Was he Correct in Speaking Out.
'Civilian control of the military' is incidental to this argument. Any civilian posting criticism of their employer's senior executives and/or company strategy on social media could easily find themselves on the wrong end of an internal disciplinary process and potentially be dismissed for bringing the firm into disrepute.
FWIW I think he was extremely unwise to speak out in this way. He is far, far too low down the food chain to make any kind of difference: 3* resignations can easily be glossed over, potentially even 4* if the politicians are prepared to play dirty. There are many public calls for accountability already being made and one lowly O-5 is not going to make a scrap of difference to that debate. And holding the moral high ground won't pay the bills.
Better to have resigned from the service with a polite but hard-hitting private letter explaining loss of confidence in the chain of command. VIP egos are such that attacking them in public invites a counter-attack which sweeps away the complaint as well as the complainer. Pricking VIP consciences in private might have a low probability of success but at least it's above zero.
FWIW I think he was extremely unwise to speak out in this way. He is far, far too low down the food chain to make any kind of difference: 3* resignations can easily be glossed over, potentially even 4* if the politicians are prepared to play dirty. There are many public calls for accountability already being made and one lowly O-5 is not going to make a scrap of difference to that debate. And holding the moral high ground won't pay the bills.
Better to have resigned from the service with a polite but hard-hitting private letter explaining loss of confidence in the chain of command. VIP egos are such that attacking them in public invites a counter-attack which sweeps away the complaint as well as the complainer. Pricking VIP consciences in private might have a low probability of success but at least it's above zero.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And here in lies the difference between some perceptions of the US military system and other perceptions.
In the UK it is a requirement of an officer to ensure that the orders he or she has been given are just and legal. If the officer decides that enough ambiguity exists it is their right to challenge their superiors for justification of the order.
The 'I was just following orders' excuse went out with the Nuremburg Trails I'm afraid.
This guy had the balls to call into question the decisions of those at the top, political and military, and has been made the scapegoat by those protecting their own elevated positions and mistakes. I would be surprised if he did not know that posting to a public platform would get him into hot water. Perhaps his intention was to get this out into the forum of public debate whilst being fully aware of what it was going to cost. Personally, as an 18 year serving veteran myself, we need more of these people to expose those that supress such shortcomings in the system.
AIMVHO of course.
In the UK it is a requirement of an officer to ensure that the orders he or she has been given are just and legal. If the officer decides that enough ambiguity exists it is their right to challenge their superiors for justification of the order.
The 'I was just following orders' excuse went out with the Nuremburg Trails I'm afraid.
This guy had the balls to call into question the decisions of those at the top, political and military, and has been made the scapegoat by those protecting their own elevated positions and mistakes. I would be surprised if he did not know that posting to a public platform would get him into hot water. Perhaps his intention was to get this out into the forum of public debate whilst being fully aware of what it was going to cost. Personally, as an 18 year serving veteran myself, we need more of these people to expose those that supress such shortcomings in the system.
AIMVHO of course.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“bring your entire service into disrepute”
Huh?
On what basis do you draw that conclusion?
This officer did not get to his rank without knowing the rules or the undoubted outcome of his public plea for accountability. Whether you agree with him or not is irrelevant. How many of us would sacrifice our careers (and pensions) to ensure that an issue about which we felt so strongly required public debate?
I only hope his pleas are not in vain, but experience suggests otherwise.
Huh?
On what basis do you draw that conclusion?
This officer did not get to his rank without knowing the rules or the undoubted outcome of his public plea for accountability. Whether you agree with him or not is irrelevant. How many of us would sacrifice our careers (and pensions) to ensure that an issue about which we felt so strongly required public debate?
I only hope his pleas are not in vain, but experience suggests otherwise.
All he has done is make it seem acceptable by all those junior ranks to speak out, criticise, and generally whinge on social media about their senior NCO’s and officers they don’t agree with or don’t like they way they are treated.
You can’t have it both ways. He was ok because his message was so important and valid, but Private so and so moaning about Captain Cloggs being a moron wasn’t. But then if Captain Cloggs really is a moron, then does that make his social media rant ok? And who do we get to judge whether Captain Cloggs is an idiot? Convene a panel, or just a show of hands?
Thankfully my commission was commanded by Her Majesty and not a politician.
As I see leadership and command as two distinct elements (and trust that the promotion boards do actually ensure that at least a few candidates have both elements correctly intertwined) I am content with both sides of this. The man is 'free' to speak-out on such a major issue that directly impacts his men and that commanders are free to remove a subordinate's command status as they see fit. The system appears to work and work well for militaries that exist to support a democracy and its people.
Discipline does not equal blind obedience; subordinates get to evaluate the lawfulness and proportionality of all orders and judges can act as the ultimate arbitrators. Nobody said juggling the ever-conflicting requirements of orders, war-fighting, leadership and command was easy, especially when killing is involved. I've been in the dock twice to be judged by civilians over my military actions. It is scary to be under such scrutiny and the stress is immense (especially as the MoD abandons you, you know... just in case) but the court process is done with understanding and grace. Given what we do (or did for some of us) I have no difficulty with the post-Nuremberg position.
As I see leadership and command as two distinct elements (and trust that the promotion boards do actually ensure that at least a few candidates have both elements correctly intertwined) I am content with both sides of this. The man is 'free' to speak-out on such a major issue that directly impacts his men and that commanders are free to remove a subordinate's command status as they see fit. The system appears to work and work well for militaries that exist to support a democracy and its people.
Discipline does not equal blind obedience; subordinates get to evaluate the lawfulness and proportionality of all orders and judges can act as the ultimate arbitrators. Nobody said juggling the ever-conflicting requirements of orders, war-fighting, leadership and command was easy, especially when killing is involved. I've been in the dock twice to be judged by civilians over my military actions. It is scary to be under such scrutiny and the stress is immense (especially as the MoD abandons you, you know... just in case) but the court process is done with understanding and grace. Given what we do (or did for some of us) I have no difficulty with the post-Nuremberg position.
I don't see how the Nuremberg defence is at all relevant here. Orders can be stupid or unwise, in the opinion of those receiving them, but still legal. What about the decision to withdraw or its implementation do you think might have been illegal? When POTUS, directly accountable to the US electorate, decides that the American people have had enough of the conflict and orders a full withdrawal, do officers way down the food chain get to resist? Of course they don't. The risk of people dying during the withdrawal isn't a valid reason not to withdraw.
If you're talking about the conduct of senior people at earlier stages of the campaign, consciously presenting unduly optimistic assessments and suppressing negative indicators, then I agree that there may be a case to answer (and I hope there will be) but the moment for orders to be challenged was back when the 'surge' was being proposed. Much too late for that now.
If you're talking about the conduct of senior people at earlier stages of the campaign, consciously presenting unduly optimistic assessments and suppressing negative indicators, then I agree that there may be a case to answer (and I hope there will be) but the moment for orders to be challenged was back when the 'surge' was being proposed. Much too late for that now.
Last edited by Easy Street; 29th Aug 2021 at 11:11.
Having watched Lt Col Scheller's YouTube video I don't understand why some members are talking about obeying, or not, illegal orders. His complaint rather seems to be about incompetence and gross negligence at the top of his command chain and beyond, and of his demanding accountability for that. Others have said his gesture is pointless and will do no good, either for him or for his Service, and that he should have just kept sitting on his hands. That of course is the default hope of all who are found wanting at the top of the tree (our own Foreign Secretary is hoping that all such criticism aimed at him in the papers will end up on the chip counters very soon, if not there already).
It is never a question of doing 'good' (whatever that means), it is a question of right and wrong. It is for history to decide if going in was right, of what was done once we were there was right, and of the manner of leaving now. I suspect that the Lt Col knows rather more about that than I do, and has decided to fall on his sword in order to have his say. I'd hazard that history will endorse much of what he has to say. I for one respect him for doing so. As for demoralising those below him, I imagine that many of them agree with him, and feel he is speaking out on their behalf. He says many have already expressed similar ideas on social media, though I suspect that is as verboten as in the UK, and they too will soon be having their collars felt.
The incompetence and ineptitude of UK Victorian VSOs during the Crimean War was revealed by the Thunderer, and Army reforms followed as a result. If his Court Martial produces a similar outcome then his speaking out will not have been in vain. It certainly worked for Billy Mitchell!
It is never a question of doing 'good' (whatever that means), it is a question of right and wrong. It is for history to decide if going in was right, of what was done once we were there was right, and of the manner of leaving now. I suspect that the Lt Col knows rather more about that than I do, and has decided to fall on his sword in order to have his say. I'd hazard that history will endorse much of what he has to say. I for one respect him for doing so. As for demoralising those below him, I imagine that many of them agree with him, and feel he is speaking out on their behalf. He says many have already expressed similar ideas on social media, though I suspect that is as verboten as in the UK, and they too will soon be having their collars felt.
The incompetence and ineptitude of UK Victorian VSOs during the Crimean War was revealed by the Thunderer, and Army reforms followed as a result. If his Court Martial produces a similar outcome then his speaking out will not have been in vain. It certainly worked for Billy Mitchell!
"US Marines officer relieved of duties after video seeking ‘accountability’ over Afghanistan"
I take offense with military officers whom take it upon themselves to publicly criticize those appointed over them. Especially their elected leaders. It's not courage to do so. It's lack of emotional control, therefor lack of command ability. This same man has undoubtedly prosecuted, via the UCMJ, others under him for similar offense. If not, he certainly has been entrusted with the ability to do so. What he is doing is disloyal and he is making a poor example for those he himself commands. He has voluntarily given up his civil rights to unquestionably serve at the pleasure of the President of the United States and taken an oath to obey. Clearly he is incapable of command and must be removed. Beyond his vote, it is specifically not his responsibility to require accountability from his seniors, again, especially his elected political leaders. I am ashamed of the Marine Corps that this man could reach the rank of O-5 and not have the discipline to perform his duty.
I take offense with military officers whom take it upon themselves to publicly criticize those appointed over them. Especially their elected leaders. It's not courage to do so. It's lack of emotional control, therefor lack of command ability. This same man has undoubtedly prosecuted, via the UCMJ, others under him for similar offense. If not, he certainly has been entrusted with the ability to do so. What he is doing is disloyal and he is making a poor example for those he himself commands. He has voluntarily given up his civil rights to unquestionably serve at the pleasure of the President of the United States and taken an oath to obey. Clearly he is incapable of command and must be removed. Beyond his vote, it is specifically not his responsibility to require accountability from his seniors, again, especially his elected political leaders. I am ashamed of the Marine Corps that this man could reach the rank of O-5 and not have the discipline to perform his duty.
The guy himself said his superiors were correct in removing him. following his public criticism.....so lets put an end to this line of discussion.
What should be debated is his statement that calls for Senior Military Leadership to come forth and explain how all this came to be and why it happened the way it did......and most importantly what their personal and direct involvement in the process was and what their input had been and whether that input had any effect on the decision(s) that led to this debacle.
There is no legitimate argument that can suggest this is anything but a disaster.
We know no one is going to wind up carrying the can on this.....the families shall bury their dead...mourn their loss....and Medals and promotions shall surely follow as those culpable individuals shall cover their tracks and brag upon how great a success it has been.
Think not.....look back at Benghazi and how that all turned out.
Just as then....the President is headed to Dover to show his respect to those that were killed......and just as during the Benghazi affair....he should be hiding in shame instead of making a PR spectacle out of what should be a very solemn and respectful and DISCRETE event.
What should be debated is his statement that calls for Senior Military Leadership to come forth and explain how all this came to be and why it happened the way it did......and most importantly what their personal and direct involvement in the process was and what their input had been and whether that input had any effect on the decision(s) that led to this debacle.
There is no legitimate argument that can suggest this is anything but a disaster.
We know no one is going to wind up carrying the can on this.....the families shall bury their dead...mourn their loss....and Medals and promotions shall surely follow as those culpable individuals shall cover their tracks and brag upon how great a success it has been.
Think not.....look back at Benghazi and how that all turned out.
Just as then....the President is headed to Dover to show his respect to those that were killed......and just as during the Benghazi affair....he should be hiding in shame instead of making a PR spectacle out of what should be a very solemn and respectful and DISCRETE event.
This is not about an Officer refusing an Order.
This is all about an Officer speaking out about what he considers incompetence and culpability of his Seniors in the Chain of Command failing to do "right".
He very well may have been culpable himself of violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by saying what he did and for sure the way he did it.
Article 89 of the UCMJ applies....but the burden of proof in this event would be very difficult considering the circumstances and actual wording of the Officers Statement.
However, I doubt the Marine Corps would rather handle this administratively and avoid the risk of opening a much bigger bucket of worms by allowing for a good Defense Counsel digging into the documentation behind the events.
As Mods prefer we not post Links which add to their burden.....I would suggest some browsing for articles and related information re UCMJ Article 89 might prove informative.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Senior military, like senior civil servants, aren’t allowed personal views - at least not until they retire or are fired. For reasons explained by Sir Humphrey Appleby.
He may have been right in what he said, but he was wrong to say it - which he himself accepts, as well as the inevitable disciplinary action which would be taken.
He may have been right in what he said, but he was wrong to say it - which he himself accepts, as well as the inevitable disciplinary action which would be taken.
Eg The recent "incident" with the Rocks at Honington....?
Metaphorically not even time to choose which oncoming bus lower suspension to view I suspect.
Metaphorically not even time to choose which oncoming bus lower suspension to view I suspect.
Generals: "No, sorry, we left the withdrawal planning too late (even though we've had a year to prepare) and it's a bit risky to do it now, so we're just going to stay and let the ANDSF keep doing all the dying. Don't believe those reports from dissenting analysts and SIGAR about corruption, the unsustainability of the ANDSF, the near-total Taliban control of rural areas, and the refusal of either Afghan party to agree terms: those guys have been saying that stuff for 15 years, they're so naive about DC and politics and foreign policy, they don't get it. Just ignore them like we all do."
Would you be OK with that? Ironically that's pretty much what seems to have happened, except that Sleepy Joe called the generals' bluff:
Sleepy Joe: "What part of 'end this war by 31 August' do you guys still not understand?"
Generals: (Oh, ****, he's serious) "Ermm, here's a really crappy withdrawal plan that we've just made up, we could do this if you really want but it'd be much better if you send x thousand more troops and extend the deadline so we can do it better; the Taliban aren't anywhere near in a position to enforce their end of the Doha deal." (Fingers crossed...)
Sleepy Joe: "I've been very clear: just get us out, already. SecDef knows a thing or two about the CENTCOM AOR, or at least he should, so I'm going on holiday. Bye."
Generals: F*ck.
There's a need for accountability here, for sure, but it ain't with Sleepy Joe.
Last edited by Easy Street; 29th Aug 2021 at 21:28.
I thought it said "the buck stops here". But that was several Presidents ago.
The idea that POTUS is not accountable for the actions and decisions of his armed forces {Commander in Chief] is, putting it mildly, troubling..
The idea that POTUS is not accountable for the actions and decisions of his armed forces {Commander in Chief] is, putting it mildly, troubling..
June 23, at budget request hearing, Austin was asked about saving Bagram but Milley needed to insert himself to say this. "Bagram is not necessary, tactically or operationally for what we are going to try to do here with Afghanistan".
But they were quick to can the guy who pointed it out.
Last edited by Easy Street; 29th Aug 2021 at 23:08.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
“I’m resigning my commission as a United States Marine, effective now … [and] I am forfeiting my retirement, all entitlements. I don’t want a single dollar.”
Looks like the Ruy Lopez on the chessboard.
• STARS AND STRIPES • AUGUST 29, 2021
A Marine officer who filmed a viral video calling out senior military and civilian leaders for failures in Afghanistan resigned his commission “effective immediately” in a new 10-minute video Sunday and threatened to “bring the whole [expletive] system down.”
Lt. Col. Stu Scheller was dismissed Friday from command of the Advanced Infantry Training Battalion at Camp Lejeune, N.C., over the original video. In the new one, he claims he is not currently under investigation and that he likely would be allowed to ride out his remaining three years until retirement if he chose to stay silent.
“I don’t think that’s the path I’m on,” he says in the video, shot inside an “abandoned school bus” in eastern North Carolina. “I’m resigning my commission as a United States Marine, effective now … [and] I am forfeiting my retirement, all entitlements. I don’t want a single dollar.”
He then suggests that senior military leaders would need the money for jobs and security after what he intends to do, though he does not provide further details.
“The Marine Corps is taking appropriate action to ensure the safety and well-being of LtCol Scheller and his family,” said service spokesman Capt. Sam Stephenson in an emailed statement. “As this is a developing situation, we cannot comment further at this time.”
In his original video, posted on social media hours after a blast in Kabul killed 13 U.S. troops, Scheller appeared in uniform and criticized the Marine Corps commandant, defense secretary and other senior defense officials.
That nearly 5-minute clip had been viewed about 1 million times on Facebook and LinkedIn combined as of Sunday and touched a nerve within the military and veterans community.
Some have praised his courage to challenge the brass at the risk of his career, and others criticized him for grandstanding or sowing dissent.
“Blatantly using rank does cross a line,” said Jim Golby, a 20-year Army veteran and adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security who focuses on civil-military relations. A battalion commander “just doesn’t have all the info that senior military (or civilian) leaders do.”
Golby hoped someone would convince Scheller to seek mental health treatment and “get out of the spotlight quickly,” he said. “I find it very sad and misguided.”It’s not clear what new consequences he could face, but Golby said the Corps will need to be careful not to cement him as a “martyr” among those who would use him divisively.
He’s been celebrated by some on the right “to further demonize my husband and justify the vitriol he endured,” Rachel Vindman, wife of retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, said in a tweet Sunday.
Alexander Vindman is a former Ukraine expert for the National Security Council who testified in President Donald Trump’s first impeachment case.
Scheller did not immediately respond to an inquiry asking for clarification of his plans.
Marine spokesman Maj. Jim Stenger said Friday that social media is not the place to air disagreements with the chain of command, saying it was “an emotional time for a lot of Marines” who should seek counseling or talk to their comrades.
Eleven Marines, a soldier and a Navy corpsman were killed in the attack on Kabul’s airport Thursday, which was claimed by the Islamic State group. Over 160 Afghans were killed, two officials told The Associated Press on Friday. Scores of others were wounded, along with at least 18 U.S. troops.
Scheller had a personal relationship with one of the slain Marines, he said Thursday, though he did not say who because next of kin of the fallen had not yet all been notified.
In his new video, he tells those offering to send him money to instead give to the families of the fallen. He thanks both his supporters and critics but singles out a remark by retired Marine Col. Thomas K. Hobbs, who he said he knew personally and loved like a father.
“If Scheller was truly honorable, he would have resigned his commission in protest after stating what he did,” Hobbs wrote in a comment on one of Scheller’s LinkedIn posts.
Scheller repeatedly quotes from that remark, protesting that he is honorable and announcing his resignation in response to it. The video does not appear to be a resignation in a formal sense, though he says he plans to follow whatever the service’s legal requirements are.
But he also says that if senior leaders would have simply said “yes, mistakes were made” in Afghanistan, he would have gone back to “rank-and-file” and given up his quest. He believes such an admission would help those struggling with PTSD and other issues more than any other message, he said.
Praising the ordinary grunts who “go outside the wire, get blown up, bring their Marine back and then go back out there the next day,” Scheller says “they deserve accountability.”
While some of his critics have suggested he’s positioning himself for a political career, he’s vague about his plans. But he suggests he may need backing from “rich philanthropists” and “blue collar” workers.
“Follow me, and we will bring the whole [expletive] system down,” he says. “We’re just getting started.”
Viral Marine who demanded ‘accountability' for Afghanistan failures: ‘I’m resigning my commission’ | Stars and Stripes
Looks like the Ruy Lopez on the chessboard.
MARINE CORPS
Viral Marine who demanded ‘accountability' for Afghanistan failures: ‘I’m resigning my commission’
BY CHAD GARLAND• STARS AND STRIPES • AUGUST 29, 2021
A Marine officer who filmed a viral video calling out senior military and civilian leaders for failures in Afghanistan resigned his commission “effective immediately” in a new 10-minute video Sunday and threatened to “bring the whole [expletive] system down.”
Lt. Col. Stu Scheller was dismissed Friday from command of the Advanced Infantry Training Battalion at Camp Lejeune, N.C., over the original video. In the new one, he claims he is not currently under investigation and that he likely would be allowed to ride out his remaining three years until retirement if he chose to stay silent.
“I don’t think that’s the path I’m on,” he says in the video, shot inside an “abandoned school bus” in eastern North Carolina. “I’m resigning my commission as a United States Marine, effective now … [and] I am forfeiting my retirement, all entitlements. I don’t want a single dollar.”
He then suggests that senior military leaders would need the money for jobs and security after what he intends to do, though he does not provide further details.
“The Marine Corps is taking appropriate action to ensure the safety and well-being of LtCol Scheller and his family,” said service spokesman Capt. Sam Stephenson in an emailed statement. “As this is a developing situation, we cannot comment further at this time.”
In his original video, posted on social media hours after a blast in Kabul killed 13 U.S. troops, Scheller appeared in uniform and criticized the Marine Corps commandant, defense secretary and other senior defense officials.
That nearly 5-minute clip had been viewed about 1 million times on Facebook and LinkedIn combined as of Sunday and touched a nerve within the military and veterans community.
Some have praised his courage to challenge the brass at the risk of his career, and others criticized him for grandstanding or sowing dissent.
“Blatantly using rank does cross a line,” said Jim Golby, a 20-year Army veteran and adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security who focuses on civil-military relations. A battalion commander “just doesn’t have all the info that senior military (or civilian) leaders do.”
Golby hoped someone would convince Scheller to seek mental health treatment and “get out of the spotlight quickly,” he said. “I find it very sad and misguided.”It’s not clear what new consequences he could face, but Golby said the Corps will need to be careful not to cement him as a “martyr” among those who would use him divisively.
He’s been celebrated by some on the right “to further demonize my husband and justify the vitriol he endured,” Rachel Vindman, wife of retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, said in a tweet Sunday.
Alexander Vindman is a former Ukraine expert for the National Security Council who testified in President Donald Trump’s first impeachment case.
Scheller did not immediately respond to an inquiry asking for clarification of his plans.
Marine spokesman Maj. Jim Stenger said Friday that social media is not the place to air disagreements with the chain of command, saying it was “an emotional time for a lot of Marines” who should seek counseling or talk to their comrades.
Eleven Marines, a soldier and a Navy corpsman were killed in the attack on Kabul’s airport Thursday, which was claimed by the Islamic State group. Over 160 Afghans were killed, two officials told The Associated Press on Friday. Scores of others were wounded, along with at least 18 U.S. troops.
Scheller had a personal relationship with one of the slain Marines, he said Thursday, though he did not say who because next of kin of the fallen had not yet all been notified.
In his new video, he tells those offering to send him money to instead give to the families of the fallen. He thanks both his supporters and critics but singles out a remark by retired Marine Col. Thomas K. Hobbs, who he said he knew personally and loved like a father.
“If Scheller was truly honorable, he would have resigned his commission in protest after stating what he did,” Hobbs wrote in a comment on one of Scheller’s LinkedIn posts.
Scheller repeatedly quotes from that remark, protesting that he is honorable and announcing his resignation in response to it. The video does not appear to be a resignation in a formal sense, though he says he plans to follow whatever the service’s legal requirements are.
But he also says that if senior leaders would have simply said “yes, mistakes were made” in Afghanistan, he would have gone back to “rank-and-file” and given up his quest. He believes such an admission would help those struggling with PTSD and other issues more than any other message, he said.
Praising the ordinary grunts who “go outside the wire, get blown up, bring their Marine back and then go back out there the next day,” Scheller says “they deserve accountability.”
While some of his critics have suggested he’s positioning himself for a political career, he’s vague about his plans. But he suggests he may need backing from “rich philanthropists” and “blue collar” workers.
“Follow me, and we will bring the whole [expletive] system down,” he says. “We’re just getting started.”
Last edited by Airbubba; 30th Aug 2021 at 03:43.