- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump met with enlisted troops only on Afghanistan
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:04 pm to Lakeboy7
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:04 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
These deployments have readiness value, the loss compared to when deploy an unprepared force is a small fraction.
This is dumb as shite. You win wars by training to win wars. Combat readiness is a result of effective training. Combat fatigue comes from constant deployment.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:06 pm to Roaad
quote:
Everyone in the Navy believes it.
No, they don't.
Were/are you Navy?
I know a lot of Cheifs and officers who would be disappointed in your misrepresentation, including my COO.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:08 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
No it isn't.
The Bush admin had a goal of "spreading democracy and western living" while installing a puppet government in a country full of people that prefer living in 5th century stone ages and is opposed to what we wanted to do.
How is that not trying to subjugate them?
That way has brought us nothing suffering, pain and misery with trillions of our tax dollars lost.
quote:
The United States isn't the fricking Roman Empire.
We sure as hell are following the trajectory of their collapse with endless foreign conflicts and out of control immigration.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:11 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
I was in the Navy for a loooong time.
Nothing I have said is even controversial. It is just what is.
I had one conversation with my Div O in 4 years on one ship.
You think he had a firm grasp on his people?
You can catch a Captain's mast if you get too friendly with an Officer.
We ate dinner at my Chief's pad every time we pulled back into homeport, on that same ship
I don't know a single sailor who has much of a different experience.
quote:bullshite.
I know a lot of Cheifs and officers who would be disappointed in your misrepresentation
Nothing I have said is even controversial. It is just what is.
I had one conversation with my Div O in 4 years on one ship.
You think he had a firm grasp on his people?
You can catch a Captain's mast if you get too friendly with an Officer.
We ate dinner at my Chief's pad every time we pulled back into homeport, on that same ship
I don't know a single sailor who has much of a different experience.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:13 pm to Sentrius
quote:
The Bush admin had a goal of "spreading democracy and western living" while installing a puppet government in a country full of people that prefer living in 5th century stone ages and is opposed to what we wanted to do.
The stated goals of the Department of Defense are those that I highlighted earlier.
Your Dubya melt is irrelevant to me.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:15 pm to Roaad
quote:
bullshite.
Ok, I'll tell him some dude on the Internet who did a "loooong time" knows more than him.
quote:
It is often said, "Chiefs don't run the Navy, they make the Navy run."
You should've spent more time in the Navy.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:17 pm to Sentrius
quote:
in a country full of people that prefer living in 5th century stone ages and is opposed to what we wanted to do.
And a people who are constantly living with the threat and fear of being turned into a red cloud by a fellow countryman for even thinking about riding with the ideas introduced there by the U.S.A.
Little difficult to get them to do right under those circumstances.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:21 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Sure, I have no problem with it that way.
Chiefs don't run the Navy, they make the Navy run.
Either way serves my purpose in this conversation.
quote:Why?
You should've spent more time in the Navy.
quote:Do as you will.
Ok, I'll tell him some dude on the Internet who did a "loooong time" knows more than him.
Nobody that has ever served in the Navy would disagree with anything I have said in this thread.
Not one.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:25 pm to Roaad
quote:
Either way serves my purpose in this conversation.
Not really.
One, the correct one, directly supports what I've said.
quote:
Why?
So you'd know something useful and accurate about the Navy.
quote:
Nobody that has ever served in the Navy would disagree with anything I have said in this thread.
Not one.
I don't know anyone who would agree with you.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:40 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Neither supports what you said.
Not really.
One, the correct one, directly supports what I've said.
But just to play your game:
quote:LINK
Chiefs Run the Navy, CNO Tells Senior Enlisted Academy
quote:
Chiefs have been respected as the backbone and anchor of the Navy for more than a century. It is widely and fondly known among retirees and other civilians whom I have encountered, that “Chiefs run the Navy”. I accept the praise with humility and generally reply that it “is all in a day’s work.” Because I know the history and the mission of THE CHIEF: turning young scared kids into fighting seafarers, to being the voice of reason when the wardroom is unanimously praising the executive officer’s “great idea.” The position and mission of the Chief Petty Officer and the need for that differentiation and separation on afloat commands is unique in the armed services. Recent trends in training to square with those differences have largely been productive.
LINK
quote:LINK
Effectively running and fighting a warship relies on bridging the gap between officers and enlisted personnel. It was from this need that the creation of the rank of chief petty officer was born.
If you prefer the other variant, that's fine. They make it run by being the bridge between enlisted and officer. That is their job.
i am not doubting you know a couple of former sailors. I am saying your recollection of their positions on the interrelation between enlisted and officers is either flawed, or made up whole cloth.
quote:Such as?
So you'd know something useful and accurate about the Navy.
quote:Then you don't know anyone in the Navy
I don't know anyone who would agree with you.
Or any armed services, really. Want to know what's up with your soldiers or Marines? Ask your SFC or Gunney.
Always been that way, always will be that way.
It is damn near illegal to be friends with an officer as an enlisted. It is called fraternization, and it is treated harshly and swiftly.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 8:53 pm to Roaad
quote:
If you prefer the other variant
It isn't another variant. It contradicts your assertion.
quote:
But just to play your game:
Sure, let's play.
quote:
"The officers run the Navy, but the chiefs make the Navy run," explained Command Master Chief Mike Bates of Pensacola's Center for Information Warfare Training at Corry Station.
I know Mike, and many others like him. So much for your "no one ever" bullshite.
quote:
Such as?
Literally anything. Like I said...
quote:
Then you don't know anyone in the Navy
Or any armed services, really. Want to know what's up with your soldiers or Marines? Ask your SFC or Gunney.
Wrong again.
I spent a loooooooooooooong time in the Marine Corps.
quote:
Gunney
Jesus Christ.
Well, you certainly have the aptitude of a Chief.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 9:23 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/31/19 at 9:06 pm
Posted on 12/27/19 at 9:59 pm to Roaad
quote:
Nobody that has ever served in the Navy would disagree with anything I have said in this thread.
Not one.
I won't be that definitive. I will give a review of my time in the Navy (mid to late 80's). My captain(s) (plural) were obviously in charge, however, they didn't get involved much in day to day operations. The POD would be put out by him. He (they) would relay info to his (their) officer corps and they would tell their respective chiefs. Then they put us to work. The Captain trusted that the job got done by allowing the chiefs a large degree of oversight. The line officers were basically liasons between the chiefs and the Captain. The officer "in charge" of our department was a grade A dipshit. Honestly, the only officer's on my ship that seemed like they had a clue were in engineering. It is what it is. It was the Captain's ship, but the chief's truly did manage day to day operations. FWIW, my experience may be different than others as I was on a Spruance class destroyer with a crew of 250 give or take. Other ships may have had a different environment, and as a result, a totally different set up.
Just my .02.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:13 pm to antibarner
quote:
You won't tell anyone what your way is.
Nah. Just you and those like you.
quote:
At least I advocate for something.
I could advocate that we cover the whole country in Easy Cheese. That would make as much sense. It would actually be more effective, though.
Yeah, let's go with that. Cover Afghanistan in Easy Cheese.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:17 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
If the U.S. taxpayer bears the burden of the pricetag on the cheese, I'm out.
Otherwise, I'm in.
Otherwise, I'm in.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:18 pm to davyjones
We'll get Pakistan to pay for it.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:25 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
I like it. Reduce aid to Pakistan in the amount of the cost of the cheese.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:51 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/31/19 at 9:07 pm
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:53 pm to antibarner
I'll never entertain the ideas of someone who thinks erasing an entire country with nuclear weapons is a good idea.
Deal with that however you need to deal with it.
Deal with that however you need to deal with it.
Posted on 12/27/19 at 10:54 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/31/19 at 9:07 pm
Popular
Back to top



0






