I sent this to someone at CNN.
"- McDonald is NOT a “military man.” (Jake Tapper) He was given a free undergraduate degree at West Point where not only ALL his expenses were paid (I was a professor at WP) but he received a salary as a student as well.
- Mc Donald did not have a “career” in the US Army. (Suzanne Malveaux) After graduation he served the absolute minimum required by law and then RESIGNED from the Army ending any connection with the Army.
- He is not in any sense RETIRED from the US Army. (Malveaux again) Someone who is RETIRED from the military served a full career or was RETIRED for disability. Such a person was transferred from the active list to the RETIRED LIST but is still IN THE ARMY or whichever service.
General (ret.) Eric Shinseki is a RETIRED officer. He is usually referred to on 24/7 news as a “former” general. He is not. He is still a general but Mcdonald is a business shark, not a “military man,” with an Army “career” who “retired” from the Army. "
I was a professor at West Point and served 26 years as a commissioned officer of the Regular Army. I am a Special Forces soldier, school trained and served as such in combat.
Pat Lang
Colonel (ret.) US Army
to PL. Would it be more effective to run WP applicants thru a six month observation course run by sargents for character assessment/development prior to entering WP?
Posted by: wisedupearly | 24 February 2015 at 07:12 PM
wisedupearly
An excellent idea if it does not turn into a jock strappers process. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 24 February 2015 at 07:20 PM
for the SST community, the distortions being put about should not be left to stand unanswered. You have the Col.'s reply. Disseminate the facts so we can better judge good reporters from frauds. Good newspapers from the bad.
Posted by: wisedupearly | 24 February 2015 at 08:18 PM
As long as quick is preferred over good, there will be problems. It is not just in the media. As readers of these pages can see, it more widespread than that.
What to do about it, I do not know. Cultural change does not come easy, nor painlessly.
Posted by: Lars | 24 February 2015 at 08:19 PM
Some years back I recall someone of note (don't recall who) suggesting that all appointments to the service academies should be made from the pool of current or former enlisted personnel who have served a minimum (2 years IIRC) on active duty. Thoughts?
Posted by: ex-PFC Chuck | 24 February 2015 at 08:32 PM
You will then truly have the best and the brightest.
Posted by: georgeg | 24 February 2015 at 09:37 PM
WUE,
Isn't it how the German army used to (maybe still does?) select its officers?
Posted by: kao_hsien_chih | 24 February 2015 at 10:14 PM
Col Lang,
Well said!
Too few people in the US call the media on their misstatements. Hopefully, this will get CNN to be more careful in future.
Posted by: FB Ali | 24 February 2015 at 10:33 PM
Col,
I think the proposal once made here to close the Academies to undergraduates is still a good idea. Make them graduate level institutions instead. There are plenty of ROTC programs from which to draw junior officers as well as enlisted commissioning programs.
Posted by: Fred | 25 February 2015 at 08:17 AM
During my service I became a believer in the Warrant Officer as an effective leadership cadre. Is it time for a more diverse method of developing officers? I fully believe that it is. I believe the Navy could use that and draw the best of its enlisted sailors into a dynamic environment that maximizes their technical and leadership skills.
Posted by: BabelFish | 25 February 2015 at 08:54 AM
The hope to get mass media, especially broadcast TV, to improve their accuracy is more faint than a distant station in the olden days. Simply put, quality costs. And the corporations are all about low cost, even at the cost of low quality. After all, their biz case is infotainment for low-info consumers of mass mkt advertising. From misspellings to mispronunciations to misinformation... then there's ideological slanting ... the only thing they seem to really work hard on. It's all about pablum on the cheap. The only thing they pay for are "production values" and leggy blonds (not that there's anything wrong w/ THAT... what's remote volume control for, anyway?). They've closed bureaus all over the planet & depend on free-lancers to voice-over local (live from!) videos. When's the last time an important, really excellent news documentary was seen on network TV?
Posted by: ked | 25 February 2015 at 09:15 AM
Good Lord, chaps, isn't it obvious that it has all gone downhill since we Brits could actually buy our commissions?
Posted by: Bryn P | 25 February 2015 at 11:46 AM
The USN has traditionally relied on the LDO community for that. However, the LDO community is organized around technical skill-set. Traditionally the URL community has been a jack-of-all-trades. You might have a special or extra qualification in submarines or designated naval aviator, but you still are URL. (Some might say URL stands for unrestrained, but that's for another day).
Posted by: scott s. | 25 February 2015 at 03:30 PM
PL: this is off-topic but I hope you will write a brief note about this: http://www.bbc.com/news/31626875
Many on these threads, including me, have castigated Ms. Rice in the past. But on this matter she is speaking the truth.
Posted by: Swami Bhut Jolokia | 25 February 2015 at 04:21 PM
SBJ
I agree, She and BHO want to run the US foreign policy and Bibi is making a mighty effort to take control of it. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 February 2015 at 06:27 PM
scott S
So what do warrant officers do in the navy. Two of my uncles were pre and during WW2 WOs. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 February 2015 at 07:52 PM
All
I saw the film clip tonight of McDonald ands the homeless man. I'll bet you 100 bucks that man is not a former Green Beret. Two phonies. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 February 2015 at 07:54 PM
BabelFish,
I second Scott's comments below. The LDO and warrant officer programs in the Navy are available but with restrictions on advancement. You'll never reach flag rank as an LDO.
Posted by: Fred | 25 February 2015 at 07:59 PM
Given that Mossad disagrees with him over Iran seeking nuclear weapons, what intelligence is Bibi using and why would your Congress believe him?
Posted by: Bryn P | 26 February 2015 at 01:07 PM