Acting Navy chief fired Crozier for ‘panicking’ —
and before Trump could intervene
Washington Post,
by
David Ignatius
Original Article
Posted By: Pluperfect,
4/6/2020 4:41:05 AM
Acting Navy secretary Thomas Modly, in an extensive interview about the firing of the commander of a disease-threatened aircraft carrier, said he acted because he believed the captain was “panicking” under pressure — and wanted to make the move himself, before President Trump ordered the captain’s dismissal.
“I didn’t want to get into a decision where the president would feel that he had to intervene because the Navy couldn’t be decisive,” Modly told me in a telephone call from Hawaii at about 1 a.m. Sunday, Washington time. He continued: “If I were president, and I saw a commanding officer of a ship exercising such poor judgment, I would be asking
Reply 1 - Posted by:
watashiyo 4/6/2020 5:40:25 AM (No. 370109)
I think it's fair to say Mr. Modly did the right thing. But then, what do I know about military SOP.
10 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
globalwarmer 4/6/2020 6:35:51 AM (No. 370129)
Because TRUMP!
1 person likes this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
chumley 4/6/2020 6:36:22 AM (No. 370130)
If the navy had been as quick to address the captain's concerns, there may not have been a problem. His crime was to expose their complete indifference to the well being of their troops, and their willingness to needlessly sacrifice them for their own political image.
The captain is a good officer and a good leader, so he must be gotten rid of.
5 people like this.
I tend to take the Captain's side on this. A Captain is like a Colonel in other branches. He wears the eagle. He hasn't graduated to the ranks of Generals who are expert hind end smoochers who get better at their job until they are expert at 4 Star!!! My brother-in-law was a Brig. General in the Air Force...I wouldn't trust him to put anyone over or before his career! He didn't get his second star after 2 times up for it and was forced to retire. There is a list that everyone watches and if you miss the promotion after two times eligible...you are essentially over!
1 person likes this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
judy 4/6/2020 7:26:33 AM (No. 370152)
Did the WP leave out the part the captain stopped in Viet Nam & allowed sailors to leave the ship ...upon return the virus started..leaving ship during a national epidemic is not wise. Did you really expect WP to report all the facts????
29 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
judy 4/6/2020 7:31:00 AM (No. 370158)
This was nuclear powered ship , not a row boat. This is the Navy, not a high school event.
30 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Bur Oak 4/6/2020 7:44:12 AM (No. 370171)
Writing and email and releasing it in a way to allow it to be disseminated to our enemies is good cause for the captain's dismissal.
39 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Venturer 4/6/2020 8:29:13 AM (No. 370203)
He did the right thing for the wrong reason.
The Captain had to be removed.
But he said he did it because he wanted to beat Trumnp to the move.
]That's BS and his response should cause his removal.
Perhaps he did remove the captain to beat Trump to the punch, but he shouldn't be stupid enough to say that.
6 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
msjena 4/6/2020 8:32:39 AM (No. 370207)
Why is this even an issue? He didn't follow military procedures. End of story.
25 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Bluefindad 4/6/2020 9:22:21 AM (No. 370265)
Leaking the readiness or situation status of your ship is one of the worst things a naval officer can do. Imagine if, on December 6, 1941, the carrier group commander had sent a notice through unclassified channels saying "Carrier group currently at sea, but will arrive in port Monday."
16 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Shmowry1 4/6/2020 10:28:56 AM (No. 370329)
We are going to let someone who either is too stupid to not be careless with sensitive email information or on purpose widely spreads compromising information for his ship and sailors in the hopes that someone will leak it with a nuclear powered ship, countless weapons, and hundreds of sailors lives? I was never in the military, but I can tell you this behavior wouldn’t last in the private sector either. This is just bad behavior, not leadership. Plenty of military captains have loved the soldiers in their charge, even up to the point they got them killed or compromised their safety. Won’t be crying for this captain. I’m sure he’ll have his 15 minutes of fame and write a widely selling book thanks to the anti trump media.
7 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
bigfatslob 4/6/2020 10:32:14 AM (No. 370338)
What the commander of the carrier did was wrong for many reasons. Save walking the plank for later this is the military not Sigma Nu fraternity animal house.
4 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
GO3 4/6/2020 11:04:33 AM (No. 370388)
He should have been removed; no argument from me in that regard. But the fact the SecNav did it even if he didn't want to get ahead of Trump is troubling. Any service secretary is not in the chain of command - period. Per regulation, any civilian, no matter how high ranking, cannot order a uniformed service member to do anything; and vice-versa for military to civilian. If there was any removal to be done, it should have been the Pacific Fleet commander or perhaps the Third or Seventh Fleet commander (not sure which fleet the Roosevelt was part of). Generally, uniformed joint commanders don't even do this. He may recommend someone be relieved but the service component commander does that. For example, during OIF-1, a Marine Regimental commander was relieved, but Tommy Franks didn't do it. It was the Marine Component commander. I'm not singling out the Navy, but this leads to a whole set of questions as to the loyalties and sympathies of the relevant uniformed Navy leadership. Another example is LtCol Vindman. He was removed by Trump, who is in the Chain of Command, but his immediate uniformed commander has remained in hiding as far as I know.
1 person likes this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
DVC 4/6/2020 12:03:48 PM (No. 370466)
Ignatius is NEVER to be trusted, ALWAYS working to harm the President, the military and any other normal parts of our country. A thoroughly despicable man writing in a thoroughly despicable newpaper. No thanks.
2 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
earlybird 4/6/2020 12:20:41 PM (No. 370495)
Ignatius’s headline writer gets it wrong. Modly didn’t want to go all wobbly in his job so that the President would have to intervene (and do the same thing)...
1 person likes this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 4/6/2020 12:45:31 PM (No. 370527)
Ever watched the movie "Midway", old or new versions? Notice the fear and some of the overwhelming problems faced by the soldiers? Did they stop for a cry? Did they broadcast "letters" about their troubles? Would it have been appropriate for such things to happen?
Instead, they did their jobs.
The fact that we are "not at war" is meaningless. Soldiers train and hold themselves to wartime standards because if they don't, when war DOES come, it's too late to learn how to do it right. If this Captain could not behave rightly when NOT at war, how would he hold up when actually at war and far worse confronted him. He was tested and failed.
I suspect that a lot of our military has been doing the Social Justice thing and has forgotten how to be soldiers and follow the demanded rigor.
4 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
DVC 4/6/2020 2:16:09 PM (No. 370669)
Not everyone makes the transition from the cockpit to the carrier bridge effectively.
Capt. Crozier clearly did not. Sad, but there are 10 good men in line behind him, and they will be unlikely to stumble like he has.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Pluperfect"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)