Hundreds of military commanders fired or forced to resign

[Paynefree]

We are well past the tipping point. Have been for years. Do you think it matters? people or rather the sheeple keep voting this crap in. Its all corrupt. Top to bottom. Bout like the guys posting about a nearby chapter of a militia forming.. Not interested lol

 

[Indirect Fire]

Many of those cases, in fact most, are for damn good cause. Look beneath the numbers......when two Marine Generals have such sorry security in place 12 Taliban suicide bombers can run in and destroy most a squadron (largest lost of planes since the Tet Offensive, in Vietnam IIRC) they need to be fired. I can just browse thru that and see many more that were fired for things enlisted men go to prison for....... I think Obama sucks a camels schlong and I know some have been discharged for BS reason but really because they disagree with with "modern military" model he is pushing BUT...this list has many losers that never should have been commissioned.

 

[oldmetlfan]

 

[Indirect Fire]

"Fired" takes on a whole new meaning here as well, most all of these folks at the 0-6 level and up already had plenty of time (20-30 years plus) in and a pension secured, so "fired" really means forced "retirement" as opposed to the meaning in the civilian world.

 

[Captain Kaboom]

There is a great book out now titled "The Generals" that covers the Marshall Plan-I've just started reading it. Started in WWII, it calls for the active and rapid replacement of failing military leaders; e.g. fired and/or reassigned. The tie in to this discussion is that in modern wars, we've been keeping failed leaders in positions for political reasons. Rather than donning a tin foil hat, it might be the case that this turnover process is a return to a previously successful process.

It might also help if we had similar reports of turnover from previous years to see if the last few are out of whack?

 

[USMC6542]

Thanks Obama

 

[SOLGardener]

There is a great book out now titled "The Generals" that covers the Marshall Plan-I've just started reading it. Started in WWII, it calls for the active and rapid replacement of failing military leaders; e.g. fired and/or reassigned. The tie in to this discussion is that in modern wars, we've been keeping failed leaders in positions for political reasons. Rather than donning a tin foil hat, it might be the case that this turnover process is a return to a previously successful process.

It might also help if we had similar reports of turnover from previous years to see if the last few are out of whack?

That'd be all well and good if one could presume that the replacements were uniformly competent.

 

[georgia357]

It might also help if we had similar reports of turnover from previous years to see if the last few are out of whack?

That would be interesting to see.

 

[spavent]

There is a great book out now titled "The Generals" that covers the Marshall Plan-I've just started reading it. Started in WWII, it calls for the active and rapid replacement of failing military leaders; e.g. fired and/or reassigned. The tie in to this discussion is that in modern wars, we've been keeping failed leaders in positions for political reasons. Rather than donning a tin foil hat, it might be the case that this turnover process is a return to a previously successful process.

It might also help if we had similar reports of turnover from previous years to see if the last few are out of whack?

This is the first thing I thought. An organization that large this turnover is most likely quite average. Also look at the stories of the last 2 recipients of the congressional metal of honor Dakota Myers and I forget the other guy (both left the military because of disillusion with leadership) and you'll see that many more should be fired.