New posts

Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="bvvanes, post: 547487, member: 12247"] As I think about what just occurred in SWC and in particular, SF standards. I was initially struck when asking what has been accomplished? In the sprit of transparency, I have to admit as an enlisted man, my interactions with officers were never noteworthy except my interaction with the IG in my short Division stint. In SF the officers I dealt with were closer to the admonishment given in the "US Army Officers" guide of 1894 where it stated: [B]Enlisted men[/B] are,,,, extremely cunning and sly and [B]bear[/B] considerable [B]watching[/B]." then the EMs I dealt with over the years, both as an EM and as an Officer. I'll admit during my training in SF most of that knowledge base I acquired came from EMs which by design is the way that training is instilled in newbies. The officer corps lost an excellent opportunity to 'spit shine' their image. Additionally, later in my career as an officer, I did meet some officers that did have that SF spirit, where the mission took priority over their badges/career aspirations. I had great respect early on, for those Os that would jump in and teach a class with the EM instructors and to hell with ticket punching. With all that said, what occurred is not just that a very senior officer, a bevy of junior officers and at least 2 combat-tested EMs from Mackall have lost a career (I'm not judging the individuals involved since I never met any of them) but that the standards for S & A have been put under the microscope where it should be to avoid "mission creep". Oh, these 2 EMs from Mackall, they embody the spirit my earlier post mentioned: 'the 18A that would sit in the GB club and drink a beer with the team. The ones with a touch of larceny in their collective hearts, the ones that prioritized mission over self. I wonder what would Bargewell, Beckwith and Rowe say if they weighed in on this debacle? [/QUOTE]

Verification: How many letters are in "ShadowSpear?"