The Pentagon's controversial plan to hire military leaders off the street

The Pentagon's controversial plan to hire military leaders off the street

What do you think of this?

 

Being in the military from bottom up teaches a way of thinking of Country first (not government), true freedom is to be cherished which your pretty much denied for yourself in the military, and a number of other core values many which would be seen as conservative in the political landscape. This is why I think the vast majority of veterans and active duty vote conservative as well.

Now with that said I see this as a way to allow more liberalism into the service because they could move into top positions of power w/o the whole system that tends to drive someone towards conservative views. Liberalism believes in self rather than country and doesn't care about true personal freedoms. Yet to be able to appoint a top commander who shares extreme liberal views would be devastating for the security of the armed forces and really lead to some insane decision making.

Do we really want someone in the military who is their only for themselves and has no belief in their country first? Can we trust someone who's views are about eroding freedoms of Americans in favor of a global environment? Can we trust someone who's views are to blame the US whenever something is disliked by the liberal agenda or globalist agenda? Can we trust someone who never put in the time to earn their position the old fashioned way and was just appointed as your new boss?

Lastly I also see this as a way to curb promoting from within which just further grows conservative minded people. No need to promote those who actually love and want to protect their country because you can put in an outsider to force a new agenda.

 

Edward Snowden ?.

 

From the article: Defense Secretary Ash Carter wants to open the door for more “lateral entry”

This conjures up an image of gay men spooning. Then the mind wanders on to think that the new hires were unwilling to risk their own lives but are more than willing to risk other people's lives. Then the mind says: Foolish idea.

 

Hmmmmmm

In some branches, this form of military accession has already been in place for decades.

An example of this type of "push button" Officer and Enlisted happens in the medical fields - and in some of the "softer" military fields.

A Doctor, a specialized Nurse, a Lawyer, some Ministers, and certain Enlisted rank first-termers who have a Bachelor's degree in certain qualifying disciplines can be - and are - routinely offered rank higher than that of the typical entry rank level for Officer/Enlisted. Many can start right off the bat on Day One with and O-3 or E-3 rank. I used to call the Enlisted folks like this "push buttons", because by the time they finished 6-8 weeks basic training/boot camp, they were automatically promoted to E-4. And by the time they completed their first military MOS/A school (it was usually a long one), they wound up being an E-5 when they got to their very first duty station.

And while they may have been technically proficient, many were sorely tactically deficient. It caused a lot of personnel issues as they had rank and didn't know jack squat about how to manage their lower Enlisted because they didn't have any seasoning time under their belt and didn't know how the system operated. A few did OK - maybe they were older and had a bit more common sense. But for the most part, it was more of a pain in the butt to have a "push button" for your immediate NCO as they simply didn't know by experience, the nuances of this type of work environment (combat or field exercise environment).

As you can tell by now, I'm not too keen on this idea. However, I do think we need to attract particularly skilled/educated folks to fill these type of skilled positions. I think one way would be to offer very sizable student loan forgiveness plans, and offer healthy bonuses payable over X amount/per year for X many years. But that would cost more money than simply offering stripes. Stripes are cheaper on the Enlisted side of this equation when you compare the cost of the rank to the cost of the educational debt forgiveness and/or bonuses.

I believe we would greatly risk hollowing out the military Enlisted component if this were to be adopted - and especially so with the NCO core, which is the backbone of the military structure. Rank simply has to be earned over time and through demonstrable and competent experience and training.

This is not the area to save a dollar on. Very penny wise - but very pound foolish.

They need to look at the massively bloated military/DoD contracts that bleed buckets of red ink, lest we start bleeding buckets of red blood, too from inexperienced "push button" NCO recruits.

Let's not conflate these two shades of red.

nwlivewire

 

I recently met a retired US Navy Doctor that obviously did not get much military training. He is also born Filipino in Siquijor. He retired after 21 years in Navy then ran a hospital for 12 years as a civilian. This type of lateral enlistment has been going on for years, even back to WWII that I know.
This gentleman retired as a CDR. I retired as a E5, or more accurately got out after my initial enlistment.
So if it is not doctors and such they would be hiring just what would their job descriptions be?
As King Cole mentioned Edward Snowden which is what came to mind while reading this article. I had a high security clearance as did all the guys I worked with. There was a culture of not talking shop out side our work area. If there was any talk it was always about unclassified stuff.
There is also the culture of Patriotism, of taking care of your fellow soldiers/sailors/marines no matter what the costs, Of following orders immediately, not second guessing whether it was right or wrong.
I think there is an ulterior motive but it may never be known what it is.

 

I think you have hit squarely on a component of, shall we say, "The Transformation?"
It is not just the Military having it's culture and (and agenda?) revised but civilian paramilitary entities as well.
I think this is directly related to the topic...I'll paste what I copied as part of an article from a USA Today article on the embattled Oakland, Ca. Police dept:

"Mayor Libby Schaaf promised to destroy the “disgusting," "macho" culture of the Oakland Police Department."
"...Schaaf then appointed a civilian—and a woman—to oversee the Oakland P.D. The command staff will report to City Administrator Sabrina Landreth, who will be responsible for personnel and disciplinary decisions, the report notes.

Miss Landreth doesn't know diddly squat about police work and now she will oversee personnel and discipline according to the article.
I'm just wondering, without those disgusting macho cops (and soldiers), who is going to keep the citizens safe?

(Asia here I come)

 

I can't cite the source at this time, but I have heard often that the U.S. Military personnel vote approx. 85% Republican.
It's all about votes and The New World Order folks.
This attempt is simply part and parcel to undermining the traditions and customs of the United States and installing the "new and improved agenda."
Still think I'm a nut job?