|
Was he Correct in Speaking Out.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...scheller-video
US Marines officer relieved of duties after video seeking ‘accountability’ over Afghanistan https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-...ed-of-command/ ….As a member of the Marines for 17 years, he had not yet hit the 20-year mark to qualify for a full pension. He later posted that fellow Marines asked him to immediately take down the post: “We all agree with you, Stu, but nothing will change, and it will come at a huge personal cost to you,” Scheller recalled them saying. But he said in the video that he had thought through the consequences. “What you believe in can only be defined by what you’re willing to risk,” he said, adding that he was risking his battalion commander position, family stability and retirement. “I think that gives me some moral high ground to demand the same honesty, accountability and integrity from my senior leaders.” About 18 hours after he uploaded the video, he posted that he had been relieved from duty. |
Was he Correct in Speaking Out.
Just read this and wondered what your thoughts are regarding using Social media to speak out, I know it is not Aviation related but could apply across the board, taken from the Mail.
Active duty Marine Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller was relieved of his duty for saying senior leaders need to take accountability for botched, fatal Afghanistan evacuation in widely shared video. 'The reason people are so upset on social media right now is not because the Marine on the battlefield let someone down,' Scheller said in a nearly five-minute video posted on Facebook and LinkedIn. 'People are upset because their senior leaders let them down. And none of them are raising their hands and accepting accountability or saying, "We messed this up."' The video has been shared on Facebook over 23,000 times by Friday evening and has over 3,100 comments, most of which are supporting Scheller's bravery for speaking out. He was relieved of his duties hours later. The Marines said in a statement to DailyMail.com, ''This is obviously an emotional time for a lot of Marines, and we encourage anyone struggling right now to seek counseling or talk to a fellow Marine. There is a forum in which Marine leaders can address their disagreements with the chain of command, but it's not social media.' Scheller knew he was risking his stellar 17-year career by posting the video. 'I have been fighting for 17 years. I am willing to throw it all away to say to my senior leaders, "I demand accountability."' |
Real military values
Originally Posted by KPax
(Post 11102482)
Just read this and wondered what your thoughts are regarding using Social media to speak out, I know it is not Aviation related but could apply across the board, taken from the Mail.
Active duty Marine Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller was relieved of his duty for saying senior leaders need to take accountability for botched, fatal Afghanistan evacuation in widely shared video. 'The reason people are so upset on social media right now is not because the Marine on the battlefield let someone down,' Scheller said in a nearly five-minute video posted on Facebook and LinkedIn. 'People are upset because their senior leaders let them down. And none of them are raising their hands and accepting accountability or saying, "We messed this up."' The video has been shared on Facebook over 23,000 times by Friday evening and has over 3,100 comments, most of which are supporting Scheller's bravery for speaking out. He was relieved of his duties hours later. The Marines said in a statement to DailyMail.com, ''This is obviously an emotional time for a lot of Marines, and we encourage anyone struggling right now to seek counseling or talk to a fellow Marine. There is a forum in which Marine leaders can address their disagreements with the chain of command, but it's not social media.' Scheller knew he was risking his stellar 17-year career by posting the video. 'I have been fighting for 17 years. I am willing to throw it all away to say to my senior leaders, "I demand accountability."' |
As it is said...."The Truth shall set you free.".
Although I admire the guy's grit....making himself another martyr shall not change things one small bit. He is a Leader....and not just a Commander....and sadly there are far too few like him in the Senior Ranks of the Military. We are seeing today something very similar to the Vietnam years when the Joint Chiefs and senior Combatant Command positions do not offer their Resignations upon being given incredibly stupid orders or see bone headed decisions that defy reality. Sadly, ours is not the only Military suffering from this kind of environment today. You did see where Admiral Mullen.....who was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs recently admitted publicly of having been wrong about his decisions on Afghanistan Strategies for years. Sadly, he did not go into detail on how it happened he and so many other Senior Commanders and National Security Officials got it so wrong for so long. |
Too right he was. Many in rank between him up to and including "Sleepy Joe" ought to hang their head's in shame and resign. No honour any more at all, example when Lord Carrington resigned over the Falklands, "Not my fault but I am the man in charge at FCO, therefore must resign", or words to that effect.
|
Incredibly difficult subject, especially for those in positions near the top of the food chain.
I say that because people near the top have [or should have] enough clout to do a bit of steering, a bit of correcting, a bit of nudging. If such a person falls on his/her sword, the replacement might be just a greasy-pole climber. Then we have a lose-lose situation. For those at and below about one star, they can do little to influence policy or events, and, after making their protest, the sea just fills the hole. I salute the man, and I do hope he has a Plan B. |
Thank you, LB … that saved me a lot of typing.
|
Unfortunate but in any walk of life the Commander in chief has the last word unless impeached
In work if you disagree with those higher up and you have not been able to change the direction you have a choice to make.... Put up or shut up...he chose to put up. Will now be seen as a troublemaker God bless you sir.... |
He seems like a good man. Perhaps, the Royal Marines should offer him a job if the USMC don't want him! 🤔
|
As a marine, he was probably familiar with Boyd's fork in the road "To Be or To Do"...
Unfortunately men like Col. Scheller, or Col. Boyd never make it far enough up the hierarchy to really make a difference. |
Funny, under the previous administration many senior military commanders openly critizied the POTUS - without apparent repercussions.
Oh, and he's absolutely right - no one is being held accountable. They won't even admit that abandoning their biggest airbase was a huge mistake. |
I personally think it was a waste. He is a good man and maybe a great leader, but now he has thrown it all away. His statement will be forgotten by next week. Had he kept it within the service then he had a chance of moving up the ranks and maybe actually having a chance to make a difference.
|
Originally Posted by XXmet
(Post 11102574)
Beyond his vote, it is specifically not his responsibility to require accountability from his seniors, again, especially his elected political leaders.
I'm happy to live in a world where higher ranks are not sacred and untouchable and can be criticised. That said I'm not sure that in this case it was worth it. He will get sacked and nothing will change. |
Originally Posted by XXmet
(Post 11102574)
"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 lake 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 only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,” |
To not speak out when those above you are obviously doing wrong and not admitting it is an even greater crime in my eyes, if more had spoken out during ww2 then some of the German atrocities might not have happened.
Rightly or wrongly in your eyes, the President and his government are elected officials and as elected officials they are accountable to the public they serve, be they in uniform or not. Every man, women and child should have the right to critique their Government and President and seek their atonement for their errors. You say he isn’t a leader, well far from it, to lead it takes guts and he has them in spades full, his thoughts are with his men and those put in harms way by incompetence and ineptitude and he is fighting their corner, he has put his future on the line and his pension, so has lots to lose. I would promote him and secure his pension, he has more sense of honour and decency than any of those above him who cower and are subservient to the wishes of someone clearly well out of his depth, without the slightest guts to tell it as it is. |
Erwin Rommel paid the price for having the courage to speak out against Hitler and his gang along with others.
Speaking out and not just whinging is the measure of the man. Pity more don't... |
His method of "taking issue" with his superior officers must be heavily considered. It's one thing to express misgivings through the chain of command, quite another to post a YouTube video to the world and bring your entire service into disrepute.
Reducing incredibly complex issues into stupidly simple binary right-wrong questions is the hallmark of our time, so it comes as no surprise that many would see the pointless discarding of a career as something taking "guts". Foolishness now passes for noble and brave. Have to agree with XXmet completely - not worthy of command for his lack of judgement alone. Whether he is "right" or "wrong" is completely irrelevant to that point. |
Originally Posted by XXmet
(Post 11102574)
"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 lake 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. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to disagree. |
When I was in the military it was beaten into me that you never criticized the political leadership. Once you put on the uniform you were there to obey all legal orders. Dissenters had two honorable choices: drive a POV up the chain of command and/or leave the military and then have at it. This is because civilian control of the military is the foundation of western democracy. Are there stupid politicians? Yes. The military chain of command is IMO little better. But let's remember the oath we took and the principles that stand behind it.
|
“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. |
'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. |
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. |
Originally Posted by Shackeng
(Post 11102809)
“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. 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. |
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. |
"It means Command and Obey," A few Nazis tried that as a defence at Nuremberg. Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
|
Originally Posted by Wirbelsturm
(Post 11102883)
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.
|
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! |
A cynic might suggest this was an audition for a well remunerated gig with Fox News.
|
Originally Posted by XXmet
(Post 11102574)
"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. |
Would the LTC be happy to be publicly castigated by one of his Cpls? When you work out the answer I think we can work out why he was removed from his position.
|
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. |
Originally Posted by henra
(Post 11102920)
German Military is the same as UK. No blind obedience.
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. |
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. |
Eg The recent "incident" with the Rocks at Honington....?
Metaphorically not even time to choose which oncoming bus lower suspension to view I suspect. |
Originally Posted by Blackfriar
(Post 11102991)
But the Nuremburg trials showed that "I was only following orders" is not a defence. Sleepy Joe is not ordering death camps but there must be a time when the troops have to say no.
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. |
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.. |
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. |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 11103180)
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.. |
“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. MARINE CORPSViral 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.” https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/ima...zzXBC4gdSY9tv4 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.” |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:18. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.