More Bush Administration Idiocy

So if one of your crewmembers had been guilty of maybe rape, you should be
held accountable?

Yes, defintely at some level. The leader should have kept a better eye on
that
person.

You're kidding right?

No I am not kidding at all.

If you're in charge, you are responsible. That's what I heard over and over in
the Marine Corps. Maybe you heard something different in the Air Force.

Walt

No I am not kidding at all.

If you're in charge, you are responsible.

Nice snippage of my DUI example.

That's what I heard over and over in
the Marine Corps.

I'm willing to bet they didn't teach you in the Marine Corps; "and don't screw
this up or there will be hell to pay from the Prseident since he's ultimately
responsible".

Maybe you heard something different in the Air Force.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected to be
professionals. Additionally, you are not responsible if someone under your
command decides to violate the UCMJ, military regulations or the Geneva
convention unless you were in a position stop that behavior and didn't or if
you command influance somehow built an atmosphere where this behavior was
acceptable.

Your attacks on the President are a joke. You expect me to believe that the
Marine Corps Commandant gets grief from the CNO or the CJCS for every
infraction of every Marine. That's absurd, and so are you.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
No I am not kidding at all.

If you're in charge, you are responsible.

Nice snippage of my DUI example.

Who is this guy? Obviously one of those I previously killfiled--perhaps a
guy by the name of Case? Whoever it is, BUFDRVR, you are dead on target
here, and obviously this guy has his head so deep in the sand that he has no
idea of which way is up, much less how to define the limits of command
responsibility.

Brooks


That's what I heard over and over in
the Marine Corps.

I'm willing to bet they didn't teach you in the Marine Corps; "and don't
screw
this up or there will be hell to pay from the Prseident since he's
ultimately
responsible".

Maybe you heard something different in the Air Force.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not
mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected
to be
professionals. Additionally, you are not responsible if someone under your
command decides to violate the UCMJ, military regulations or the Geneva
convention unless you were in a position stop that behavior and didn't or
if
you command influance somehow built an atmosphere where this behavior was
acceptable.

Your attacks on the President are a joke. You expect me to believe that
the
Marine Corps Commandant gets grief from the CNO or the CJCS for every
infraction of every Marine. That's absurd, and so are you.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

I'm willing to bet they didn't teach you in the Marine Corps; "and don't
screw
this up or there will be hell to pay from the Prseident since he's ultimately
responsible".

Isn't that sort of silly?

I had a deep and abiding understanding that there were many people in the chain
of command well below the president who could make my life pretty miserable.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected to
be
professionals.

Well, that is not what they teach in the Marine Corps.

"When you pass along some of your duties down the chain of command to more
junior non-commissioned leaders, you hold the latter responsible for producing.
At the same time, you delegate to each subordinate the authority he needs to
carry out his duty. In this way, each level of the chain of command, from
division or air wing down to fire team, receives authority equal to its
responsibilities; and each level carries out its missions under directiion and
supervision of the next higher level.

Although you can delegate authority to your subordinates, you always carry the
ultimate responsibility for all that your unit does or leaves undone."

--"Handbook For Marine NCO's; Second Edition" p. 301 by Col. Robert Debs Heinl,
Jr.


I will also say that my experience with the Air Force during my time in the
Marine Corps was not extensive, but I was not overly impressed. I think you
are showing me why.

Walt

I'm willing to bet they didn't teach you in the Marine Corps; "and don't
screw
this up or there will be hell to pay from the Prseident since he's
ultimately
responsible".

Isn't that sort of silly?

I'm glad you've finally realized what you arguing for is silly.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not
mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected to
be
professionals.

Well, that is not what they teach in the Marine Corps.

Interesting, but I know quite a few Marines and every now and again their young
bucks get into trouble (as most of us at 18 years old did) and the disciplinary
action is focused directly on the 18-year old and not the NCO or officer above
them. In fact, usually the person handing out the punishment is the officer
charged with their supervision. According to you, there would be hell to pay
for the NCO and every officer up to the 4-star general level (and beyond..) for
the actions of an 18-year old Marine. I find it hard to believe the USMC *ever*
worked that way.

Although you can delegate authority to your subordinates, you always carry
the
ultimate responsibility for all that your unit does or leaves undone."


I've never argued anything different. The key word in the above paragraph is
*ultimate*. You'll notice it does not say that you carry personal
responsibility or even specific responsibility for the actions of everyone
below you in the chain of command. You have ultimate responsibility for the
general performance of that unit. The same holds true for the President, he is
ultimately responsible for the general conduct of the U.S. military as a whole,
not for the individual acts of all 1 million plus men.

I will also say that my experience with the Air Force during my time in the
Marine Corps was not extensive, but I was not overly impressed.

Some how I think the feeling is probably mutual amongst the blue suiters who
were unfortnate enough to meet you.

I think you
are showing me why.

If being unbiased and explaining logically how the chain of command works
offends you, I suggest you stear clear of any newsgroups with "military" in the
title.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

BUFDRVR:


I'm willing to bet they didn't teach you in the Marine Corps; "and don't
screw
this up or there will be hell to pay from the Prseident since he's
ultimately
responsible".

Isn't that sort of silly?

I'm glad you've finally realized what you arguing for is silly.


Your comment was silly. It remans silly.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not
mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected
to
be
professionals.

Military personnel are never off duty when it comes to behavior prejudicial to
good order and discipline. Funny UCMJ you have in the Air Force.



Well, that is not what they teach in the Marine Corps.

Interesting, but I know quite a few Marines and every now and again their
young
bucks get into trouble (as most of us at 18 years old did) and the
disciplinary
action is focused directly on the 18-year old and not the NCO or officer
above
them.

Funny, I remember a very unhappy second lieutenant, one of whose sentries
decided to fire all his shot gun rounds into the New River one dark night. You
don't think that incident wasn't reflected in his FITREP? I bet it was.


In fact, usually the person handing out the punishment is the officer
charged with their supervision.

Not many second or first lieuitenants have Article 15 power, and of course
cannot direct that any sort of court martial be convened.

You were in the military, is that right? You're claiming to have been in the
military?


According to you, there would be hell to pay
for the NCO and every officer up to the 4-star general level (and beyond..)

I never said anything even remotely like that.


for
the actions of an 18-year old Marine. I find it hard to believe the USMC
*ever*
worked that way.

Well, there's a saying: "To err is human, to forgive divine. Neither is
Marine Corps policy."



Although you can delegate authority to your subordinates, you always carry
the
ultimate responsibility for all that your unit does or leaves undone."


I've never argued anything different.

You did in this very note to which I respond.

Above:

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not
mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected
to
be
professionals.

Well, that's enough.

I don't even think you were in the military.

Walt

I'm glad you've finally realized what you arguing for is silly.


Your comment was silly. It remans silly.

My comment was simply reiterating your position. Damn you're thick.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not
mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all
expected
to
be
professionals.

Military personnel are never off duty when it comes to behavior prejudicial
to
good order and discipline.

Exactly, you are making my point genius. Your above statement is well
understood by everyone in the USAF and repeatedly stated at every opportunity
by everyone from the COS down to squadron commanders. Because it is well
understood, when an airman goes out and gets pulled over for a DUI, the only
person held accountable is the young airman. His NCO, supervising officer,
squadron commander and on up are not held to task for the individual action of
one airman. That airman knows the rules, he understands the issues and its no
ones fault but his own if he chooses to break them. After talking with one of
my fraternity brothers at Camp Lejune last week, it works the same in the USMC.
If one of his PFCs gets a DUI, unless it was a repeated offense for the person
or reflected continuing behavior of the company as a whole, he is not blamed or
held accountable. Seems your "I was in the USMC" story is suffering some set
backs huh?

Funny UCMJ you have in the Air Force.

Same UCMJ you *supposedly* had in the Marine Corps.

Funny, I remember a very unhappy second lieutenant, one of whose sentries
decided to fire all his shot gun rounds into the New River one dark night.
You
don't think that incident wasn't reflected in his FITREP? I bet it was.

Unless it was a repeated occurance, I bet it wasn't. Why hold the butter bars
responsible for the single act of one individual? If this was the second
occurance, by the same guy or even another guy, I agree the 2 LT has a
leadership issue that needs to be documented.

In fact, usually the person handing out the punishment is the officer
charged with their supervision.


Not many second or first lieuitenants have Article 15 power

Now I'm really doubting your claim to be a vet. Is an Article 15 the only
punshiment that can be handed out? As a Captain I handed out a few LORs and
LOCs. As far as Article 15s go, who do you think makes that recommendation to
the officer with commanders orders? One of my worst weeks in the USAF was when
I had to recommend an Article 15 for one of my life support airmen. Now
granted, the Article 15 was not my idea, it was the senior NCOs, but when the
time came, I was the one recommending it to the commander.

You were in the military, is that right?

Still am genius.

You're claiming to have been in the
military?

What a coincidence, I was just beginning to doubt your claim.

According to you, there would be hell to pay
for the NCO and every officer up to the 4-star general level (and beyond..)

I never said anything even remotely like that.

Thats exactly what you said, that President Bush should be held accountable for
the behavior of several National Guard NCO and enlisted.

Although you can delegate authority to your subordinates, you always carry
the
ultimate responsibility for all that your unit does or leaves undone."


I've never argued anything different.

You did in this very note to which I respond.

In the Air Force they teach you that you are responsible for the direction
and
supervision of those below your chain of command. However, that does not
mean
you are accountable for their off-duty behavior since we are all expected
to
be
professionals.

You must have a reading comprehension problem huh? My above statement says
nothing about not having ultimate responsibility (in fact I reiterate you do
have ultimate responsibility), it deals with accountability. Your initial
premis was that President Bush should be held accountable for the prisoner
abuse case. I have pointed out time and time again that while he is ultimately
responsible for the *overall conduct* of the U.S. military, he is not
accountable (or even personally responsible) for the individual actions of U.S.
service members. You have swapped back and forth (a Kerry man huh?) between
agreeing with me and disagreeing with me. You are either very confused or
suffering mental illness.

I don't even think you were in the military.

Walt


Oh goody, I love quiz games. Do yourself a favor zealot, try not to hang around
boards that deal with the military since you have no idea how it works.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...

snip


Thats exactly what you said, that President Bush should be held
accountable for
the behavior of several National Guard NCO and enlisted.

Wasn't the MP battalion in question a USAR formation?

Brooks

snip

From: (WalterM140)

snip

Funny, I remember a very unhappy second lieutenant, one of whose sentries
decided to fire all his shot gun rounds into the New River one dark night.
You
don't think that incident wasn't reflected in his FITREP? I bet it was.

Why would it? If the 2Lt were present, fired the shots himself and/or
encouraged the act it might.Other than that I can see no reason.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Funny, I remember a very unhappy second lieutenant, one of whose sentries
decided to fire all his shot gun rounds into the New River one dark night.
You
don't think that incident wasn't reflected in his FITREP? I bet it was.

Why would it? If the 2Lt were present, fired the shots himself and/or
encouraged the act it might.Other than that I can see no reason.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Dan, don't waste your time. The guy will come back and agree with you, then
make some other ridiculous inflamatory statement then, two or threee posts down
the road he'll again claim this 2LT should be held accountable. The guy is a
leftist troll who has no interest in a rational discussion.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"