Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: cassandra and sara's daddy on September 30, 2013, 07:05:13 PM
-
so i seek input
did these guys deserve this? or fall guys?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/two-marine-generals-fired-for-security-lapses-in-afghanistan/2013/09/30/b2ccb8a6-29fe-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html?tid=sm_fb
-
Given the talk of "limits" mandated by the administration, I'm inclined to say fall guy
But there's not enough info
-
that was my gut feeling based on knowledge of how organizations work.
-
I'll go with fall guy.
It was my experience that after any "incident" in the military the first order of business is always placement of blame.
What happened, why it happened, how to prevent it from happening again are all irrelevant if blame can be placed in the "right place".
-
Heads on down to the Corporal of the Guard should also roll. But they probably will not.
Yes, the Commander is the only one who is responsible. He can delegate his authority, but never his responsibility. But all those below him apparently also failed in their jobs of carrying out the Commander's order - which probably went something like "Don't let our assets get *expletive deleted"'d up. The two star issues the order. The one star tells the colonel who tells the lieutenant colonel who tells the major who tells the captain who tells the 1st lieutenant who tells the second lieutenant who tells the first sergeant who tells the gunny who tells the staff sergeant who tells the sergeant who tells the corporal who tells the lance corporal and ptivates (first class and plain). Every one of them, both on the way down and on the way back up, needs to check to see that their assignment is being carried out and to report any problems to the next higher level.
Insurgents do not get inside the wire and destroy that much "stuff" without someone having failed to ensure that their assignment was carried out.
Based on absolutely no information whatsoever, I'm going to guess the breakdown took place somewhere bewtween the colonel and the major. And that it probably involves the same sort of thinking that allowed air assets at Hickham Field to be destroyed so easily in 1941 - dispersal is messy and takes more troops to guard the dispersed assets.
stay safe.
-
The current Commandant is a *expletive deleted*che and he's been axing a lot of people.
Of course, he is trying to arm the ODO's on all bases at a minimum. That's a start in one right direction.
-
Head in another aritcle the Tongans used for guards were sleeping and such and going a pretty poor job. And it was apparently common knowledge to just about everyone, but no steps were taken to fix it. Not sure if the commanders had the freedom to make a change or not.
-
Head in another aritcle the Tongans used for guards were sleeping and such and going a pretty poor job. And it was apparently common knowledge to just about everyone, but no steps were taken to fix it. Not sure if the commanders had the freedom to make a change or not.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that the local commander could not set up an internal guard/reaction force/firewatch?
stay safe.
-
Are you seriously trying to suggest that the local commander could not set up an internal guard/reaction force/firewatch?
stay safe.
Yep. The planes were on the British side of the base. Jurisdiction and all that. The Brits were allowing/using the Tongan's as guards. The Tongans failed. But yes, the commander(s)* could have and should have done more.
*Generally there is a base commander. Depending on the size of the base may or may not be the same as the commander of the troops there, especially if the troop unit is merely "passing through".