Military Pilots Complaining

[AUUSN 823]

Is this one? Brig. Gen. Bryan T. Roberts publicly warned his troops at Fort Jackson, S.C., last spring that he and the Army had “zero tolerance for sexual harassment and sexual assault.” Here’s what the Army didn’t tell the soldiers: At the time, Roberts himself was under investigation by the military over allegations that he physically assaulted one of his mistresses on multiple occasions.

[AUUSN 823]

Is this one? David C. Uhrich, a one-star Air Force general, kept a vodka bottle in his desk at Joint Base Langley-Eustis and repeatedly drank on duty, so much so that another officer told investigators that “if he did not have his alcohol, the wheels would come off,” according to the findings of an Air Force probe. The married Uhrich later sought treatment for a drinking problem, but not before he was also investigated for allegedly having an affair, something prohibited under military law.

[AUUSN 823]

Is this one? Army Maj. Gen. Ralph O. Baker, the commander of a strategic counterterrorism force on the Horn of Africa, was fired March 28 on charges of sexual misconduct. Two officials familiar with the case said Baker was investigated for allegedly groping a female civilian employee after he had been drinking.

[autigeremt 6,640]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Has it been extensive or not, AUUSN? I get a new email just about every day from DOD on another replacement at the highest levels of every service.

Start listing names of these supposed purged Officers.

It's not just "purged"....it's the mass turnover, which leads to new officers being appointed into positions which has political implications....you know the deal. At least you ought to.

[AUUSN 823]

How about this one? On Tuesday, Panetta demoted Gen. William E. “Kip” Ward, the former four-star commander of the military’s Africa Command, and the Army ordered him to repay $82,000 for billing the Pentagon for unjustified expenses, including lavish trips with his wife.

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Has it been extensive or not, AUUSN? I get a new email just about every day from DOD on another replacement at the highest levels of every service.

Start listing names of these supposed purged Officers.

It's not just "purged"....it's the mass turnover, which leads to new officers being appointed into positions which has political implications....you know the deal. At least you ought to.

Give me some names and I'll research it.

[autigeremt 6,640]

Or this one...

Navy officials accused of taking bribes 03:08

Washington (CNN)The Navy announced Tuesday it censured three admirals in connection with a fraud and bribery investigation that has already led to convictions of three other Navy officers.

Rear Admirals Michael Miller, Terry Kraft and David Pimpo were censured by the Secretary of the Navy on Tuesday after an investigation found that they "improperly accepted gifts from a prohibited source" from 2006 to 2007. All three officers have now submitted retirement requests.

The investigation also revealed that two of the officers had "improperly endorsed a commercial business" and one solicited "gifts and services" from an unauthorized source, according to a Navy press release. All are violations of U.S. Navy ethics regulations.

"All Navy officers, particularly our senior leadership in positions of unique trust and responsibility, must uphold and be held to the highest standards of personal and professional behavior," Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus said in a statement. "These three officers, whose actions were revealed during the GDMA investigation demonstrated poor judgment and a failure of leadership in prior tours."

The investigation revolves around a corruption case involving several Navy officers and defense contractor Glenn Defense Marine Asia, referred to as GDMA in the investigation.

Three other Navy officers pled guilty to federal charges in the corruption case involving Glenn Defense Marine Asia and its head, Malaysian national Leonard Glenn Francis. A fourth Navy officer, Commander Michael Vannak Khem Misiewicz has pleaded not guilty to federal charges in the bribery case.

The officers allegedly traded classified information in exchange for luxury travel and and hotel stays as well as prostitution services.

Two other Navy officers were suspended in November 2013 and their access to classified information suspended, also in connection with the Glenn Defense Marine Asia case.

The Navy said its investigation continues and federal prosecutors will likely "refer additional cases to the Navy for review," according to the release.

[AUDub 11,153]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

How the hell they ever let an idiot like you in the Navy I'll never know. Go back and play with your Obama doll.

You need to take a break.

[autigeremt 6,640]

If I gave you names, you would be doing research for weeks on end.

[AUUSN 823]

If I gave you names, you would be doing research for weeks on end.

Then give me just one. Something to prove your assertion.

[AUUSN 823]

You need to take a break.

No let him continue. He knows he is out of his league and on a daily basis gets his butt figuratively handed to him. He knows nothing but has a moronic opinion on everything. He's an uneducated Raptor. At least Raptor is right sometimes. This dude is wrong all. of. the. time.

[autigeremt 6,640]

If I gave you names, you would be doing research for weeks on end.

Then give me just one. Something to prove your assertion.

You have this: http://fcw.com/Blogs/FCW-Insider/2014/01/insider-pentagon-nominees.aspx

Coupled with this: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/18/us-usa-pentagon-waste-specialreport-idUSBRE9AH0LQ20131118

And add in this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-investigations-point-to-military-system-that-promotes-abusive-leaders/2014/01/28/3e1be1f0-8799-11e3-916e-e01534b1e132_story.html

At the end of the day you have HIGH TURNOVER and an unstable environment. At the same time you have people gaining ground under the politics of becoming a high ranking officer at this level and you cannot tell me that the mindset of command changes based on the politics of the day. It's just the way it is.

[autigeremt 6,640]

You need to take a break.

No let him continue. He knows he is out of his league and on a daily basis gets his butt figuratively handed to him. He knows nothing but has a moronic opinion on everything. He's an uneducated Raptor. At least Raptor is right sometimes. This dude is wrong all. of. the. time.

Bens right....it's not worth it. I know first hand. LOL

I'm defensive.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

You need to take a break.

No let him continue. He knows he is out of his league and on a daily basis gets his butt figuratively handed to him. He knows nothing but has a moronic opinion on everything. He's an uneducated Raptor. At least Raptor is right sometimes. This dude is wrong all. of. the. time.

Bens right....it's not worth it. I know first hand. LOL

I'm defensive.

Shield for the orange and blue. Can't get more defensive than a "shield".

[autigeremt 6,640]

You need to take a break.

No let him continue. He knows he is out of his league and on a daily basis gets his butt figuratively handed to him. He knows nothing but has a moronic opinion on everything. He's an uneducated Raptor. At least Raptor is right sometimes. This dude is wrong all. of. the. time.

Bens right....it's not worth it. I know first hand. LOL

I'm defensive. :cool:/>

Shield for the orange and blue. Can't get more defensive than a "shield".

That's right.

[TexasTiger 12,938]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

How the hell they ever let an idiot like you in the Navy I'll never know. Go back and play with your Obama doll.

Your disdain for our troops is unpatriotic and disgraceful.

[aubfaninga 16]

I'm never been military and dang sure have never flown a fighter jet but I would like to give a civilians thoughts for someone to give comment on. Preferably someone with any military experience.

Lets leave the blaming Obama and the admin out for just one second. We all have confidence that our military could reclaim most all the ground Isis has taken if we let them. Some of us deep down are starting to think that this option may be inevitable. This, imho, is good because popular opinion of being favorable is a good thing if we do decide to put boots down. We all must also be honest that if we as Americans make that choice to root out Isis it will not fix the problem and it will only morph. Poison Ivy is my best analogy for this world we live in today. You can scrath the itch to give some relief but it will only spread.

I listened to McCain talk about spotters to help the airstrikes. I stepped back and tried to soak it in and understand where he is coming from. I came up with more questions than answers.

We are in a very extremely selective targeting role. We absolutely do not want to just kill civilians in the name of getting the bad guy.

So if we are not going to go full "war" mode how can spotters even help to a degree that matters?

Once Isis knows that we have spotters they will only make absolute sure they are carefull to use civilian sheilds. Then spotters are only as effective to how close they can get and evaluate the target. Is this correct?

The closer we get the more likely they are to capture American hostages. Correct? As a civilian, seeing American soldiers burned alive or decapitated is not something that I am ready to stomach. This might be good for some, that want Boots on the ground, as the American public will be hardened and angered by such scenes but sacrificing American lives just to get the war you want has been, and always will be, one of the most evil things a person of leadership can do. Imho

[homersapien 11,382]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

Raptor?

That you?

:-\

[homersapien 11,382]

The enemy choosing to demonically use innocent people as human shields does not give us, who claim to be the good guys, absolution from the moral imperative to avoid civilian casualties. War doesn't mean "all bets are off" and that we can cast off restraint.

No but, sometimes, it's unavoidable. We could defeat these people in very short order and save a lot of innocent lives in the process if we'd take the handcuffs off.afraid of killing even one innocent person in going after the bad guys. Think of all the innocent Christians and others they have killed because we are They know we will do anything to avoid even one civilian casualty and that's why they use them as human shields. We've had to kill some innocent civilians before in past wars in going after the enemy to save more of them and our own troops too. If you aren't willing to risk even one civilian getting killed then you will never fight any war anywhere at any time. Might as well disarm and forget having a military. In war sometimes decisions like that have to be made. It's not a thing to be celebrated but still sometimes it has to be done. Wars are messy things.

Who exactly, do you mean by "these people"?

[homersapien 11,382]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Has it been extensive or not, AUUSN? I get a new email just about every day from DOD on another replacement at the highest levels of every service.

Start listing names of these supposed purged Officers.

It's not just "purged"....it's the mass turnover, which leads to new officers being appointed into positions which has political implications....you know the deal. At least you ought to.

Heck, from the way you throw out accusations, I figured you were the one that new about it.

How about starting with the statistics?

[autigeremt 6,640]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Has it been extensive or not, AUUSN? I get a new email just about every day from DOD on another replacement at the highest levels of every service.

Start listing names of these supposed purged Officers.

It's not just "purged"....it's the mass turnover, which leads to new officers being appointed into positions which has political implications....you know the deal. At least you ought to.

Heck, from the way you throw out accusations, I figured you were the one that new about it.

How about starting with the statistics?

I don't keep every email the DOD sends out as a member of their listserve....I'm just stating what I see on a regular basis. Just because you didn't get them doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[cptau 169]

I'm never been military and dang sure have never flown a fighter jet but I would like to give a civilians thoughts for someone to give comment on. Preferably someone with any military experience.

Lets leave the blaming Obama and the admin out for just one second. We all have confidence that our military could reclaim most all the ground Isis has taken if we let them. Some of us deep down are starting to think that this option may be inevitable. This, imho, is good because popular opinion of being favorable is a good thing if we do decide to put boots down. We all must also be honest that if we as Americans make that choice to root out Isis it will not fix the problem and it will only morph. Poison Ivy is my best analogy for this world we live in today. You can scrath the itch to give some relief but it will only spread.

I listened to McCain talk about spotters to help the airstrikes. I stepped back and tried to soak it in and understand where he is coming from. I came up with more questions than answers.

We are in a very extremely selective targeting role. We absolutely do not want to just kill civilians in the name of getting the bad guy.

So if we are not going to go full "war" mode how can spotters even help to a degree that matters?

Once Isis knows that we have spotters they will only make absolute sure they are carefull to use civilian sheilds. Then spotters are only as effective to how close they can get and evaluate the target. Is this correct?

The closer we get the more likely they are to capture American hostages. Correct? As a civilian, seeing American soldiers burned alive or decapitated is not something that I am ready to stomach. This might be good for some, that want Boots on the ground, as the American public will be hardened and angered by such scenes but sacrificing American lives just to get the war you want has been, and always will be, one of the most evil things a person of leadership can do. Imho

Yes, putting more American personnel in the area on the ground increases the risk some will be captured and or killed by ISIS.

The forward observers can detect ISIS moving in the open and call in an air strikes. Unmanned Aerial vehicles (drones) can do some of this. They can watch and many of them can fire weapons. The UAV's advantage is that they can loiter in the area much longer than a manned aircraft. Their disadvantage is that they do not carry the weaponry that a manned fighter bomber does.

The real problem is air power needs a ground force to occupy the territory won. we had that with the Kurds who wanted their territory back. The Iraqi army is mostly Shia, they probably don't care to take Sunni territory back from the Sunni ISIS forces.

[aubfaninga 16]

I'm never been military and dang sure have never flown a fighter jet but I would like to give a civilians thoughts for someone to give comment on. Preferably someone with any military experience.

Lets leave the blaming Obama and the admin out for just one second. We all have confidence that our military could reclaim most all the ground Isis has taken if we let them. Some of us deep down are starting to think that this option may be inevitable. This, imho, is good because popular opinion of being favorable is a good thing if we do decide to put boots down. We all must also be honest that if we as Americans make that choice to root out Isis it will not fix the problem and it will only morph. Poison Ivy is my best analogy for this world we live in today. You can scrath the itch to give some relief but it will only spread.

I listened to McCain talk about spotters to help the airstrikes. I stepped back and tried to soak it in and understand where he is coming from. I came up with more questions than answers.

We are in a very extremely selective targeting role. We absolutely do not want to just kill civilians in the name of getting the bad guy.

So if we are not going to go full "war" mode how can spotters even help to a degree that matters?

Once Isis knows that we have spotters they will only make absolute sure they are carefull to use civilian sheilds. Then spotters are only as effective to how close they can get and evaluate the target. Is this correct?

The closer we get the more likely they are to capture American hostages. Correct? As a civilian, seeing American soldiers burned alive or decapitated is not something that I am ready to stomach. This might be good for some, that want Boots on the ground, as the American public will be hardened and angered by such scenes but sacrificing American lives just to get the war you want has been, and always will be, one of the most evil things a person of leadership can do. Imho

Yes, putting more American personnel in the area on the ground increases the risk some will be captured and or killed by ISIS.

The forward observers can detect ISIS moving in the open and call in an air strikes. Unmanned Aerial vehicles (drones) can do some of this. They can watch and many of them can fire weapons. The UAV's advantage is that they can loiter in the area much longer than a manned aircraft. Their disadvantage is that they do not carry the weaponry that a manned fighter bomber does.

The real problem is air power needs a ground force to occupy the territory won. we had that with the Kurds who wanted their territory back. The Iraqi army is mostly Shia, they probably don't care to take Sunni territory back from the Sunni ISIS forces.

Thanks

[AUUSN 823]

The "Spokesperson" is probably a pilot as well who works in the CAOC.

The general officers in charge will not risk their careers going against the administration's party line.

Perhaps that is the real problem. We no longer have leaders with the courage necessary to accept the consequences of exercising their conscience. Perhaps we have too many bureaucrat Generals and not enough fighting Generals?

BOOM! Everyone needs to do some research on the massive turnover of brass within the highest ranks over the last 4 years. It will make you go....hmmmmmmmm

Well the military brass, at the highest levels has been purged of anyone who won't kiss Obamas butt. The ones that remain are either full supporters or more concerned about their own career than doing the right thing by the men and women in their command.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Has it been extensive or not, AUUSN? I get a new email just about every day from DOD on another replacement at the highest levels of every service.

Start listing names of these supposed purged Officers.

It's not just "purged"....it's the mass turnover, which leads to new officers being appointed into positions which has political implications....you know the deal. At least you ought to.

Heck, from the way you throw out accusations, I figured you were the one that new about it.

How about starting with the statistics?

I don't keep every email the DOD sends out as a member of their listserve....I'm just stating what I see on a regular basis. Just because you didn't get them doesn't mean it didn't happen.

How about this one?

Maj. Gen. Michael Regner, the director of Marine Corps Staff at the Pentagon, was tapped for a third star in November 2014. Officials at Headquarters Marine Corps confirmed Regner was also slated to serve as the deputy commandant of Manpower and Reserve Affairs, a three-star post, once the promotion was confirmed.

The nomination came nearly a year after a damning Defense Department Inspector General's report was made public. The report, which stemmed from an April 2012 complaint made by Sgt. Maj. Jayme Winders, found Regner misused his authority by allowing subordinates to complete personal, menial tasks for him.

[aujeff11 6,243]

I appreciate your service AUUSN. Obama doll or not. LMAO

[AUUSN 823]

I appreciate your service AUUSN. Obama doll or not. LMAO

COOLTIGGER - you're a f****** moron.

Thanks brother. My desire to see General and Flag Officers held to a higher standard transcends whatever person occupying the White House. This alleged purge is a freaking myth.