Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Was it a Marine Corps Major? He may have been thinking Captain, O-3. I always enjoyed talking over the phone to people on a Naval base when I was an Army Captain.
When you have the written order signed by an O-6 on base letterhead with you, I don't think there is any doubt.
When you have the written order signed by an O-6 on base letterhead with you, I don't think there is any doubt.
You misunderstand my question. Did he think he was talking about a Navy Captain, or a Marine Corps Captain (thinking maybe it was security, as is possible in the Army or Air Force)? In other words, did you have him read the letter so he knew it existed? Big, big difference between those ranks and positions and if he didn’t realize the Captain he was talking about drastically outranked him the statement is less weird and entitled.
You misunderstand my question. Did he think he was talking about a Navy Captain, or a Marine Corps Captain (thinking maybe it was security, as is possible in the Army or Air Force)? In other words, did you have him read the letter so he knew it existed? Big, big difference between those ranks and positions and if he didn’t realize the Captain he was talking about drastically outranked him the statement is less weird and entitled.
He should have realized that they were operating under the authority of the facility commanding officer, who would certainly not be an O-3, but an O-6 or greater.
So I have a question for those who might be interested in answering.
How do some just ‘follow’ orders? Is it taught or is ingrained in personality ?
For example...can a general disagree ‘internally’ but just follow orders?
It’s something that has always impressed me. What would stop General Patton from disagreeing with orders while he commanded the 7th Army?
On a day-to-day basis for the great majority of people in uniform, it's just following instructions to do a job, and not different from comparable civilian jobs. There are many civilian jobs in which lives are on the line if people do not closely follow instructions.
When the situation moves beyond that in a combat situation, it's a matter of the integrity of the individuals standing by the commitment of the oath they have taken to obey lawful orders.
He should have realized that they were operating under the authority of the facility commanding officer, who would certainly not be an O-3, but an O-6 or greater.
Thank you!
But more than that, sort of not relative. You drive on to the facility of the commanding officer, you will obey his orders.....or you don't come on his facility at all. It doesn't matter if he is an O-6, an O-3, or an E-6.
About the E-6. An officer, I think he was an O-2, from a ship got picked up by the state police for a threatening display of a firearm. He and his firearm was turned over to the head of the naval police, an E-6. Before he was released with his 1911, he was made to disassemble it down to the every single piece level.
I knew that officer and with his attitude, it must have been quite the shock for this E-6 to have the gall to tell him to do that but.......
.........like the Captain told, another time, another at Mast, "When you told my police officer you would shove that night stick up where the sun doesn't shine, you were saying that to me!".
When you think you can lord over someone's representative just because you are of a higher rank, you better know exactly who you are dealing with, what that chain of command is, or WATCH OUT!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaTransplant
You misunderstand my question. Did he think he was talking about a Navy Captain, or a Marine Corps Captain (thinking maybe it was security, as is possible in the Army or Air Force)? In other words, did you have him read the letter so he knew it existed? Big, big difference between those ranks and positions and if he didn’t realize the Captain he was talking about drastically outranked him the statement is less weird and entitled.
What one thinks may get them into trouble.
Be very aware of who one is thinking about. I was told that in the Cold War, while the post commander for Fort Hood was officially some colonel, he reported to (and hence, operationally the commander was) the deputy commander for III Corps, a 2 star general.
Different gate search, outbound where there is no option for refusal. I went through the words with an Army Major of an interior command and he told me unless I had a search warrant, I was not searching his car. I went through a few passes of this with him refusing each time, so finally I told him we would handle this through his command.
When I reported it to the Captain at his meeting that afternoon, "Pull his driving privs! If he won't obey my rules, he won't drive on my base." So for the next week, he had to park his car exterior to the base and walk on and off. Now, before one thinks "well, he could have just caught a ride with someone", keep in mind that would probably bring the fury of my Captain down on the head of that "someone" along with disobeying an order of an officer and tickets for disobeying the orders of a police officer.
At the end of the week, the CO of that interior command, an O-5, calls me up on the phone and explains of how he sat down his officer and had a very intense talk with him. Here's an O-5 talking to me, an O-2, like this, very gently.
Finally, on those signs one would see at military base entrances in the last century, an internal security act is often mentioned. Part of that act is that commanding officers have the right to write regulations for the security of their facilities. When one starts running afoul of the procedures a CO says about the running of his base, one is running afoul of this act.
Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 04-06-2021 at 05:17 AM..
He should have realized that they were operating under the authority of the facility commanding officer, who would certainly not be an O-3, but an O-6 or greater.
Reminds me of the time I deployed to a Marine base during a contingency operation. I showed up on day one and met some of the guys I would be working with, and then the section chief (or whatever they are called in the USMC) came down to say hello.
So my very first meeting went like this:
He said, “Master Sergeant ( I was an E-7 in the USAF at the time), nice to meet you. I’m also a Master Sergeant(E-8), but make no mistake, I outrank you. As long as you remember that, we’ll get along pretty good.”
My first thought was what an incredible douche this guy was. That’s not the proper way to greet a fellow SNCO from another service.
But hey, I’m a professional and let it go, and we all ended up having a successful tour.
At the highest levels, any General worth his salt knows how to direct his staff to formulate COAs (courses of action) that will “steer” the NCA in the right direction and cause them to choose the COA that the General wants.
At lower levels, such as junior enlisted, NCOs, SNCOs, CGOs, and FGOs, they mostly just smile and say and yes sir! But even they have skin in the game and can definitely affect policy through formulations of instructions and regulations. A junior person worth his salt can also write COAs and “steer” senior leadership into signing off on a procedure or process. After all, that junior person is much more competent at the task than the senior person is, so if you articulate your position very creatively, you can “help” the senior person create the order that you want.
As far as a ridiculous scenario like the MSM who loves to speculate that Trump would order a country to be nuked, I believe that the NCA would either talk him out of it, or just refuse the order altogether. I don’t believe it to be possible that a President could order the NCA, who would then order the STRATCOM commander to launch a nuke unless the entire NCA agreed with the President.
Lastly, talking about a Combatant Commander or a JTF Commander who is commanding troops in a theater of operations or a specific operation, they are generally given broad orders as to what the goal is with perhaps a few parameters, but they are normally given latitude to execute as they see fit, taking into consideration the LOAC and other factors.
For example, if Schwarzkopf had decided to invade Iraq when Bush ordered him not to chase the retreating Iraqis into Iraq, man, that’s an interesting question. Assuming that all of Schwarzkopf’s staff were unified behind him, I suppose that they could have ignored that order and went ahead. Because it isn’t a secret phone call between Bush and Schwarzkopf, hundreds of staff members would’ve seen the directive and would’ve known that invading Iraq was off the table. So then what? That would create quite the situation, and the President has the authority to remove a General from command, but that would look really, really bad. In the middle of a major offensive operation, removing a commander for insubordination? What might happen is that Bush would’ve just went along with it and rescinded his order and gave Schwarzkopf the go ahead since he was going to do it anyway.
Regardless, that’s a good question. A President is supposed to be in charge, but let’s be honest here, his orders are followed because military commanders choose to follow it. So far, it’s all worked out. But there could come a time when this system is put to the test.
And... the logistics train just keeps on rolling in this scenario? I'm not talking about the 'glamorous' stuff like bombs and bullets, either. All the fuel and oil and spare parts and the endless list of non-sexy items that every unit needs in order to operate? The intelligence just keeps flowing, from satellite to sigint and humint? The rest of the coalition, which may be small but some of which (particularly British and French, but others as well) are playing key rolls on the ground, in the air, and at sea), just shrug their shoulders and play along? Schwarzkopf and his command existed at the end of a long tether over which he had no control. And without it, he can't do squat - at least, not for long.
"We're invading Iraq! At least for the next 48 hours until we grind to a halt when the materiel stops arriving!"
That's the rallying cry that's going to convince Stormin' Norman's staff to fall in line behind him?
And... the logistics train just keeps on rolling in this scenario? I'm not talking about the 'glamorous' stuff like bombs and bullets, either. All the fuel and oil and spare parts and the endless list of non-sexy items that every unit needs in order to operate? The intelligence just keeps flowing, from satellite to sigint and humint? The rest of the coalition, which may be small but some of which (particularly British and French, but others as well) are playing key rolls on the ground, in the air, and at sea), just shrug their shoulders and play along? Schwarzkopf and his command existed at the end of a long tether over which he had no control. And without it, he can't do squat - at least, not for long.
"We're invading Iraq! At least for the next 48 hours until we grind to a halt when the materiel stops arriving!"
That's the rallying cry that's going to convince Stormin' Norman's staff to fall in line behind him?
I agree with what you wrote, and I did not elaborate well enough. But what if Norm had the backing of the JCS and the service components?
My main point of this ridiculous scenario is to highlight that civilian control of the military only works because the military brass allows it to work.
Reminds me of the time I deployed to a Marine base during a contingency operation. I showed up on day one and met some of the guys I would be working with, and then the section chief (or whatever they are called in the USMC) came down to say hello.
So my very first meeting went like this:
He said, “Master Sergeant ( I was an E-7 in the USAF at the time), nice to meet you. I’m also a Master Sergeant(E-8), but make no mistake, I outrank you. As long as you remember that, we’ll get along pretty good.”
My first thought was what an incredible douche this guy was. That’s not the proper way to greet a fellow SNCO from another service.
But hey, I’m a professional and let it go, and we all ended up having a successful tour.
Marine enlisted are very serious about their grade levels. Before I ever worked closely with them, I thought "sticks up their azzes."
But when I was in a joint unit as the division senior NCO (Air Force) working for a Marine Lt Col with Marines working for me, I realized that unlike the Air Force, which operationally tends to really have only four or so enlisted grades, Marines accord very definite levels of authority to each grade. A Marine staff sergeant has authority very significantly greater than a Marine sergeant, for instance, and a sergeant is not interchangeable with a staff sergeant. So each grade actually matters operationally.
And I realized, working with them, that was not a bad thing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
