Woke Military

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock pleaded guilty on Fitzgerald collision

Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock was sentenced to receive half-pay for three months and a letter of reprimand.

The plea was the result of an agreement between Coppock and military prosecutors before a special court-martial was supposed to begin at the Navy Yard in Washington.


You take on huge responsibility as a JG. You're a division officer with people's lives in your hands. I essentially had command at LTJG, with 22 Sailors reporting to me. You stand watch at ENS.

This person was a Surface Warfare Officer. It's a hard job. It's SUPPOSED to be a hard job.

I've seen worse punishment for a Sailor keeping a rental car too long while on official travel.


1637613_42b12e5953bdf6f79cc64bc764c991cb.jpg

 

get2choppaaa

Pelican
Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock pleaded guilty on Fitzgerald collision

Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock was sentenced to receive half-pay for three months and a letter of reprimand.

The plea was the result of an agreement between Coppock and military prosecutors before a special court-martial was supposed to begin at the Navy Yard in Washington.


You take on huge responsibility as a JG. You're a division officer with people's lives in your hands. I essentially had command at LTJG, with 22 Sailors reporting to me. You stand watch at ENS.

This person was a Surface Warfare Officer. It's a hard job. It's SUPPOSED to be a hard job.

I've seen worse punishment for a Sailor keeping a rental car too long while on official travel.


1637613_42b12e5953bdf6f79cc64bc764c991cb.jpg

I personally saw a female sailor get butt naked and cause a scene while on a port call. She was allowed to go on liberty two days later... No repercussions.

Meanwhile one of the pilots slapped a girl on the ass at a bar whole drunk (he was flying combat missions mind you) and was sent home from the deployment.

Total double standard and a joke.
 

SlickyBoy

Hummingbird
USS-Fitzgerald_1440-e1503069420592-1.jpg


E6CE4Z4DGD2P5VGWANWRTXYNQQ.jpg

This is what happened to the USS Fitzgerald collusion with a freighter in June 2017 when you put women in the military.

Below is an old and very interesting post (June 17, 2018) related to the above mentioned pictures via The Other McCain. Relevant to this thread title.

Tip: Pentagon Covering Up Fact That Female Officers Nearly Sank Navy Ship​



I wondered about that story the minute it came out and was quickly stuffed down the memory hole. Not one bit surprised there were a couple of affirmative action females on duty that shift, nor do I doubt the suggestion that senior officers who do not enthusiastically support "gender integration" will see their careers stalled. I was in the military around the time of the first female F14 pilot LT Hultgreen, referenced in the embedded ROK article. I actually met one of the salvage divers who was on the recovery mission to retrieve her body - he'd left the Navy and was going through Army SF training. He confirmed the story was one of cover ups, incompetence and ignoring reality.

That was back in the mid nineties, when we thought the Clinton administration pushed the PC nonsense to the outer limits. We really had no idea how bad it could get.
 

SlickyBoy

Hummingbird
Women are a curse on ships. Even if we assume they are equal in capability to male sailors (upper body strength is crucial in the engine room and fire teams) they divide and distract the crew through sex. Even worse than that, when we affirmative action any group of people to undeserved top roles, crashes like this are what you get.
Ask any marine serving on an aircraft carrier (they have a few). Within a few months of the float, over a dozen lower enlisted females will be busted for adultery, fraternization, you name it. As part of their punishment on the float a friend of mine described, the guilty females had to wear reflective vests with the letter A on them. Not sure that punishment would fly today but it was a very obvious reminder aboard the whole ship as to who the trollops were.
 

budoslavic

Owl
Gold Member
97f99456f4a4f614.jpeg


Marine Corps Officer Warns Congress Against Classifying Christians in Military as ‘Religious Extremists’​

A slide used in a Department of Defense (DOD) training manual identifies Catholics and evangelical Christians as “religious extremists,” along with members of the Ku Klux Klan, al-Qaeda, and Hamas, according to a Marine Corps officer.

“First Liberty also obtained a screenshot of an unclassified slide from a U.S. Army training manual. The slide is entitled ‘Religious Extremism’ and it purports to identify religious extremists,” Michael Berry told the House Armed Services Committee, during a hearing on March 24 titled “Extremism in the Military.”

Berry is general counsel to the First Liberty Institute (FLI), a Plano, Texas-based public interest law firm that specializes in First Amendment and religious freedom cases. Berry is also an officer in the Marine Corps Reserves, although he presented his testimony in his capacity as a civilian.

“Included among those listed are al-Qaeda, Hamas, and the Ku Klux Klan as groups that use or advocate violence to accomplish their objectives and are therefore rightly classified as extremists,” Berry told the committee.

“But also included are Evangelical Christianity and Catholicism, who most assuredly do not advocate violence. Surely, the fact that Evangelical Christians and Catholics hold fast to millennia-old views on marriage and human sexuality does not make them extremists who are unfit to serve.

“At a time of turmoil and instability, during which our nation faces many external threats, [this] message is inappropriate and offensive to our service members and those they defend.”

The training manual that Berry referred to is used in Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s recently ordered “stand-down” to identify and root out extremists in the U.S. military. Austin’s order came in the wake of the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, in which some of the participants were military veterans.

Austin said, in a DOD video explaining his reasons for the stand-down that all military members in each of the branches are required to view, that “there is not a single doubt in my mind that you take seriously your oath to the Constitution and that you serve this country with honor and dignity and character.”

Even so, according to Austin in the video, the stand-down is needed because of “extremism and extremist ideology, views, and conduct that runs counter to everything that we believe in.”

Austin claimed in the video that the presence of extremist views “is not new to our country and, sadly, it’s not new to our military.” He didn’t provide in the video any examples of such individuals.

The training materials used in Austin’s stand-down and presented by Berry during the hearing purported to present credible descriptions of extremist ideologies, conduct, reasoning, and identifying characteristics.

Committee Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) told the hearing in his opening statement: “If you serve in the military, you pledge an oath to the U.S. Constitution and to the laws of this country. If you disagree with that Constitution and you disagree with the laws of this country so strongly that you no longer think our government is legitimate, then you have no business serving in the U.S. military and you should get out now.”

Two issues were particularly prominent in witness testimony and committee members’ comments, the lack of credible data about the extent of any extremism in the ranks, and the lack of what constitutes impermissible expression of views and actions on behalf of those views.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), the panel’s top Republican, told the hearing at the outset that “it is important to point out that we lack any concrete evidence that violent extremism is as rife in the military as some commentators claim.”

Rogers said “extremism was a factor” in the separation of only nine soldiers from the U.S. Army in 2020, and he noted that “since 2018, 17 Marines have been separated for extremism, gang or separatist activities.”

“That’s 17 out of 200,000. While I agree that this number ought to be zero, this is far from the largest military justice issue facing our armed services,” Rogers said.

“Earlier this year, 151 overwhelmingly liberal organizations, including Human Rights Watch, the ACLU, and SPLC Action [Southern Poverty Law Center Action Fund], urged Congress not to expand domestic terrorism charges.

“The organizations said, ‘We urge you to oppose any new domestic terrorism charge, the creation of a list of designated domestic terrorist organizations, or other expansion of existing terrorism-related authorities.’”

The committee heard from only two other witnesses, Audrey Kurth Cronin, an American University professor of international security, and Lecia Brooks, chief of staff for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a liberal advocacy group often criticized by conservatives for defining “extremism” so broadly as to include conventional political groups that clearly are not.

The newest Republican member of the committee, Rep. Pat Fallon of Texas, pointed out that “recently the Washington Post, the New York Times, Politico, NPR, and the New Yorker magazine, just to name a few, skewered the SPLC for, among other things, corruption, harassment, racism, and a widening credibility gap.”

Fallon also noted that Cronin claimed 37 of those arrested in connection with the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol were either U.S. military veterans or reservists.

“There are 18 million U.S. military veterans. Thirty-four were rioters. This means that 17,999,966 of us were not. That’s one out of 529,000,” Fallon said.

Smith rejected Fallon’s comments, however, as “logically absurd” because veterans arrested during or after the Jan. 6 riot don’t represent the full scope of the problem.

“We don’t know how large a problem this is. That’s why we’re having this hearing,” Smith said.

Cronin told the committee in response to a question from Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) that recruitment efforts by extremist groups targeting active and retired military individuals “is indeed becoming an increasing problem.”

Asked by Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) for his view on the use of lists of prohibited organizations, Berry said: “They can be dangerous. Labeling evangelical Christians and Catholics as ‘extremists’ is opening Pandora’s box.”

Rep. Michael Waltz (R-Fla.) expressed concern that a DOD effort against extremism will play into the hands of Chinese Communist Party efforts to damage the U.S.’s image overseas.

“There is an active propaganda campaign being prosecuted by the Chinese Communist Party right now attempting to portray our country as an evil racist hellscape with no authority to lecture them on human rights. I worry that we may be playing into our adversary’s hands, and I do worry it will undermine our ability to fight and win wars in the future,” Waltz said.

Smith concluded the hearing by saying “there are demagogues on both sides” and that he “is very concerned about over-reactions.”

“If we are targeting people and shutting them off from jobs and everything for something they said 20 years ago. There’s no reference point, no structure to that and it becomes just this excuse to shove your point of view down somebody’s throat,” he said.

Full video of the above mentioned hearing.

 
97f99456f4a4f614.jpeg


Marine Corps Officer Warns Congress Against Classifying Christians in Military as ‘Religious Extremists’​



Full video of the above mentioned hearing.

If I was Orthodox I'd be insulted to know the DOD does not consider me a domestic terrorist.

Yet at the same time, I appreciate the inability to contribute.

:)
 

get2choppaaa

Pelican
Ask any marine serving on an aircraft carrier (they have a few). Within a few months of the float, over a dozen lower enlisted females will be busted for adultery, fraternization, you name it. As part of their punishment on the float a friend of mine described, the guilty females had to wear reflective vests with the letter A on them. Not sure that punishment would fly today but it was a very obvious reminder aboard the whole ship as to who the trollops were.
I had a buddy, (civilian) who was married to a female ensign (officer). She cheated on him while deployed with a Marine Officer in the the same grade (both were company grade officers so while sex on ship is banned, they would have otherwise been able to fraternize except both were married)... The Marine was charged with adultery, career over, divorced ect (as it should be) . She was given no negative write ups. No career ending sanctions ect...my bro (now a self made millionaire) had to pay out the wazoo during the divorce due to California laws.

There is ZERO application of any standard from what I have seen.

I know about a female Artillery Officer who slept with her senior enlisted advisor. She was held slightly accountable (transferred) My buddy wrote her fitrep after the fact. once she was in a new unit so he didnt deal with her paperwork to see what consequences she ever really faced... but I do know she did not get an NJP or reprimand in her official record (something a general officer has to do for Officers, nor was she court martialed) The enlisted Marine was forced out.

On top of that. The GTICF or something similar standing for Ground Integrated Task Force spent 36 million dollars... they proved that "women can do the job" yet never took them to the field for 30 days plus with out showers ect... So even then they gave no real assessment of the capabilities of women compared to men.

I have seen this bullshit in action. The military is turning into a cesspool of wokeness. I am not saying it doesn't have its benefits... but it is not like it was when I jointed during the surge-post surge Iraq time. The Obama era really did a number on it and those political purges put a final nail in the coffin.
 

SlickyBoy

Hummingbird
I had a buddy, (civilian) who was married to a female ensign (officer). She cheated on him while deployed with a Marine Officer in the the same grade (both were company grade officers so while sex on ship is banned, they would have otherwise been able to fraternize except both were married)... The Marine was charged with adultery, career over, divorced ect (as it should be) . She was given no negative write ups. No career ending sanctions ect...my bro (now a self made millionaire) had to pay out the wazoo during the divorce due to California laws.
This situation has been this way for a while, but it is getting worse. Since most people in the military beyond their first term wind up married, adultery is rampant given the secular atomization, deployment and general sin all over the place. The trick is when a female married service member gets caught in an affair with a married male service member, the first thing she usually does is allege sexual assault. Bye bye, charges of adultery for her, and hello changes of adultery and rape for him. I know a military lawyer who has a name for this phenomenon - "coitus regrettus"

Not to knock on your buddy too much, but really, what was he thinking marrying a woman who by design of her career would be on boats full of temptation for her? Could her paycheck really have been that critical to the family finances? But I know he wasn't thinking this way.
 

get2choppaaa

Pelican
This situation has been this way for a while, but it is getting worse. Since most people in the military beyond their first term wind up married, adultery is rampant given the secular atomization, deployment and general sin all over the place. The trick is when a female married service member gets caught in an affair with a married male service member, the first thing she usually does is allege sexual assault. Bye bye, charges of adultery for her, and hello changes of adultery and rape for him. I know a military lawyer who has a name for this phenomenon - "coitus regrettus"

Not to knock on your buddy too much, but really, what was he thinking marrying a woman who by design of her career would be on boats full of temptation for her? Could her paycheck really have been that critical to the family finances? But I know he wasn't thinking this way.
Well, clearly he chose poorly... But then again I've done that also.

Second woman he was with chose a career in the FBI, so he is apparently attracted to women who are career driven.

Not my cup of tea... conversely, my ex wife was a stay at home mom who claimed to be traditional when we got together secretly wanted a career and left after getting pregnant post deployment as I was dealing with some re-adjustment issues. So bad choices come in all types and all presentations.

There is a reason, in the Marines at least, that many generals are Catholic. The guilt milage is superb.

Frankly the military is better if you're single and get married when you're 30.
 

fiasco360

Kingfisher
The military is done.

China adopted a policy called “Proposal on Preventing the Feminization of Male Adolescents” - working on doubling the number of fitness instructors in schools, teaching "masculine lifestyle", and they will outpace us in per capita meat consumption.

We debate allowing transsexuals in the military, lower both physical and mental standards so women feel "included", have "diversity" chiefs and promote eating these soy-corn mutated plants that lower our testosterone every year.

Someone mentioned in another thread - at this point we have to pretty much live like we are under occupation - because we are.
 
So, its important to remind everyone of another silly issue that's ongoing. People who play pretend, cross dressers, demand they compete as whatever sex they're pretending to be at the moment. This has caused lots of issues with female sports for all the obvious reasons. Here we see how unfair this situation is because the males outcompete the females. Keep in mind that these males might be on some kind of hormone treatment. And, if they're so pathetic to compete with the girls chances are they're not very good athletes to begin with. So, this combination shows us that you have substandard males getting into female sports but still beating the girls. Certainly, putting female hormones into your body will only make a male less competitive. Yet, these males still dominate. This makes it ipso facto that there is no equality between the sexes.

This is reality. And as this is occurring we have these experiments in the military, coed boot camps, women in combat arms etc, that are based on this idea that males and females are exactly the same and that, females can compete at the level of males. Yet, we have direct evidence that this is not at all the case. Matter of fact, the weirdo and weak males are dominating the best females.
I wrote a paper once about women in the military, a long time ago. I read a book by a guy named Richard Gabriel who did a bunch of research into the issue, decades ago. His findings were common sense, but his conclusion was sadly prophetic. I will never forget this quote:

It will avail us little that the members of our defeated force were all equal. History will treat us for what we were: A social curiosity that failed.”
 
Sanctions work in funny ways - mostly economic. Iran wants to get XYZ resource, but we wont sell it to them because of sanctions. They could buy it from any other country, but then State Department reminds said countries about whatever benefit (resources, deals, or flat out cash - maybe even weapons for trade, yes), and by extension our sanctions have extra power from other nations taking our bribes. Soft power, you could call it. That's political, not military.

Then again, as Von Clausewitz said, war is an extension of politics, so maybe in that sense, you could argue the idea of a military supports the currency. But it isn't because people fear being nuked.

As for Syria, I read something about that currency gambit. Seemed a bit less likely a motive than the idea of knocking off Gaddafi to steal his weapons and funnel them to the "rebels" in Syria who Obama really wanted to help, but politically could not.

I believe there are multiple motives. And one doesn't always exclude the other. So its as much about currencies as those other motives listed.
 

Easy_C

Peacock
Obama could politically help the rebels. On multiple occasions they openly bragged about arming and training “moderate Syrian rebels”.

Libya was pre-identified all the way back in 1998 as a country that the project for a new American century wanted toppled. The weapons smuggling was most likely an opportunity created by the chaos (anticipated or not doesn’t really matter) and just a step towards the next PNAC goal of destabilizing Syria.

As to why Syria and Russia together became such an intense focus over all the other PNAC targets:

 

SlickyBoy

Hummingbird
By "help" I refer to the Obama administration openly floating the idea of significant direct intervention and ground troops. That was too much for the population so soon after Iraq died down, but the neocons still found a way.

Trump even participated a bit but as much as he tried to limit involvement, his own envoy lied to him about the numbers of troops present in Syria. I don't think there will ever be a time when they can't find an excuse for middle east military involvement.
 

Dusty

Peacock
Gold Member
For you youngins, MASH was a 1970s sitcom with a big lib bent. Even the libs then thought it a ridiculous joke, trannies in the military.

1616859006036.jpeg
Klinger dressed like a woman to fake mental illness to get out of the military.

Nowaday, Klinger would be held up as a roll model. Some general would tweet out Kilngers picture saying “isn’t this wonderful! This is what the US Military is all about! Inclusion and diversity!”
 
Last edited:
Top