A Navy Lieutenant No More

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
BBCode is OFF
Smilies are OFF
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: A Navy Lieutenant No More

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Gone Asiatic » Wed Apr 23, 2008 6:30 pm

She made a bad choice and must now accept the consequences.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:08 pm

Lesforan wrote:While I don't agree that she was right to refuse her assignment, I still think that she or any other person joining any particular branch should have a reasonable expectation to be assigned service within that branch. If all personnel are considered a pool for any branch to draw on as-needed, they why even have a division of services? Maybe a joint, homogenized national military force would be a more honest way of dealing with the problem.

I would hate to see it come to that. But if the branches are having trouble filling their enlistment quotas, sending people to different branches than the ones they joined (except for special liason situations) certainly won't help.
We really don't know... it could be that the unit she was to be assigned to was a "joint' unit, in which it would be entirely consistent with current policy to send her. It might have been a Marine Corps unit, in which case her assignment would not even be cross service in nature.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Lesforan » Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:47 pm

While I don't agree that she was right to refuse her assignment, I still think that she or any other person joining any particular branch should have a reasonable expectation to be assigned service within that branch. If all personnel are considered a pool for any branch to draw on as-needed, they why even have a division of services? Maybe a joint, homogenized national military force would be a more honest way of dealing with the problem.

I would hate to see it come to that. But if the branches are having trouble filling their enlistment quotas, sending people to different branches than the ones they joined (except for special liason situations) certainly won't help.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by NucSub » Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:05 am

Funny, The females gripe about not being allowed into all the available jobs, then she gets one that she doesn't like.....boo hoo. Since when did race, religion, or ethnicity play a part in assignments since the late 1940s?? She is the only one saying she was to have direct contact with the Iraqi's. Sounds more like an admin job signing off on things, not direct negotiations. Even if she were the one with direct contact, aren't we supposed to be showing them "strong females". If we excluded her from the job, she'd be in the news griping that the military was backwards and prejusticed agains females. Joint services tours have been going for as long as I remember. Officers are trained as administrators as well as leaders.
The Navy changed my jobs several times including my duties, locations, and functions. This included many things that I did not "sign up for". Failure to report, beach to the point of being tossed, I think not. She got off lucky. If it were a male officer, he'd have a new address. The Brig.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Rich Mathsen » Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:35 am

This reminds me of an article in the USNI Proceedings several years back, entitled "I Went Joint (But Didn't Inhale)." Because of the "transformation in military affairs" led by former SecDef Rummy, the services (with the exception of the USMC) are all having trouble retaining people, part of the problem being that you get nowhere as an officer if you don't do some joint duty assignment. A lot of people get out because they've become disillusioned with how things are run now. For those that stay, it's a given that you'll do some time with another service. And when they need boots on the ground, the thinking now is that they don't care if those boots are brown, green or blue. In this particular case, the thing that most perplexes me is, what thoroughbred sphincter thought it would be a good idea to send a Jewish woman to handle bribing Arab men?

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:06 pm

I think you'll find that all changed in 1949.

Lately, the military has been sponsoring a "Blue to Green" incentive program to shuffle more qualified sailors to the Army.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Lesforan » Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:00 pm

The point I was trying to make had nothing to do with her being ordered to Iraq, but everything to do with her being assigned to another branch of the military than the one she enlisted in. As far as that goes, I think she has a legitimate beef.

If one were to join "the military", if that were really possible, then maybe they would become a generic soldier/sailor/airman with total interchangeability. That may well be the case in nations like Canada that has an homogenzied military.

But in this country, people do not join an organization called "the military", or "National Defense Force". They join either the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, or the Coast Guard. As such, they should have a right to be employed in the particular branch they signed up for, not just anywhere to fill a lack of recruits in any particular group.

In WWII there were draftees sent into the Navy. But even in that case, I don't think they wound up in the Army.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Walt » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:21 pm

I seem to remember..
"I swear to defend the Constitution of The United States from all enemys , foreign and domestic"
The good LT made a choice.. not a wise choice :big_grin: .. Now she must prepare to accept the penalty for such a poor and illegal choice :cool_1: . You have no "Bill of Rights" while in the service.. This is the same pledge all service people swear to uphold.. There is no if or sometimes in that pledge..She should get prison but during these days of soft Military law she won't...I'll wager she cashes her pay checks...
If your Boss orders you to Iraq .. then go or suffer the consenquences. :thumbs_up_1: It's not the Girl Scouts.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by NAVMACS_V2 » Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:57 pm

She could have reported and then made her objections known. There's a good chance if she made her case she might have been assigned a different job. But deciding not to report was a bad idea. Particularly for an officer. She shouldn't complain too much: you can hang for desertion during wartime A crewmember on my ship deserted right before we deployed to the Persian gulf. He got ten years in Leavenworth when he got caught.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:53 pm

chuck wrote: I think it is not unreasonable for the military to send you damn well anywhere they need you. Your value, no matter how highly you might think of your self and how many Trillions of dollars were invested in your training, is still not a single penny higher than the value of the post that needs you most. You volunteered. They didn't draft you. When you volunteered you voluntarily swore to obey any lawful order and put the good of the service above your own.
Absolutely!

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by chuck » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:36 pm

Lesforan wrote:Quite obviously, Ms. Weiner knew her refusal would involve unpleasant consequences. Yet she knowingly sacrificed her career to stand on her principals. For this I feel she should be neither lauded nor condemned.

She could have gone along with her deployment if she had wanted to save her career. At least she had a choice.

While the military cannot guarantee a person will always work in their Military Occupational Specialty, I don't think it is unreasonable for a volunteer to expect that his/her service in the military should be at least in the branch they signed up for.
A volunteer specialist ought to be able to choose which order to obey, but a volunteer grunt had better take a bullet if told to do so?

How's this "principle" materially different from cowardess? Any coward could be expected to knowingly sacrafice her career to stand by her principle so long as that principle involves reducing danger to her life. She certainly had sacraficed her career. Which I would say makes for a fair trade were it not also for the fact that she jepardized the cohesion and discipline of her unit. This she can not repay by merely loosing her career.

I think it is not unreasonable for the military to send you damn well anywhere they need you. Your value, no matter how highly you might think of your self and how many Trillions of dollars were invested in your training, is still not a single penny higher than the value of the post that needs you most. You volunteered. They didn't draft you. When you volunteered you voluntarily swore to obey any lawful order and put the good of the service above your own.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:22 pm

Yes, the posting makes no sense, for someone from the ONR to be assigned so speaks of incompetence at the detailer level within personnel and administration department. Of course, without seeing her fitness reports, she may have done something which would have caused them to try to squeeze her out with this assignment.

There are many avenues to work an issue like this; clearly she failed to use them and resorted to embarrassing the Navy by making a family squabble a public matter.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Timmy C » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:01 pm

But in the capacity that she was proposed to be served? Up close and personal, dealing with (probably) intolerant fundamentalists in a non-combative role? There is a difference between a combat soldier charged with keeping guard or a surgeon dealing with his or her own mates versus directly dealing with someone whom you are not likely to be very successful .

It's not so much a matter of personal concern, but rather, practicality. Why would you send someone who is untrained and significantly disadvantaged in place of someone else who would be more suitable?

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Sorry, my apologies. My statement still stands, that she would not be the only person (or woman) of Jewish faith to serve in Iraq.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Devin » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:37 pm

Werner wrote:I don't see any reference to her religion in the piece. Even if she is Jewish, she would not be the only person of that faith to serve in Iraq. In addition, I would imagine any non-Muslim could make a claim of fear regarding tolerance in the area.
"That gave her pause, not only because she was not trained for the job, but also because she is of Japanese, Korean and Jewish ancestry."

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Devin » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:35 pm

Werner wrote:Articles like this dishonor the thousands of soldiers, sailors and Marines who sign right up to go back immediately after the end of their tours because they believe in the mission.
Nonsense. An Article can not dishonor anyone that does not wish it. Words on a page. That's the same type of thinking that says you can't criticize the war because you'll hurt the feelings of the troops. Does anyone really think the fighting men and women of this country are that simple? They can look at the facts and make the decisions themselves. During Gulf War Part 1 I was well aware of protests happening on college campuses, and I can assure you it made no difference in my decision to be in the military and in the war.

I agree with Les, she is not to be commended or condemned. I for one am glad to see these sorts of stories talked about, though, as it shows the extents that the military has to go to in order to meet manning obligations. Regardless of reasons for this war, it has been murder on the men and women in uniform, and as long as everyone shuts up, toes the line, and no one hears about it, there will be no pressure put on those in charge to make any changes.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:33 pm

I don't see any reference to her religion in the piece. Even if she is Jewish, she would not be the only person of that faith to serve in Iraq. In addition, I would imagine any non-Muslim could make a claim of fear regarding tolerance in the area.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Timmy C » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:18 pm

Werner wrote: People who sign up for the service generally know what they signed up for.
Except, in this case, she -didn't- know that when signing up for the Navy, that she would be personally dealing with (possibly) fundamentalist Islamic warlords as an East Asian Jewish female!

There is a line between legal and dutiful actions versus impractical. This crosses that. Sending a person of her heritage and gender into a situation where she would be at an distinct disadvantage, not to mention an area in which she was not trained, is -not- conducive to a practical outcome. If they wanted to reassign her to Iraq in an area of her expertise, then that's fine, but throwing her into the deep end full of sharks is not. Find someone else who is going to have a better chance at it.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Werner » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:07 pm

I see the words "Duty, Honor, Country" do not include convenience, comfort or even fairness. People who sign up for the service generally know what they signed up for.

Articles like this dishonor the thousands of soldiers, sailors and Marines who sign right up to go back immediately after the end of their tours because they believe in the mission.

Re: A Navy Lieutenant No More

by Lesforan » Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:37 pm

Quite obviously, Ms. Weiner knew her refusal would involve unpleasant consequences. Yet she knowingly sacrificed her career to stand on her principals. For this I feel she should be neither lauded nor condemned.

She could have gone along with her deployment if she had wanted to save her career. At least she had a choice.

While the military cannot guarantee a person will always work in their Military Occupational Specialty, I don't think it is unreasonable for a volunteer to expect that his/her service in the military should be at least in the branch they signed up for.

Top