Acting Navy secretary blasts ousted
aircraft carrier captain as 'stupid' in
address to ship's crew
CNN,
by
Barbara Starr
&
Evan Perez *
Original Article
Posted By: abuela10,
4/6/2020 11:08:41 AM
The Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly blasted the now ousted commander of the USS Theodore Roosevelt as "stupid" in an address to the ship's crew Monday morning, in remarks obtained by CNN.
Modly told the crew that their former commander, Capt. Brett Crozier, was either "too naive or too stupid" to be in command or that he intentionally leaked to the media a memo in which he warned about coronavirus spreading aboard the aircraft carrier and urged action to save his sailors.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
VirtuDawg 4/6/2020 11:14:15 AM (No. 370401)
As a former Naval Officer, I don't think that CAPT Crozier was "stupid" or "naïve." Arrogant, likely.
I don't think that he ever imagined that his email/letter would end up in the national news media, creating the public relations sh!tstorm that it has churned up.
13 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Refried 4/6/2020 11:19:49 AM (No. 370403)
Poor judgement by Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly in his choice of words. Imho.
21 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Flyball Dogs 4/6/2020 11:23:45 AM (No. 370408)
I have used the same words (verbatim) when discussing Felonia von Pantsuit and her sending unsecured emails. Either naive or stupid. Either option: not good.
(Of course, there is always the “A” word —- Arrogant.)
24 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Rob_NC 4/6/2020 11:27:16 AM (No. 370411)
Ignorant may be a better term.He should have known better.
He should have used the chain of command...which he didn't so his dismissal was appropriate.
39 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
HotRod 4/6/2020 11:35:40 AM (No. 370425)
The Captain's removal was enough. Modly was out of line in making those remarks, especially to the ship's crew. That is a capital NO NO! Modly needs to be taken to task for those words! Maybe Modly was deficient in taking action before the letter was sent, and has been embarrassed.
19 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
daisey 4/6/2020 11:39:29 AM (No. 370431)
I guess I’m a softie, but to my mind, Acting Secretary Modly is piling on. I’m not military, and it’s probably a good thing. More of a there, there, it’s going to be ok type.
5 people like this.
With this address to the officers and enlisted of the TR, Modly destroyed any credibility he had with the professional officers and enlisted of the United States Navy.
9 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 4/6/2020 12:42:49 PM (No. 370525)
OK first point....this is CNN, and I immediately doubt the veracity of the report.
23 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Fireball27 4/6/2020 12:56:28 PM (No. 370546)
From what I understand, the arrogant SOB gave the crew shore leave in Vietnam. In the middle of a pandemic! Just imagine if you were on that ship and didn't go ashore because you didn't want to get CoronaVirus. The crew is allowed to go ashore and bring it back to you and everyone else on board? Then when everyone starts coming down with CV, the captain starts yelling he needs help? Now they are claiming he is a hero because he wanted to let his crew get off the ship and possibly infect thousands? Give me a break. Now the people who have to deal with the aftermath of this guys mistakes are being made to look like the bad guys. Hope the crew get better soon. And those who went ashore really think about what they have done. Kind of like the kids who went on spring break and partied like it was 1999!
19 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Chuzzles 4/6/2020 1:08:22 PM (No. 370569)
The Pentagon has such a bad PR problem right now, and they cannot even see it. Yes the commander was arrogant, but how about the Pentagon, ignoring all the sick sailors on board the ship? Esper and this Acting Sec of the Navy are real problems for Trump, problems he does not need. You don't go on board a ship and insult and denigrate an officer of command rank to his subordinates. At least the military understands loyalty, something the Brass does not.
6 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
The Other Guy 4/6/2020 1:19:28 PM (No. 370600)
Navy hierarchy wanted investigation as to whether firing or less strong discipline was warranted. Sec of Navy didn't delay. Prudent choice would have been to wait for investigation. Efforts to control Corona were already under way and allowing the commander to remain in place until investigation was completed would neither accelerate nor hinder that effort. And firing at a later date, if warranted, would still maintain the recognized necessity of chain of command authority.
As a first sergeant I had the freedom to disagree with my commander in private if I didn't like his course of action. But when he said the decision was final my choice was do it or request a transfer. All that aside, Moly's address was absolutely out of line. Its tone indicated the decision to fire was based on vindictive punishment of the captain and not on reason.
5 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
lgplgp 4/6/2020 2:03:46 PM (No. 370656)
I'm sorry, Crozier by his actions, disabled an ENTIRE battle group for 6 months and let our adversaries know all they need to do is get a few sailors sick with the Wuhan Flu on a carrier and they can take out an entire battle group. Crozier's immediate superior was the battle fleet Admiral two cabins down on the TR, Crozier did not buck his concern up to him for forwarding up the chain of command. Does anyone think the TR is the only ship in NAVY that has crewmen sick with Wuhan Flu? We don't hear about those others because their captains follow protocols.
Modly did the right thing, to remind the sailors that their loyalty is to the NAVY, not to a Captain ... As much as they like him and he them he endangered all the other sailors on all the other ships. This also reinforces to the Captains of all the other ships to follow the chain of command don't go Crozier.
14 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Right Time 4/6/2020 2:11:38 PM (No. 370664)
The fact that the Navy Secretary's words were leaked to CNN is proof that the Navy has become politicized.
THIS is the damage to our armed services that Obama left behind.
Maybe every person who rose to flag rank between 2008 and 2017 has to be retired or retired in place.
11 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
fishbone 4/6/2020 2:15:13 PM (No. 370667)
I'm in agreement with the Acting NavSec. Those of you who think these words were wrong (stupid, naive, arrogant) don't forget there are a couple of others (opportunistic, inept, treasonous).
Opportunistic: If he's going into politics, it will be as a Dim hero.
Inept: He didn't know how to handle situations in a crisis.
Treasonous: The captain deliberately and publicly sidelined 10% of the ships of this class, thereby, reducing our defenses. Try breaking one of your fingers and then get into a brawl.
The NacSec had to inject some reality into the sailors that the captain was NOT a hero or martyr. So, yes, I support the strong words. How did this wimp get to this position. An Obama sailor?
17 people like this.
The beauty of an ironclad chain of command such as that used by the military is elimination of ambiguity. The CO had a responsibility for the safety and well being of his crew. Fair enough. He also had a responsibility to the battle group commander to support the mission. By advising his immediate superior of the situation and its impact on the readiness of his ship and requesting direction he would have been in the clear. But he blew it. Period.
I wonder how the conversation between the two went when the group commander learned that the CO of his flagship had unilaterally decided to change course and head to Guam.
And, yes, the Secretary could have handled this better. Any word to the crew should have come from the new CO (who, by the way, is the previous CO before Crozier and now a rear admiral).
4 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
judy 4/6/2020 2:58:56 PM (No. 370713)
Disrespectful...that's for sure!!! People who cater to CNN & MSNBC are out of touch. It was reported he CC of the letter to 5 people ... Was CNN included ???
2 people like this.
CAPT Crozier had numerous well known and familiar avenues to properly communicate and explain operational capability of the ship/embarked air wing onboard the TR (classified SITREPs, P-4s, etc) and, here is the clincher...actual face to face chit chat with the Strike Force Commander (O-7/operational chain of command/available 24/7/ and onboard the very same ship as CAPT Crozier.
Naive or stupid...maybe. Overwhelmed...maybe. Poor working relations with the embarked Flag Officer...maybe. All the CAPT"s responsibility to sort out and fix using the huge number of tools he and the Navy has at his/their disposal.
What is a for sure is our adversaries (PRC, NK, Iran, others) in the world now know, and have known for a number of days that the TR Battle Group is in a weakened state and probably not fully operational and capable of fulfilling its mission. I am sure Japan, SK, Taiwan, P.I., others have taken note of the situation.
There is an old adage in the Navy, probably in the other services as well. "Don't be the senior man with a secret." He had a secret,he did not communicate it to his ISIC (embarked FO), and irresponsibly sent the letter (with Classified info) outside his chain of command. Ouch!
I really don't care why he did it. He can sort that all out in retirement back on the beach in sunny CA.
Short answer: he was properly assessed and no longer held the trust and confidence of Navy leadership.
COs are administrative, are not statutory, and serve at the discretion of the respective service head. Acting SECVAV called it correctly.
Recommend we all move on, there are bigger problems to address rather than play to the media's clutching of their pearls and faux hysterics.
11 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
DVC 4/6/2020 4:18:56 PM (No. 370765)
Very well said, #17, and clearly the brown shoes add weight to your comments....for those who have an idea why shoe color might have some weight on this topic.
"Screwed the pooch" was the common term 50 year ago in that version of naval aviation.
3 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Pete Stone 4/6/2020 4:24:49 PM (No. 370774)
#4: Ignorant is right. Every O-1 (Ensign or Second Lieutenant) has it drummed into his or her head before getting commissioned that (1) you don't bypass the chain of command, and (2) you don't violate security regs. By the time Captain Obvious got to commanding a CVN, he should have known better than to let the enemy (China, Iran, etc.) know his ship's combat readiness was degraded.
6 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
DVC 4/6/2020 4:42:44 PM (No. 370789)
#17, It makes me wonder if Crozier didn't talk to the CSG commander about it and didn't like the answer he got...so went around "because it was important". If SECNAV had that info, likely after talking to the CSG Commander....THAT right there would definitely end any doubt on whether the skipper needed a new job on land somewhere, NOW. That is way out into loose cannon territory, if it wasn't just an error.
And if Crozier had a 'poor working relationship with CSG Commander' I would, at this point, have a guess at which party was at fault for that poor working relationship.
1 person likes this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
Ogden Pod 4/6/2020 4:59:38 PM (No. 370805)
Any Captain who does not understand what an Aircraft Carrier is and what it represents should not be in command. Any commander that does not realize that we are at war is not competent.
2 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
watashiyo 4/6/2020 6:05:46 PM (No. 370848)
Captain cracked under pressure and decided to go outside the chain of command to serve his ego. This happens all the time in the corporate environment. Betray your boss's confidence and you're fired. At least this one just got reassigned to something else.
2 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
Krause 4/6/2020 7:37:31 PM (No. 370920)
Can a captain dock a ship and let the crew go ashore without higher-ups approving?
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "abuela10"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
*and Ryan Browne,