Quote (thundercock @ Apr 3 2020 02:21pm)
I'm not convinced that those are his intentions. The answer to your question though is that a lot of people in the military aren't political animals like yourself. Often times, members of the military are pretty ignorant to political ramifications and they are solely focused on the issues at hand. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but I think you expect too much from mid-ranking individuals.
How could someone get to be a captain of an aircraft carrier and not have the awareness to know that if he sents an inflammatory, passionate call to arms specifically requesting political intervention with tons of dire prognostication and CC's dozens of people with no need to know, that his words are going to leak out? I don't like narratives that require either ignoring plot holes or explaining them away with conspicuous and uncharacteristic incompetence. And if we are to try to explain it away as profound lack of political awareness- then what's he doing asking for explicit political intervention in the first place? I don't think that's credible, he's not a mid-ranking individual or Mr. Magoo, he's the captain of an aircraft carrier.
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Apr 3 2020 03:29pm)
I didnt follow the Crozier story in detail, perhaps you can fill me in: do we actually know if Crozier tried addressing the situation via the proper chain of command?
Perhaps he tried the good way, got told by his command to fuck off and carry on, and only then decided that he wasnt gonna take that and sacrificed his career for his men?
IF he really didnt follow the proper chain of command and brought the issue to the public (and thus political) sphere, then I'm with Goom and he deserved to be fired. But if he did follow protocol, then it's outrageous to fire him because he wasnt willing to sacrifice his men. It would, in fact, be outrageous to give him this order in the first place.
I don't think we can know.
What we've heard is that the superior officers adamantly denied that Crozier ever stated any kind of extreme emergency need to them before and said he never took made any such emphatic request
and we know that the letter was dated the same day it leaked to the media, so they had no chance to respond to the letter before it came out.
But we also can deduce with pretty good certainty that leaking the letter was intentional and that leaking it clearly compromised national security by broadcasting the unreadiness of the US's most important strategic asset to our enemies.
This post was edited by Goomshill on Apr 3 2020 02:35pm