|
|
Is it ever permissible for troops to question leadership in the field?
|
Posts:
67
Registered:
5/2/08
|
|
(24 of 24)
Aug 24, 2008 2:19 PM
|
> A number of the officers are shown as incompetent
> namely Encino Man and Captain America. What is not
> explained, as it was in the book, is than that
> battalion did not normally perform missions as a
> collection of companies and platoons rather that
> small teams where split off and operated
> independently. As the battalion was being deployed
> as a single unit officers had to be found to fill
> spots which where usually left vacant i.e. company
> commanders and platoon leaders. Some of officers
> that filled these roles had no previous command
> experience.
This explains a lot and makes a lot of sense. I was assuming this was the case since it seemed there was a great lack of familiarity.
> Is it ever permissible for troops to question
> leadership in the field? Technically and legally,
> almost assuredly not (unless the order was CLEARLY
> illegal according to a ream of regulations, which NO
> field grunt is going to ever have handy). YEAH
> RIGHT!
>
> IN THE REAL WORLD (and you won't appreciate the
> meaning of that term until one day (perhaps as
> depicted in this series), you do) that sort of
> questioning goes on ALL OF THE TIME, at least among
> the remaining sentient warriors.
>
> In the end, putting substantial armnament and a
> "raison d'etre" in the hands of a madman would seem
> crazy in almost every culture, except perhaps
> America. Tell me, who's the crazy one here?
>
> DaNihilist
In the Army, and with some commanders, they expect subordinates, after a briefing, to ask questions and point out observations. That shows the subordinates are listening, and understand what is going on.
Also, it helps to engender leadership potential in your subordinates by making them realize they can do the "thinking" like others.
In a combat environment, the back-and-forth should be flowing easily, and tempered with respect.
Lt. Fick had to "drink the cool-aid" when he started receiving pressure (vague threats) from his superiors over behavior in the field. This included when he crossed Godfather with that injured kid.
> Personally I can't fathom (retired navy (-: ) the
> level of incompetence of these two officers.
>
> What the hell happened in this episode with Encino
> man; or was it Captain America? His actions were so
> bazaar that they were, to me, incomprehensible.
>
> What inspired him to make that wild, screaming, leap
> into that scene and why is everyone being to tight
> lipped about it?
>
> How is it possible that he could be so
> unaware of how ridiculous he is, and why
> has no one taken him out!!!
>
> Does the "report" have to do with his actions or of
> the shooting of the driver at the checkpoint?
Well, there is a whole can of worms that can be opened up, and guys who "do the right thing" end up having to cover up for their leaders short-comings.
Captain America stupidly attacked a prisoner, and was struck by one of his subordinates. If you report the sub for striking the superior, you have to ask why and what happened. Things start cascading.
Remember when Fick cut off the one SGT when he was about to open his mouth about CPT America?
Also, remember and realize, these guys are not sleeping. The stress is getting to them.
To me, CPT America probably is blood type A. That means he can stress out easily, if he does not handle his environment. And that talk he had with Fick was a cry for help. Fick was too tired and distracted by his own problems to realize it and do something to help CA.
Ideally, Fick should have approached Encino Man and expressed that he felt CA needed "time off," that he was "suffering battlefield fatigue." Simple answer, and a nice out to remove someone from the chain of command who needs to be removed.
Also, best to do it after the guy is recognized for some accomodation, less of a negative spin on things.
--
Sky
http://www.youtube.com/user/skyanimal
|
|
|
Posts:
8
Registered:
8/21/08
|
|
(23 of 24)
Aug 22, 2008 8:51 PM
|
|
It says in the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice that if an order is unjust or anyway what could be considered Morally wrong or will endanger the lives of yourself or your troops. You can question said order. But you will go up before court martial pannel of your peers to be judge. (Don't quote me on the wording) And if you are having trouble understanding sme of the officers and their problems read the book for a better understanding of them. Also Lt Fick wrote a book titled One Bullet Away: The Making of a Marine Officer. He talks about some of the other officers but does not slam any of them but it does give you a better understanding of the problem.
|
|
|
Posts:
13
Registered:
10/10/02
|
|
(22 of 24)
Aug 22, 2008 5:10 PM
|
Personally I can't fathom (retired navy (-: ) the level of incompetence of these two officers.
What the hell happened in this episode with Encino man; or was it Captain America? His actions were so bazaar that they were, to me, incomprehensible.
What inspired him to make that wild, screaming, leap into that scene and why is everyone being to tight lipped about it?
How is it possible that he could be so unaware of how ridiculous he is, and why has no one taken him out!!!
Does the "report" have to do with his actions or of the shooting of the driver at the checkpoint?
|
|
|
Posts:
867
Registered:
3/13/08
|
|
(21 of 24)
Aug 22, 2008 12:01 AM
|
To the top,
I've replied to this once before, but after further digesting this episode let me revise my comments.
Is it ever permissible for troops to question leadership in the field? Technically and legally, almost assuredly not (unless the order was CLEARLY illegal according to a ream of regulations, which NO field grunt is going to ever have handy). YEAH RIGHT!
IN THE REAL WORLD (and you won't appreciate the meaning of that term until one day (perhaps as depicted in this series), you do) that sort of questioning goes on ALL OF THE TIME, at least among the remaining sentient warriors.
In the end, putting substantial armnament and a "raison d'etre" in the hands of a madman would seem crazy in almost every culture, except perhaps America. Tell me, who's the crazy one here?
DaNihilist
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
8/19/08
|
|
(20 of 24)
Aug 20, 2008 2:19 PM
|
I have been enjoying the radio chatter at the end of the shows, but this week we heard what I assume were the real guys.....
true?
|
|
|
Posts:
2
Registered:
8/20/08
|
|
(19 of 24)
Aug 20, 2008 1:25 PM
|
|
A number of the officers are shown as incompetent namely Encino Man and Captain America. What is not explained, as it was in the book, is than that battalion did not normally perform missions as a collection of companies and platoons rather that small teams where split off and operated independently. As the battalion was being deployed as a single unit officers had to be found to fill spots which where usually left vacant i.e. company commanders and platoon leaders. Some of officers that filled these roles had no previous command experience.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
8/20/08
|
|
(18 of 24)
Aug 20, 2008 12:12 PM
|
|
I am retired Army. Draftee, NCO and Officer grades. Served with many a good marine. I love the realism but have one complaint. How on earth can a unit have all the stupid officers and gunnery sergaents in the corps all gathered into one unit??? That part is NOT realistic. Yes, there are some around the services but not a whole unit full of them. "Band of Brothers" leadership was more in line with the real world. "Black Hawk Down" was more in line with the real leadership out there. Please people, just remember that this is JUST a story line........ For the most part, when you go into the service, the leadership are good people and NOT the f-ups gathered together in this story...... The services do a pretty good job of putting the f-ups in jobs where they can't get good soldiers hurt. Yes, there are some bad eggs out there and always will be. If you think that you might have what it takes to be one of the good ones ------ get yourself on down to the recruiters office ------- we can use more of the good guys......
|
|
|
Posts:
67
Registered:
5/2/08
|
|
|
Posts:
10
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
(16 of 24)
Aug 19, 2008 9:19 PM
|
> Listen to the dialogue under the closing credits of
> Part 6. I think you'll agree that it's poetry. Can
> someone print out a transcript?
I can't tell... is it the actors in that dialogue, or is it an original recording of the real men?
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
8/19/08
|
|
(15 of 24)
Aug 19, 2008 1:33 PM
|
|
Listen to the dialogue under the closing credits of Part 6. I think you'll agree that it's poetry. Can someone print out a transcript?
|
|
|
Posts:
67
Registered:
5/2/08
|
|
(14 of 24)
Aug 19, 2008 2:16 AM
|
> Is it ever permissible for troops to question
> leadership in the field?
You can look at people talking as "subordinates questioning the orders of their superiors" or you can view them talking as "how are they going to share information and achieve the best outcome for a mission."
No plan is perfect. No man is perfect.
Authority and chain of command exist to recognize seniority and experience, but when it comes time to move out, you want to ensure that every person is of the same mindset in how they are going to achieve their objective.
In briefing troops, the Army employs a timetable method so that if in a rush, the leader can brief his subordinates, and those individuals brief the men. But along with that, subordinates asking questions, and especially pointing out things they notice or bringing up information which may have been overlooked, can be vital.
In "Stay Frosty," a lot of mistakes are made because the combat effectiveness of the unit began falling apart from illness, which stressed the rest of the platoon and company in duties and tasks. Luckily they were not being employed for more missions, but the lack of sleep, lack of food, and being treated like a mouse by a cat for two weeks, has so rattled the brains of the men that they are all struggling and suffering against the odds.
(Recall how water bottles started making a big appearance?)
Now, where subordinates can outright, and with hopefully no reprisal, question their bosses is in private, where no one can observe what is being discussed. The two people speaking should maintain their composure, and mutual respect for each other.
In a combat situation, you need to trust the men in your team, and if you have doubts about people you serve with, those doubts will cloud your judgment, and that can cost someone their life.
Fick should have reported "CPT America" to COL Ferrando, and said the guy was suffering combat stress or some such. I bet any chance to leave the war zone would have been jumped at by CA.
--
Sky
http://www.youtube.com/user/skyanimal
|
|
|
Posts:
2
Registered:
8/18/08
|
|
(13 of 24)
Aug 18, 2008 7:26 PM
|
|
I agree with the majority regarding disobeying an order. Doing so for the right reason takes guts but you had better have a clear understanding why it is illegal. For example, when they found the wounded Syrian Jihadist, Captain America's order to shoot him was probably illegal.
|
|
|
Posts:
183
Registered:
11/19/05
|
|
(12 of 24)
Aug 18, 2008 5:27 PM
|
>>>Is it ever permissible for troops to question leadership in the field?
Of course. You can question, but in the end if the order stands you must obey.
|
|
|
Posts:
38
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
(11 of 24)
Aug 18, 2008 2:54 PM
|
|
Roger that Bob. I'd be severly pissed off if I was a plt cmdr and someone below me took my men. One thing I haven't seen yet from the book and maybe it's in episode 7 but...I think it was earlier is when someone used an AT-4 on a T-72, which typically, wouldn't do shit to a MBT but a lucky hit on the gas tanks in the rear caused a catostrophic kill. Was hoping to see that as it made me laugh out loud reading.
|
|
|
Posts:
24
Registered:
7/30/08
|
|
(10 of 24)
Aug 18, 2008 12:19 PM
|
|
Nice confrontation scene between Kasey Kasem and Lt. Fick also. When those two are in a scene together, you can cut the tension with a knife.
|
|
|
|
|
