General Dempsey Attacks SpecOps Group for Protesting Whitehouse Leaks
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Age: 60
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gen. Dempsey has seemed to step outside his lane regarding politics.
If he'd said nothing regarding the former SEAL but instructed the Pentagon's lawyers to pursue the apparent breaking of the NDA - Non-Disclosure Agreement - then I'd say he had a leg to stand on. But quietly. (One does wonder, having signed such a thing myself, if the press to test would fail in this case?)
His call to the loony pastor in Florida shocked me.
He didn't speak out against the retired flag officers who are supporting, publicly, either major candidate.
Yet he has been party, actively or passively, in granting a filmmaker intimate access with the particular SEAL team and planners for a movie on the raid. That sure seems to cut his point off at the knees.
One also wonders how the current Administration, including the current SECDEF and CJCS, can condemn the amateur movie being blamed for the latest round of loony Muslim protests (although the fact that it was a planned terrorist attack is being admitted as I type) yet have done nothing to stop this movie which will show Osama, a hero to many of the Muslims, being killed by American forces.
Surely, that's worth a bonfire or two?
Yet not a word stopping it and active participation in making it.
edited to add: I think the increasing public politicization of the US military is kicking at one of the last pillars of society.
If he'd said nothing regarding the former SEAL but instructed the Pentagon's lawyers to pursue the apparent breaking of the NDA - Non-Disclosure Agreement - then I'd say he had a leg to stand on. But quietly. (One does wonder, having signed such a thing myself, if the press to test would fail in this case?)
His call to the loony pastor in Florida shocked me.
He didn't speak out against the retired flag officers who are supporting, publicly, either major candidate.
Yet he has been party, actively or passively, in granting a filmmaker intimate access with the particular SEAL team and planners for a movie on the raid. That sure seems to cut his point off at the knees.
One also wonders how the current Administration, including the current SECDEF and CJCS, can condemn the amateur movie being blamed for the latest round of loony Muslim protests (although the fact that it was a planned terrorist attack is being admitted as I type) yet have done nothing to stop this movie which will show Osama, a hero to many of the Muslims, being killed by American forces.
Surely, that's worth a bonfire or two?
Yet not a word stopping it and active participation in making it.
edited to add: I think the increasing public politicization of the US military is kicking at one of the last pillars of society.
Last edited by brickhistory; 19th Sep 2012 at 23:51.
Thread Starter
Perhaps Dempsey may find himself defending his actions re LTC Dooley in a civilian court if Dooley's Lawyers file a civil action as a result of the adverse action taken by Dempsey.
The Adverse action flies in the face of the National Defense University policy regarding Scholastic Freedom and Standards maintained by the NDU.
This could get very interesting and very sticky for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs if this winds up in a Federal Civil Court.
The link takes you to an article that references the NDU's policy statement which would be the cornerstone of Dooley's case against Dempsey.
Muslim Letter that Prompted the Pentagon to Purge Military Instruction
From the NDU policy statement.....
The Adverse action flies in the face of the National Defense University policy regarding Scholastic Freedom and Standards maintained by the NDU.
This could get very interesting and very sticky for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs if this winds up in a Federal Civil Court.
The link takes you to an article that references the NDU's policy statement which would be the cornerstone of Dooley's case against Dempsey.
Muslim Letter that Prompted the Pentagon to Purge Military Instruction
From the NDU policy statement.....
“No subject or issue is considered taboo, and there are no approved “school solutions.” Students are encouraged—indeed expected—to look at issues from a new perspective , to take nothing for granted, and to question everything they read and hear, no matter how authoritative the source.10”
. .........
“Academic freedom is recognized by DOD Directive 5230.9, Clearance of DOD Information for Public Release. The directive requires that personnel in the school environment have the widest latitude to express their views, normally restricted only by security considerations.”
Page 4: Under sub heading “Political Intervention in Education”:
“The academy requires that inquiry and analysis be guided by evidence and ethics, unfettered by political intervention. A college or university must be sensitive to the conditions of society in which it exists, but it must also be free to determine how to be most responsive and responsible. Political interference in the affairs of an educational institution presents a threat to its freedom and effectiveness. Direct intervention by elected or appointed officials, political parties, or pressure groups in the selection of faculty, the determination of curricula, textbooks, course content, or in admissions or retention policies, inject factors which are often inimical to the fulfillment of an institution’s mission. In the matter of appointments, for example, political control at any level results in divided loyalty and weakened authority. To impose political considerations upon faculty selection and retention harms an institution intellectually and educationally, not only by reducing its options in the recruitment of talent, but also by creating pressures against dissent on important policy issues...14”
. .........
“Academic freedom is recognized by DOD Directive 5230.9, Clearance of DOD Information for Public Release. The directive requires that personnel in the school environment have the widest latitude to express their views, normally restricted only by security considerations.”
Page 4: Under sub heading “Political Intervention in Education”:
“The academy requires that inquiry and analysis be guided by evidence and ethics, unfettered by political intervention. A college or university must be sensitive to the conditions of society in which it exists, but it must also be free to determine how to be most responsive and responsible. Political interference in the affairs of an educational institution presents a threat to its freedom and effectiveness. Direct intervention by elected or appointed officials, political parties, or pressure groups in the selection of faculty, the determination of curricula, textbooks, course content, or in admissions or retention policies, inject factors which are often inimical to the fulfillment of an institution’s mission. In the matter of appointments, for example, political control at any level results in divided loyalty and weakened authority. To impose political considerations upon faculty selection and retention harms an institution intellectually and educationally, not only by reducing its options in the recruitment of talent, but also by creating pressures against dissent on important policy issues...14”
Last edited by SASless; 22nd Sep 2012 at 02:37.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting case, either way. Completely agree with the NDU policy statement, but there I have to assume there is (or should be) oversight by someone as to what is taught - otherwise it could be any old tripe, politically sensitive or not. If that is the case then it will rest on whether Dooley went outside the curriculum the school allowed, as I said before.
Thread Starter
You missed the point completely.....twas not the "school" that had the problem with what was being taught....and had been taught before Dooley. It was Dempsey who took issue with what was being taught....acting on the direction of the President who seems overly supportive of things Muslim for some reason.
This issue ignores that some very true statements about Islam will be considered offensive by Islamists despite their being honest, well articulated, critiques of some positions held by Islamic Fundamentalists.
Just because they are offended...or could possibly be offended....should not be the criteria by which course content is judged. The critieria should remain as stated....and leave politics, political correctness concerns, and individual opinions out of it.
All we have to do is look to Fort Hood and Major Hassan's mass murder to see how political correctness and fear of repercussions from above can result in very bad consequences.
This issue ignores that some very true statements about Islam will be considered offensive by Islamists despite their being honest, well articulated, critiques of some positions held by Islamic Fundamentalists.
Just because they are offended...or could possibly be offended....should not be the criteria by which course content is judged. The critieria should remain as stated....and leave politics, political correctness concerns, and individual opinions out of it.
All we have to do is look to Fort Hood and Major Hassan's mass murder to see how political correctness and fear of repercussions from above can result in very bad consequences.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
twas not the "school" that had the problem with what was being taught....and had been taught before Dooley. It was Dempsey who took issue with what was being taught
A class urging senior US military officers to wage “total war” on Islam wasn’t just the work of one misguided teacher. According to an inquiry ordered by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it was the result of “institutional failures in oversight and judgment” at one of the military’s top educational institutions.
Just because they are offended...or could possibly be offended....should not be the criteria by which course content is judged.
Thread Starter
I reckon Dempsey buy rights of being the Number 1 Soldier in the USA....can say that with some authority.....but the issue of whether he is "right" still appears to be under challenge....and hopefully it shall wind up in Court where the good General will have to defend not only his actions...but his reasoning. That will be an interesting bit of testimony to listen to....and consider.
We will be able to learn exactly what the very Senior Commanders and Civilian Secretaries of the Army and Defense have to say about Radical Islam, Terrorism, and the US Army's teachings on the subjects.
We will be able to learn exactly what the very Senior Commanders and Civilian Secretaries of the Army and Defense have to say about Radical Islam, Terrorism, and the US Army's teachings on the subjects.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 86
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately Dempsey is completely politicized. It's come to this. Even the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff thinks that it if Muslims respond to something with butchery and murderous violence, it is up to the non-Muslims to change the way they behave so as to accommodate them. And so eleven years after 9/11, terrorism has well and truly won: now if any group wants anything, they know that all they have to do in order to get it is rampage and riot and kill.
This is no different than General Casey saying that as bad as the massacre at Ft. Hood was, it would be much worse if diversity were a casualty of that massacre. Not a word about the victims, his own soldiers, but concern that diversity may suffer!
Then we have Dempsey instituting Muslim sensitivity training in response to the Afghan trainee killings of US soldiers! He believes that the US soldiers killed by the Afghan soldiers they were training were at fault, not the Muslim murderers!
He still has a job. Sadly, these are the types of people who now populate the upper echelon of our once-proud military.
This is no different than General Casey saying that as bad as the massacre at Ft. Hood was, it would be much worse if diversity were a casualty of that massacre. Not a word about the victims, his own soldiers, but concern that diversity may suffer!
Then we have Dempsey instituting Muslim sensitivity training in response to the Afghan trainee killings of US soldiers! He believes that the US soldiers killed by the Afghan soldiers they were training were at fault, not the Muslim murderers!
He still has a job. Sadly, these are the types of people who now populate the upper echelon of our once-proud military.
Lets apply the golden rule to SASless comment and see how it stacks up:
The application of the golden rule in this case demonstrates conclusively that the post by Sasless is uninformed racist ****e.
You missed the point completely.....twas not the "school" that had the problem with what was being taught....and had been taught before Dooley. It was Dempsey who took issue with what was being taught....acting on the direction of the President who seems overly supportive of things Jewish for some reason.
This issue ignores that some very true statements about Judaism will be considered offensive by Jews despite their being honest, well articulated, critiques of some positions held by Jewish Fundamentalists.
Just because they are offended...or could possibly be offended....should not be the criteria by which course content is judged. The critieria should remain as stated....and leave politics, political correctness concerns, and individual opinions out of it.
All we have to do is look to Gaza and the Jewish army's mass murder with White Phosphorous to see how political correctness and fear of repercussions from above can result in very bad consequences.
This issue ignores that some very true statements about Judaism will be considered offensive by Jews despite their being honest, well articulated, critiques of some positions held by Jewish Fundamentalists.
Just because they are offended...or could possibly be offended....should not be the criteria by which course content is judged. The critieria should remain as stated....and leave politics, political correctness concerns, and individual opinions out of it.
All we have to do is look to Gaza and the Jewish army's mass murder with White Phosphorous to see how political correctness and fear of repercussions from above can result in very bad consequences.
Last edited by Sunfish; 23rd Sep 2012 at 21:55.
Thread Starter
Sunfish,
Uninformed.....what basis do you have to decide that?
Somehow I think you think far more of your opinion than might be appropriate....as your post leaves out a bit of information by which we might figure out what you are trying to say.
Is it the "Golden Rule" to which you refer? Matter of fact....which "Golden Rule" do you mean to apply....the one about "He who has the Gold, Makes the Rules!"?
When was the last time Fundamentalist Jews committed Terror Attacks? There were some Zionists that did in a Hotel in Palestine many years ago before the State of Israel came into being...but I don't think their motive was religious but was more political in reality.
Now do tell me about this Mass Murder to which you refer.....Willy Pete is a Smoke Round....used for marking targets for attack by aircraft generally.
I find this to be a fairly straight forward and commonsense response to the continuous complaints and violence by our Radical Islamist friends.
Uninformed.....what basis do you have to decide that?
Somehow I think you think far more of your opinion than might be appropriate....as your post leaves out a bit of information by which we might figure out what you are trying to say.
Is it the "Golden Rule" to which you refer? Matter of fact....which "Golden Rule" do you mean to apply....the one about "He who has the Gold, Makes the Rules!"?
When was the last time Fundamentalist Jews committed Terror Attacks? There were some Zionists that did in a Hotel in Palestine many years ago before the State of Israel came into being...but I don't think their motive was religious but was more political in reality.
Now do tell me about this Mass Murder to which you refer.....Willy Pete is a Smoke Round....used for marking targets for attack by aircraft generally.
I find this to be a fairly straight forward and commonsense response to the continuous complaints and violence by our Radical Islamist friends.
Last edited by SASless; 24th Sep 2012 at 02:45.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When was the last time Fundamentalist Jews committed Terror Attacks?
- Gush Emunim Underground (1979–84): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim. This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2nd 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques. The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the group’s trial, stated that they had three motives, ‘not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.’
- Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (1981–1989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group.
- The "Bat Ayin Underground" or Bat Ayin group. In 2002, four people from Bat Ayin and Hebron were arrested outside of Abu Tor School, a Palestinian girls' school in East Jerusalem, with a trailer filled with explosives. Three of the men were convicted for the attempted bombing.
- Brit HaKanaim (Hebrew: בְּרִית הַקַנַאִים, lit. Covenant of the Zealots) was a radical religious Jewish underground organisation which operated in Israel between 1950 and 1953, against the widespread trend of secularisation in the country. The ultimate goal of the movement was to impose Jewish religious law in the State of Israel and establish a Halakhic state.
- The Kingdom of Israel group (Hebrew: מלכות ישראל, Malchut Yisrael), or Tzrifin Underground, were active in Israel in the 1950s. The group carried out attacks on the diplomatic facilities of the USSR and Czechoslovakia and occasionally shot at Jordanian troops stationed along the border in Jerusalem. Members of the group caught trying to bomb the Israeli Ministry of Education in May 1953, have been described as acting because of the secularisation of Jewish North African immigrants which they saw as 'a direct assault on the religious Jews' way of life and as an existential threat to the ultra-Orthodox community in Israel.'
- Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (1981–1989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group.
- The "Bat Ayin Underground" or Bat Ayin group. In 2002, four people from Bat Ayin and Hebron were arrested outside of Abu Tor School, a Palestinian girls' school in East Jerusalem, with a trailer filled with explosives. Three of the men were convicted for the attempted bombing.
- Brit HaKanaim (Hebrew: בְּרִית הַקַנַאִים, lit. Covenant of the Zealots) was a radical religious Jewish underground organisation which operated in Israel between 1950 and 1953, against the widespread trend of secularisation in the country. The ultimate goal of the movement was to impose Jewish religious law in the State of Israel and establish a Halakhic state.
- The Kingdom of Israel group (Hebrew: מלכות ישראל, Malchut Yisrael), or Tzrifin Underground, were active in Israel in the 1950s. The group carried out attacks on the diplomatic facilities of the USSR and Czechoslovakia and occasionally shot at Jordanian troops stationed along the border in Jerusalem. Members of the group caught trying to bomb the Israeli Ministry of Education in May 1953, have been described as acting because of the secularisation of Jewish North African immigrants which they saw as 'a direct assault on the religious Jews' way of life and as an existential threat to the ultra-Orthodox community in Israel.'
In 2004 congressional testimony, John S. Pistole, Executive Assistant Director for Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence for the Federal Bureau of Investigation described the JDL as "a known violent extremist Jewish Organization." FBI statistics show that, from 1980 through 1985, there were 18 terrorist attacks in the U.S. committed by Jews; 15 of those by members of the JDL. Mary Doran, an FBI agent, described the JDL in a 2004 Congressional testimony as "a proscribed terrorist group". Most recently, then-JDL Chairman Irv Rubin was jailed while awaiting trial on charges of conspiracy in planning bomb attacks against the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, California, and on the office of Arab-American Congressman Darrell Issa.
From the FBI database you so disparage (source):
Apologies for the size.
Note that there are more Jewish extremist attacks than there are Islamic extremist attacks.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now do tell me about this Mass Murder to which you refer.....Willy Pete is a Smoke Round....used for marking targets for attack by aircraft generally.
During major military operations, from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009, Israel banned access to Gaza for all media and human rights monitors. Access via Rafah in Egypt was also blocked. Unable to enter Gaza, Human Rights Watch researchers spent time on the Israeli side of the 1948 armistice line with northern Gaza. On January 9, 10 and 15, they watched IDF artillery repeatedly fire air-burst white phosphorus above civilian areas, including what appeared to be Gaza City and Jabalya. Israeli forces fired these shells from a 155mm artillery battery east of Highway 232 in Israel. The distinctive burst, sending burning wedges down, was consistent with media photographs taken since the start of the ground invasion on January 3. Barred by Israel from entry into Gaza, the researchers were unable to determine precisely where the white phosphorus landed and what effect it had on the civilian population.
Human Rights Watch researchers entered Gaza via the Rafah border crossing with Egypt on January 21, three days after major military operations had ceased, and spent the next 10 days investigating many of the sites where white phosphorus had been used, and the resultant harm to civilians and civilian objects. During this time, Human Rights Watch researchers conducted 29 interviews with the victims and witnesses of white phosphorus use, as well as with ambulance drivers and doctors who treated people with burns. Interviews with doctors who treated burn patients, as well as with another witness of a white phosphorus attack, were conducted in Cairo, Egypt on February 9 and 10.
Human Rights Watch researchers entered Gaza via the Rafah border crossing with Egypt on January 21, three days after major military operations had ceased, and spent the next 10 days investigating many of the sites where white phosphorus had been used, and the resultant harm to civilians and civilian objects. During this time, Human Rights Watch researchers conducted 29 interviews with the victims and witnesses of white phosphorus use, as well as with ambulance drivers and doctors who treated people with burns. Interviews with doctors who treated burn patients, as well as with another witness of a white phosphorus attack, were conducted in Cairo, Egypt on February 9 and 10.
Thread Starter
A General lives large on the Taxpayers Dime.....gets hauled up on charges and Dempsey gives the guy a Pass.
What does General Ward know that bought off the Bosses?
Think maybe he knows something embarrassing about the Libyan situation?
Could it be that SecDef also commutes to his home in California on Military aircraft each weekend and thus is in a Conflict of Interest situation himself?
Or is it something else......like Race in a very Race conscious Administration?
Gen. Dempsey Opposes Gen. Ward's Demotion - Business Insider
Top military officer opposes General William Ward's demotion | Fox News
Looks like Dempsey and the Army are headed to Federal Court as Defendants....as the Sacked Instructor seeks to have his Negative OER removed and replaced with an appropriate one based upon his actual performance. and the violation of the University's Policy ahd Procedures.
Legal group comes to aid of Army instructor ousted over Muslim groups' complaints | Fox News
What does General Ward know that bought off the Bosses?
Think maybe he knows something embarrassing about the Libyan situation?
Could it be that SecDef also commutes to his home in California on Military aircraft each weekend and thus is in a Conflict of Interest situation himself?
Or is it something else......like Race in a very Race conscious Administration?
Gen. Dempsey Opposes Gen. Ward's Demotion - Business Insider
Top military officer opposes General William Ward's demotion | Fox News
Looks like Dempsey and the Army are headed to Federal Court as Defendants....as the Sacked Instructor seeks to have his Negative OER removed and replaced with an appropriate one based upon his actual performance. and the violation of the University's Policy ahd Procedures.
Legal group comes to aid of Army instructor ousted over Muslim groups' complaints | Fox News
Last edited by SASless; 6th Oct 2012 at 01:28.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless, clearly freedom of speech is limited even in the context of the First Amendment (see 249 US 47 for example)... unless you're someone who doesn't know the Supreme Court's role in the governance of the United States.
I also agree with those above who criticised your note's lack of focus - why would you conflate whether people can march in a parade with the dissemination of classified material?
(or at least until Romney fires Big Bird)
I also agree with those above who criticised your note's lack of focus - why would you conflate whether people can march in a parade with the dissemination of classified material?
Thread Starter
I know it is a queer notion to some that I see Dempsey and Panetta allowing Uniformed Military Personnel to march in a Gay Pride Parade to be participating in a Political Event.....something that is clearly forbidden to Non-Gay Personnel and Non-Gay Events.....but I then I also see it as being quite queer that some cannot see the position Dempsey taking in the SOF guys (who are not active duty or reserve personnel but who are private citizens) protests as being forbidden political conduct because they used to be prohibited from political activities while they were in uniform.
Every one of you who have protested have done so because of my nexus of Homosexuals and political activities.....which unfortunately for you is a very clear example of Political Correctness combining with a Political Agenda to subvert existing standards of conduct re political activities by Uniformed Personnel.
As I have said repeatedly....it is not the issue of Homosexuality and the military that is wrong....it is the actions of Dempsey and Panetta in kowtowing to Political Correctness and wrongfully making a political issue of former Miltitary personnel exercising their First Amendment Rights to protest government action.
For those of you who are so blinded by things "Homosexual" that you cannot see the contradiction of Dempsey and Paneeta's actions to long established and CURRENT DOD policy (which if you had read well enough....you would know that the Gay Pride Parade in San Francisco was to be a one time only exemption to the policy) and that by allowing this exemption made mock of the very policy they cite as being the reason they object to the SOFA guys protest.
If you think I have assaulted someone's sensitivities about things Homosexual....that is your problem....not mine....as that clearly is not the case. I am protesting Dempsey's forgetting what he is supposed to be defending and am pointing out why I think he has done so.
The Regulations apply to everyone equally....at least the last time I checked they did. When we start making exceptions to the Regulation without changing the Regulation we do away with the one thing the Miltiary depends upon....that being a uniform administration of policy. Otherwise.....Hypocrisy rules and resentment occurs....which in a Miltary organization is the recipe for disaster.
Every one of you who have protested have done so because of my nexus of Homosexuals and political activities.....which unfortunately for you is a very clear example of Political Correctness combining with a Political Agenda to subvert existing standards of conduct re political activities by Uniformed Personnel.
As I have said repeatedly....it is not the issue of Homosexuality and the military that is wrong....it is the actions of Dempsey and Panetta in kowtowing to Political Correctness and wrongfully making a political issue of former Miltitary personnel exercising their First Amendment Rights to protest government action.
For those of you who are so blinded by things "Homosexual" that you cannot see the contradiction of Dempsey and Paneeta's actions to long established and CURRENT DOD policy (which if you had read well enough....you would know that the Gay Pride Parade in San Francisco was to be a one time only exemption to the policy) and that by allowing this exemption made mock of the very policy they cite as being the reason they object to the SOFA guys protest.
If you think I have assaulted someone's sensitivities about things Homosexual....that is your problem....not mine....as that clearly is not the case. I am protesting Dempsey's forgetting what he is supposed to be defending and am pointing out why I think he has done so.
The Regulations apply to everyone equally....at least the last time I checked they did. When we start making exceptions to the Regulation without changing the Regulation we do away with the one thing the Miltiary depends upon....that being a uniform administration of policy. Otherwise.....Hypocrisy rules and resentment occurs....which in a Miltary organization is the recipe for disaster.
Thread Starter
The RAF and British Army Helicopter units get praise by this guy along with the Canadians and Australian SpecOps guys....but it would appear he has some problems with the British Army non-aviation commanders.
He is especially critical of US Army Senior Leadership.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ima...cted-redux.pdf
He is especially critical of US Army Senior Leadership.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ima...cted-redux.pdf
The RAF and British Army Helicopter units get praise by this guy along with the Canadians and Australian SpecOps guys....but it would appear he has some problems with the British Army non-aviation commanders.
He is especially critical of US Army Senior Leadership.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ima...cted-redux.pdf
He is especially critical of US Army Senior Leadership.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ima...cted-redux.pdf
Report blames lapses on Stryker commander - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times
'Agressive' commander Colonel Harry D. Tunnell of U.S. army Afghanistan 'kill squad' cleared of responsibility for atrocities | Mail Online
In the Tunnell report, Brigadier General Frederick Hodges, then-director of operations in southern Afghanistan, said: 'Looking back on my relationship with him [Tunnell], I regret that I wasn’t more involved in his professional development during his tenure as a brigade commander.
'I should have specifically told him that MG Carter and I had lost confidence in his ability to command from his failure to follow instructions and intent.'
'I should have specifically told him that MG Carter and I had lost confidence in his ability to command from his failure to follow instructions and intent.'
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Just reading Tunnel's letter tells you everything you need to know about his view of the command structure in place at the time. Self-serving, delusional, and myopic are the most charitable things you could say about his letter. Interesting to see the subsequent report identified these characteristics, but only after the damage had been done. He's just another Colonel who started to believe his own publicity and forgot that wars are fought by soldiers, but controlled by politicians.