of the fight for the foreseeable future. If that carrier is NEEDED, it won't be able to respond. For those actions any consequences are all on him.

There is no such poster saying that. Bother to read what I write, please.

Yes, a 'mission', but I'll take Crozier's word for whether a 'wartime mission'. Nope.

You really ought to also read what Crozier wrote too.

and over and over and over again said that I understand how this was outside the chain of command (even though the admirals were insisting otherwise on April 1) given that the distribution was not limited to just the chain of command. I've said that it is quite likely that Crozier understood that his action jeopardized his personal career.

But "justified"? You betcha.
Unless I see a basis that tells me otherwise.

So far, you guys are just puffing your chests and "mission" and took them out of the "fight" and "chain of command", blah, blah, blah, yet are unwilling to tell us the scenario under which that ship did not need to get a large portion of that crew off fast, and ultimately rotate out all or else cleared via testing.

Tell me the scenario where you say, 'guys you're just going to tough it out these next months on board.'

Now, if you want to make that argument because it was 'wartime' and they couldn't be spared from the 'fight' then ok, have at it.

but otherwise, you're all wet

Spoken like a true REMF.

When i was in the Army MD a REMF was the ultimate insult someone could throw your way. We had a few of our own officers that fit the bill. They were they folks way far away from what was really happening but would tell you they understood the situation better than anyone and understood what was happening better than anyone. IMO you are the poster child for everything a REMF stands for. On a personal note if you want to disparage me please up your game. I have never been more insulted than to have you call me all wet. REALLY, SERIOUSLY? i felt like i just got lectured by Mr Freaking Rogers. Kick it up a notch, it won't kill you to tell me to go pound sand or something more out of the box to your sensitive nature . You can even tell me to go screw myself or worse. i know for a marshmallow like middle of the road, moderate don't wanna hurt nobodys feelins type of republican that you are that is hard to do. Just pretend i am yer brother in law in the basement, the hostility will naturally boil in your blood.

I fully understood the insult.
It's just that you indeed should just go pound sand as you are so completely out of your gourd on this, cradle.

But yeah, I prefer to not get so personal. The issues we discuss on here are challenging enough without the personal insults.

So, I'd rather you take it down a notch than for me to return fire.

Let's just say that, in my experience, guys who talk tough tend to be the most insecure of all.

[MDlaxfan76]

Salty, you dragged me into this discussion.

I simply said that Crozier was the kind of guy I'd rather follow into the battle than Modly.
Straightforward. Not a close call.

and you just can't let up with all the insults.

the constant posturing and chest thumping is indeed tedious.

You have tons to offer of real insight in this area, but to think your interpretations are therefore absolutely correct, unimpeachable by anyone else, well on that you fall flat.

[cradleandshoot]

Far,
Any good officer is relying on his senior NCO's - they know the heartbeat;
As stated if you think you are being given an illegal order - you have every right to jump as high as you want. The SS is NOT the US Military. The US Military does not operate that way nor at least in my lifetime it ever will.
Can we all agree the situation be either was not handled appropriately. I know one dissenting vote.
Being one of the chest thumpers - do I get a medal for that? Can we all also agree that we have young people in COMBAT - Vietnam was never a declared War nor was Korea nor the Gulf......so MD enlighten some of us beaters what you mean by war/battle or whatever noun you are using. Getting shot at is war/combat/military action, did I meet your satisfaction?

MD,
Everything to you if somebodies have experience in this field and has done it and we are trying to rely personal experiences, now we voted for Trump. Trump probably had no clue where the damn thing was headed. Man, leave the politics out of this. I could give you 100 business cases where the same thing would have happened. Two people fired.

This ship was not under fire nor was it in a position to fire on anyone with a likelihood to fire upon them.

It was indeed unfortunately conscripted into the 'war' that our 'wartime President" talks so much about, the 'unseen enemy'.

Yes, absolutely we do have people in combat. And I mean the same as you do. And we have ships in the region that has such active combat, in support of those on the ground. Important.

I would assume, and Salty has asserted, that the TR would have potentially rotated into position to support those in combat, with another ship rotating out. No argument from me.

But I lean on Crozier to understand exactly the exigencies of his ships' mission, the timetable, and how that mission could be best executed. He sure as heck knew more about that mission than any of us on here.

I haven't heard anyone (YET) argue that there was a a viable option for this crew not to be rotated off the ship, tested, ship scrubbed etc. "Mission" interrupted for a period, if you will. Crozier apparently wanted this to go way faster than the Navy was executing (or what he believed was the Navy's plan of execution). He wanted to have fewer of his crew infected. In addition to the obvious health aspects, that also would mean more of his crew clearable to return to active duty, sooner. Better for the 'mission'.

I respect the service, sacrifices, of those who put their lives on the line for others, for America. That includes posters on here. But chest thumpers, not so much. I don't care whether they voted for Trump or not.

"This ship was not under fire nor was it in a position to fire on anyone with a likelihood to fire upon them."
The same could be said for all those ships parked in Pearl Harbor back in December of 1941.
The same could be said of the USS Cole, remember that?

MD you can not possibly be this stupid or this naive. Do you know what an aircraft carrier is?

They call em BFT, or for you BIG FAT TARGETS. You really need to STFU old sod. You are humiliating your integrity more than you know. Every freaking second a United States Aircraft carrier is at sea they are a huge potential target of destruction for bad people. It is astounding for me with your superior intellect that little fact has totally evaded you. You think not at war means at peace. Why do you think so much of every aircraft carrier is dedicated to protecting the vessel from all the bad folks that would love to see it at the bottom of the ocean. I honestly and truly am hopeful that our military does not have very many people with your perspective defending our country. Fortunately i believe your point of view is a miniscule anomaly to what i call common sense.

[old salt]

Salty, you dragged me into this discussion.

I simply said that Crozier was the kind of guy I'd rather follow into the battle than Modly.
Straightforward. Not a close call.

and you just can't let up with all the insults.

the constant posturing and chest thumping is indeed tedious.

You have tons to offer of real insight in this area, but to think your interpretations are therefore absolutely correct, unimpeachable by anyone else, well on that you fall flat.

You insult the members of the military CoC & their civilian leaders, every time you assert or imply that they put pleasing Trump ahead of the welfare of the people in their charge or good order & discipline at all levels of the CoC.

I'm happy to discuss the details with you, but your automatic prejudgements, obsessive TDS, & failure to give the military CoC the benefit of the doubt makes that impossible.

You are incapable of discussion without somehow bringing Trump into the discussion. That's what is the most tedious.

obtw -- you might be suprised to know that a deployed carrier strike group is on a constant war time footing, constantly adapting to the potential likely adversaries in their area of operations.

[cradleandshoot]

Everyone acknowledges he violated the chain of command so I don't have any clue why you keep saying people don't understand that. What people don't understand is the specific reaction and behavior of Modly, which OS even said wasn't right. Ever heard of lead by example? I care more about the influence of the people in the top than middle management. But you keep insisting that no one understands or acknowledges the chain of command and I've seen like 15 folks who question the higher up leadership acknowledge the violation, so who are you talking about? Or is this in your head?

I keep saying that because certain people here keep saying the captain was justified in his actions. His first obligation was to his mission and what his orders were. There is even one poster here trying to tell us the good captain had no orders, had no mission he was just sailing around on a pleasure cruise just for the hell of it. i understand why the captain did what he did. i just can't understand his reasoning for doing it the way he did. That is not how an experienced, seasoned naval officer responds to the problem at hand. He took actions that he knew were wrong and took his ship out of the fight for the foreseeable future. If that carrier is NEEDED, it won't be able to respond. For those actions any consequences are all on him.

There is no such poster saying that. Bother to read what I write, please.

Yes, a 'mission', but I'll take Crozier's word for whether a 'wartime mission'. Nope.

You really ought to also read what Crozier wrote too.

and over and over and over again said that I understand how this was outside the chain of command (even though the admirals were insisting otherwise on April 1) given that the distribution was not limited to just the chain of command. I've said that it is quite likely that Crozier understood that his action jeopardized his personal career.

But "justified"? You betcha.
Unless I see a basis that tells me otherwise.

So far, you guys are just puffing your chests and "mission" and took them out of the "fight" and "chain of command", blah, blah, blah, yet are unwilling to tell us the scenario under which that ship did not need to get a large portion of that crew off fast, and ultimately rotate out all or else cleared via testing.

Tell me the scenario where you say, 'guys you're just going to tough it out these next months on board.'

Now, if you want to make that argument because it was 'wartime' and they couldn't be spared from the 'fight' then ok, have at it.

but otherwise, you're all wet

Spoken like a true REMF.

When i was in the Army MD a REMF was the ultimate insult someone could throw your way. We had a few of our own officers that fit the bill. They were they folks way far away from what was really happening but would tell you they understood the situation better than anyone and understood what was happening better than anyone. IMO you are the poster child for everything a REMF stands for. On a personal note if you want to disparage me please up your game. I have never been more insulted than to have you call me all wet. REALLY, SERIOUSLY? i felt like i just got lectured by Mr Freaking Rogers. Kick it up a notch, it won't kill you to tell me to go pound sand or something more out of the box to your sensitive nature . You can even tell me to go screw myself or worse. i know for a marshmallow like middle of the road, moderate don't wanna hurt nobodys feelins type of republican that you are that is hard to do. Just pretend i am yer brother in law in the basement, the hostility will naturally boil in your blood.

I fully understood the insult.
It's just that you indeed should just go pound sand as you are so completely out of your gourd on this, cradle.

But yeah, I prefer to not get so personal. The issues we discuss on here are challenging enough without the personal insults.

So, I'd rather you take it down a notch than for me to return fire.

Let's just say that, in my experience, guys who talk tough tend to be the most insecure of all.

Yeah, i made it through jump school by being a candy ass. My bad ass days are long behind me. The scars and the broken down body of a 62 year old guy are all i have left. I ain't a tough guy but i will never back down from when i believe i am right. Hell i am asking you to take it up a notch, at least a little. Telling me i am all wet!! Like i said, you have no clue where i come from and the people i have spent my entire life working with. We are rude and crude and nasty but most important we will never blow smoke up your ass or feed you a line of sheepdip. There is a time to be a gentleman and there is a time you have to get down in the weeds and get nasty. I don't know how to be like you MD. Who you are who you are. There are times i can be as nice as pie, there are times i just call em as i see em and just say what I think. That does not always make my wife very happy. She understands where i am coming from. i was never born to be a diplomat. The best compliment I know from my friends is that in a bad situation i am one of the people they would want by their side. That is not because i am a tough guy. That is because i will never turn tail and run. i gots the scars to prove it. Once you get yer ass really beaten good, it is not fun but it makes you less scared of what may happen the next time. When your 62 and still coming back from surgery from a detached retina, you can't take those blows to the head anymore. All those things from your past catch up to you eventually.

[old salt]

Latest from the TR :

https://www.cbs58.com/news/sailor-from- ... nsive-care

The sailor tested positive for coronavirus on March 30 and was found unconscious Thursday, he has been admitted to the intensive care unit of the US Navy Hospital on Guam, the Navy said in a statement Thursday.

As of Wednesday, 97% of the Theodore Roosevelt's crew have been tested for the virus and 416 sailors have tested positive, according to the Navy, representing more than 20% of all coronavirus cases within the entire US military.

"We've tested almost the whole crew now. We still have about 1,000 tests to report out. But 3,170 tested negative, 416 tested positive, 187 of those were symptomatic, 229 were asymptomatic. We still have 1,164 pending results," the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten told reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday.

"Sadly this morning we had our first hospitalization of the one sailor," Hyten added, saying that crew members who had been moved ashore and placed in isolation were checked on by military medical personnel twice a day.

Sailors isolated in single rooms, checked on twice daily ? Would this sailor have received treatment sooner if he were not isolated alone in a single room, rather than with other asymptomatic positives, either in double rooms or open bay berthing where social distancing could be maintained ? A roommate or the sailor in the next bunk could go for help as soon as symptoms emerged or began to worsen.

When I saw the first reporting that Crozier was insisting that the entire crew be berthed ahore, in isolation, in single rooms w/head, in barracks on base & then in off base hotels, I assumed there would surely be sailors standing roving "sound & security" watches, as they do aboard ship. Periodically knocking on doors & asking "you ok in there" ? It need not be medical personnel, just someone to summon help, if necessary.

[MDlaxfan76]

Far,
Any good officer is relying on his senior NCO's - they know the heartbeat;
As stated if you think you are being given an illegal order - you have every right to jump as high as you want. The SS is NOT the US Military. The US Military does not operate that way nor at least in my lifetime it ever will.
Can we all agree the situation be either was not handled appropriately. I know one dissenting vote.
Being one of the chest thumpers - do I get a medal for that? Can we all also agree that we have young people in COMBAT - Vietnam was never a declared War nor was Korea nor the Gulf......so MD enlighten some of us beaters what you mean by war/battle or whatever noun you are using. Getting shot at is war/combat/military action, did I meet your satisfaction?

MD,
Everything to you if somebodies have experience in this field and has done it and we are trying to rely personal experiences, now we voted for Trump. Trump probably had no clue where the damn thing was headed. Man, leave the politics out of this. I could give you 100 business cases where the same thing would have happened. Two people fired.

This ship was not under fire nor was it in a position to fire on anyone with a likelihood to fire upon them.

It was indeed unfortunately conscripted into the 'war' that our 'wartime President" talks so much about, the 'unseen enemy'.

Yes, absolutely we do have people in combat. And I mean the same as you do. And we have ships in the region that has such active combat, in support of those on the ground. Important.

I would assume, and Salty has asserted, that the TR would have potentially rotated into position to support those in combat, with another ship rotating out. No argument from me.

But I lean on Crozier to understand exactly the exigencies of his ships' mission, the timetable, and how that mission could be best executed. He sure as heck knew more about that mission than any of us on here.

I haven't heard anyone (YET) argue that there was a a viable option for this crew not to be rotated off the ship, tested, ship scrubbed etc. "Mission" interrupted for a period, if you will. Crozier apparently wanted this to go way faster than the Navy was executing (or what he believed was the Navy's plan of execution). He wanted to have fewer of his crew infected. In addition to the obvious health aspects, that also would mean more of his crew clearable to return to active duty, sooner. Better for the 'mission'.

I respect the service, sacrifices, of those who put their lives on the line for others, for America. That includes posters on here. But chest thumpers, not so much. I don't care whether they voted for Trump or not.

"This ship was not under fire nor was it in a position to fire on anyone with a likelihood to fire upon them."
The same could be said for all those ships parked in Pearl Harbor back in December of 1941.
The same could be said of the USS Cole, remember that?

MD you can not possibly be this stupid or this naive. Do you know what an aircraft carrier is?

They call em BFT, or for you BIG FAT TARGETS. You really need to STFU old sod. You are humiliating your integrity more than you know. Every freaking second a United States Aircraft carrier is at sea they are a huge potential target of destruction for bad people. It is astounding for me with your superior intellect that little fact has totally evaded you. You think not at war means at peace. Why do you think so much of every aircraft carrier is dedicated to protecting the vessel from all the bad folks that would love to see it at the bottom of the ocean. I honestly and truly am hopeful that our military does not have very many people with your perspective defending our country. Fortunately i believe your point of view is a miniscule anomaly to what i call common sense.

Keep doubling down, cradle.

[MDlaxfan76]

Everyone acknowledges he violated the chain of command so I don't have any clue why you keep saying people don't understand that. What people don't understand is the specific reaction and behavior of Modly, which OS even said wasn't right. Ever heard of lead by example? I care more about the influence of the people in the top than middle management. But you keep insisting that no one understands or acknowledges the chain of command and I've seen like 15 folks who question the higher up leadership acknowledge the violation, so who are you talking about? Or is this in your head?

I keep saying that because certain people here keep saying the captain was justified in his actions. His first obligation was to his mission and what his orders were. There is even one poster here trying to tell us the good captain had no orders, had no mission he was just sailing around on a pleasure cruise just for the hell of it. i understand why the captain did what he did. i just can't understand his reasoning for doing it the way he did. That is not how an experienced, seasoned naval officer responds to the problem at hand. He took actions that he knew were wrong and took his ship out of the fight for the foreseeable future. If that carrier is NEEDED, it won't be able to respond. For those actions any consequences are all on him.

There is no such poster saying that. Bother to read what I write, please.

Yes, a 'mission', but I'll take Crozier's word for whether a 'wartime mission'. Nope.

You really ought to also read what Crozier wrote too.

and over and over and over again said that I understand how this was outside the chain of command (even though the admirals were insisting otherwise on April 1) given that the distribution was not limited to just the chain of command. I've said that it is quite likely that Crozier understood that his action jeopardized his personal career.

But "justified"? You betcha.
Unless I see a basis that tells me otherwise.

So far, you guys are just puffing your chests and "mission" and took them out of the "fight" and "chain of command", blah, blah, blah, yet are unwilling to tell us the scenario under which that ship did not need to get a large portion of that crew off fast, and ultimately rotate out all or else cleared via testing.

Tell me the scenario where you say, 'guys you're just going to tough it out these next months on board.'

Now, if you want to make that argument because it was 'wartime' and they couldn't be spared from the 'fight' then ok, have at it.

but otherwise, you're all wet

Spoken like a true REMF.

When i was in the Army MD a REMF was the ultimate insult someone could throw your way. We had a few of our own officers that fit the bill. They were they folks way far away from what was really happening but would tell you they understood the situation better than anyone and understood what was happening better than anyone. IMO you are the poster child for everything a REMF stands for. On a personal note if you want to disparage me please up your game. I have never been more insulted than to have you call me all wet. REALLY, SERIOUSLY? i felt like i just got lectured by Mr Freaking Rogers. Kick it up a notch, it won't kill you to tell me to go pound sand or something more out of the box to your sensitive nature . You can even tell me to go screw myself or worse. i know for a marshmallow like middle of the road, moderate don't wanna hurt nobodys feelins type of republican that you are that is hard to do. Just pretend i am yer brother in law in the basement, the hostility will naturally boil in your blood.

I fully understood the insult.
It's just that you indeed should just go pound sand as you are so completely out of your gourd on this, cradle.

But yeah, I prefer to not get so personal. The issues we discuss on here are challenging enough without the personal insults.

So, I'd rather you take it down a notch than for me to return fire.

Let's just say that, in my experience, guys who talk tough tend to be the most insecure of all.

Yeah, i made it through jump school by being a candy ass. My bad ass days are long behind me. The scars and the broken down body of a 62 year old guy are all i have left. I ain't a tough guy but i will never back down from when i believe i am right. Hell i am asking you to take it up a notch, at least a little. Telling me i am all wet!! Like i said, you have no clue where i come from and the people i have spent my entire life working with. We are rude and crude and nasty but most important we will never blow smoke up your ass or feed you a line of sheepdip. There is a time to be a gentleman and there is a time you have to get down in the weeds and get nasty. I don't know how to be like you MD. Who you are who you are. There are times i can be as nice as pie, there are times i just call em as i see em and just say what I think. That does not always make my wife very happy. She understands where i am coming from. i was never born to be a diplomat. The best compliment I know from my friends is that in a bad situation i am one of the people they would want by their side. That is not because i am a tough guy. That is because i will never turn tail and run. i gots the scars to prove it. Once you get yer ass really beaten good, it is not fun but it makes you less scared of what may happen the next time. When your 62 and still coming back from surgery from a detached retina, you can't take those blows to the head anymore. All those things from your past catch up to you eventually.

And again.

[MDlaxfan76]

Salty, you dragged me into this discussion.

I simply said that Crozier was the kind of guy I'd rather follow into the battle than Modly.
Straightforward. Not a close call.

and you just can't let up with all the insults.

the constant posturing and chest thumping is indeed tedious.

You have tons to offer of real insight in this area, but to think your interpretations are therefore absolutely correct, unimpeachable by anyone else, well on that you fall flat.

You insult the members of the military CoC & their civilian leaders, every time you assert or imply that they put pleasing Trump ahead of the welfare of the people in their charge or good order & discipline at all levels of the CoC.

I'm happy to discuss the details with you, but your automatic prejudgements, obsessive TDS, & failure to give the military CoC the benefit of the doubt makes that impossible.

You are incapable of discussion without somehow bringing Trump into the discussion. That's what is the most tedious.

obtw -- you might be suprised to know that a deployed carrier strike group is on a constant war time footing, constantly adapting to the potential likely adversaries in their area of operations.

No, just Modly.
He admitted to doing so.

I'll take Crozier over Modly any day of the week. So will his crew.