Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Two Marine generals forced to retire

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,737
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Two Marine generals forced to retire

    Dang! Oops, good-bye 3 stars

    Marine Corps generals forced to retire over breach at Afghan base

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...cmp=latestnews
    Last edited by platoonDaddy; 10-01-13 at 18:16.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,928
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    You can fade getting a few Marines killed here and there. Lose $200M in aircraft assets? Not so much...
    What if this whole crusade's a charade?
    And behind it all there's a price to be paid
    For the blood which we dine
    Justified in the name of the holy and the divine…

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,737
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by glocktogo View Post
    You can fade getting a few Marines killed here and there. Lose $200M in aircraft assets? Not so much...
    I agree 1000% with you, if it wasn't for the aircraft assets, both would still be in.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Like it or not part of the job is assuming a certain amount of risk that may involve the loss of our lives. There are 190K Marines on active duty we are all replaceable, 6 AV-8s on the other hand cannot be replaced.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    567
    Feedback Score
    0
    I wonder if some form of political correctness led to 'inadequate force protection' ie: they were required 'win the hearts and minds'
    Dan Miami, FL

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Dan

    Much of it had to do with force caps; so choices had to be made at what to cut and where to assume risk

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    567
    Feedback Score
    0
    Ah. So these two generals made those decisions? (the article didn't make that clear)
    Dan Miami, FL

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,737
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by R0N View Post
    Dan

    Much of it had to do with force caps; so choices had to be made at what to cut and where to assume risk

    I am not buying force cuts had anything to do with the lack of security.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by danpass View Post
    Ah. So these two generals made those decisions? (the article didn't make that clear)
    Not on the force cap, but how to you use the troops they had under the force cap


    Honestly both Gens were rising stars till this happened; and unfortunately they were put in a no win situation. Do the best they could with what they had and hope for the best. Because we know what would have happen if they said they could not do it without more, they would have been fired and someone else would now be left holding the bag.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,795
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by danpass View Post
    Ah. So these two generals made those decisions? (the article didn't make that clear)
    I doubt they gave the orders that far down the chain for that particular event and circumstances, but they are ultimately responsible as commanding officers for what their people do or fail to do.
    For God and the soldier we adore, In time of danger, not before! The danger passed, and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted." - Rudyard Kipling

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •