Posted on Feb 3, 2015
Crisis of Faith in Senior Leaders; How would you address it?
4.34K
9
20
1
1
0
I hope RP's the type of professional forum in which senior leaders could address these issues in a candid manner. I'm particularly concerned about the case of MoH recipient CPT Swenson. What say you?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/average-soldiers-don-t-trust-their-generals-and-they-have-a-point.html
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/average-soldiers-don-t-trust-their-generals-and-they-have-a-point.html
Posted in these groups: 
Senior Leaders
Senior Leaders
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 10
3
3
0
I guess things are different either 1) these days or 2) because of the long war, or maybe both.
I served 30 years of active duty and general officer actions had absolutely no effect on me, my work ethic, my morale, etc.
I've even served at fairly high levels, relatively "close" to GOs, and that did not change things. They were doing their job and I was doing mine.
It just never crossed my mind to have a crisis of confidence in my senior leaders.
I served 30 years of active duty and general officer actions had absolutely no effect on me, my work ethic, my morale, etc.
I've even served at fairly high levels, relatively "close" to GOs, and that did not change things. They were doing their job and I was doing mine.
It just never crossed my mind to have a crisis of confidence in my senior leaders.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
1SG(P) (Join to see)
It should come as no surprise that the military is politicized. The military is under civilian leadership and that leadership are all politicians.
While the military claims to be apolitical, the truth of the matter is that for military leaders to become senior military leaders they have to be political and that is especially true when it comes to the general officer ranks, especially the three and four star officers. That does not mean that they cannot be effective military leaders, as well as politicians, but that take the moral courage that some simply do not display out of a desire for more rank, more power or just maintaining what they have already achieved.
I have known a great many general officers and have worked very closely with several (and lived with some in my family). Most of them desperately want to do the right thing but, more times than not, being able to do the right thing at that level requires the political clout to get it done. Contrary to what others might think, they all have bosses and they can't act unilaterally on most things and the ultimate decision-makers in the most important things that impact the most soldiers are civilian politicians.
When I was a young Lieutenant, I remember asking my dad, who was a senior Army officer, why there were so many, in my opinion, "dumb" decisions being made by our senior leadership. His answer was that the higher one gets in rank and position, the further away he gets from the troops and the realities of the impacts decisions make at the lowest levels. What seems like a good idea at the top really sucks at the ground level. He told me that, I too, would be guilty of that some day, and I probably was.
There comes a time, however, when the military leadership must stand up for what is right and put politics aside. I firmly believe that time has come in our country, but I have yet to see any real evidence of any of our senior military leaders having the moral courage to call a spade a spade and take a stand against what they know is just wrong. Those who have demonstrated an inkling to do so have been "purged" by the politicians and, even they, for the most part, have not spoken up. We need another "Revolt of the Generals" and some public "Resignation In Protest", which I personally think we will see if things continue in our country as they are.
I am certainly not calling for anything illegal or outside the Constitution of the United States. I just think it is time for our military leaders to have the moral courage to say "enough is enough" and take a public stand, fully realizing it will most likely end their careers.
It should come as no surprise that the military is politicized. The military is under civilian leadership and that leadership are all politicians.
While the military claims to be apolitical, the truth of the matter is that for military leaders to become senior military leaders they have to be political and that is especially true when it comes to the general officer ranks, especially the three and four star officers. That does not mean that they cannot be effective military leaders, as well as politicians, but that take the moral courage that some simply do not display out of a desire for more rank, more power or just maintaining what they have already achieved.
I have known a great many general officers and have worked very closely with several (and lived with some in my family). Most of them desperately want to do the right thing but, more times than not, being able to do the right thing at that level requires the political clout to get it done. Contrary to what others might think, they all have bosses and they can't act unilaterally on most things and the ultimate decision-makers in the most important things that impact the most soldiers are civilian politicians.
When I was a young Lieutenant, I remember asking my dad, who was a senior Army officer, why there were so many, in my opinion, "dumb" decisions being made by our senior leadership. His answer was that the higher one gets in rank and position, the further away he gets from the troops and the realities of the impacts decisions make at the lowest levels. What seems like a good idea at the top really sucks at the ground level. He told me that, I too, would be guilty of that some day, and I probably was.
There comes a time, however, when the military leadership must stand up for what is right and put politics aside. I firmly believe that time has come in our country, but I have yet to see any real evidence of any of our senior military leaders having the moral courage to call a spade a spade and take a stand against what they know is just wrong. Those who have demonstrated an inkling to do so have been "purged" by the politicians and, even they, for the most part, have not spoken up. We need another "Revolt of the Generals" and some public "Resignation In Protest", which I personally think we will see if things continue in our country as they are.
I am certainly not calling for anything illegal or outside the Constitution of the United States. I just think it is time for our military leaders to have the moral courage to say "enough is enough" and take a public stand, fully realizing it will most likely end their careers.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I don't think leaders at the general officer and above level have any effect on Soldiers at the tactical level. I believe most of them truly care for the Soldiers under their command but, I think they are so far detached from what happens on a daily basis that it's irrelevant.
One of the best encounters I ever had with a general officer was while deployed to Baghdad in 2008-2009. Then Major General Dan Bolger who was the commander of the Multi National Division - Baghdad came to my JSS. I was a 1SG at the time and he came into our little TOC and asked me directly how things were going. My commander immediately started into the pre-planned briefing we had prepared for him, he said wait a minute Captain I want to hear from the 1SG. I told him exactly how I saw things in the AO and how the company was doing as far as operationally and how the Soldiers were doing. He asked when the next patrol was and we told him in about six hours, he said he was tired and needed a cot but wake him up so he could go on the patrol. He slept in an open bay on a cot and then went out on patrol with one of our platoons. That guy was a true Soldier.
As a leader, no matter what level, you need to take care of your little piece of pie. If you do your job by taking care of Soldiers then that reflects all the way up the chain. Soldiers will feel taken care of period.
One of the best encounters I ever had with a general officer was while deployed to Baghdad in 2008-2009. Then Major General Dan Bolger who was the commander of the Multi National Division - Baghdad came to my JSS. I was a 1SG at the time and he came into our little TOC and asked me directly how things were going. My commander immediately started into the pre-planned briefing we had prepared for him, he said wait a minute Captain I want to hear from the 1SG. I told him exactly how I saw things in the AO and how the company was doing as far as operationally and how the Soldiers were doing. He asked when the next patrol was and we told him in about six hours, he said he was tired and needed a cot but wake him up so he could go on the patrol. He slept in an open bay on a cot and then went out on patrol with one of our platoons. That guy was a true Soldier.
As a leader, no matter what level, you need to take care of your little piece of pie. If you do your job by taking care of Soldiers then that reflects all the way up the chain. Soldiers will feel taken care of period.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Had an experience last weekend that made me think of this thread. Ran across my first 1SG. I saw him, said, "Evening First Sergeant", and made my way over to him. I'm not certain whether he remembered me or not, but he did know that I had been recently deployed and asked about my deployment. He asked why I wasn't wearing a deployment patch. I told him it was because I gave both extra multicam patches to a couple C-130 pilots who invited me to fly in the cabin with them. Around this time I glance down at his chest and realize he's been promoted to CSM since the last time I had seen him! I stammer out, "Sergeant Major, I've been calling you first sergeant." He replies, "I know, don't worry about it soldier."
My whole point in telling the story? When leaders like him get promoted, soldiers get faith in the system! Seeing him as a CSM gave me a boost in morale that I definitely needed.
My whole point in telling the story? When leaders like him get promoted, soldiers get faith in the system! Seeing him as a CSM gave me a boost in morale that I definitely needed.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I agree that many of the older leaders are out for themselves. No biggie
Every time I was asked to do something that I felt unsure of, I documented it. So if it came back to bite me in the behind I had proof of what happened. Some leaders may be out for themselves, and that's fine. My advice is to understand what is right and wrong and never put yourself in a situation that is questionable.
Every time I was asked to do something that I felt unsure of, I documented it. So if it came back to bite me in the behind I had proof of what happened. Some leaders may be out for themselves, and that's fine. My advice is to understand what is right and wrong and never put yourself in a situation that is questionable.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Congressman pushes Army on why it revoked Green Beret's Silver Star
The Army, citing an investigation, has revoked the interim Silver Star from a decorated Green Beret.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
1SG(P) (Join to see)
I won't presume to know the whole stories. Whether intentional or not, every document will reflect the bias of the writer and thus cannot be relied upon without firsthand knowledge of the incident. Take a review of the Rolling Stone article on Gen McChrystal. He was relieved for supposedly trash-talking President Obama, but it was revealed by Rolling Stone later that one of his AIDES had made the derogatory comments. That bias was very strong and went heavily against the General. Then there are those that are pretty seriously messed up, such as the Brig Gen that was accused of forcible sodomy against some of his CPT aides. Definitely a messed up situation there, but he did have action taken against him. Not all information is released in every case, so jumping to a conclusion is dangerous.
My job as I see it is to be the "Bullshit Umbrella". I protect my Soldiers from the negative aspects of the Army, and teach them to lead so that they can hopefully carry and maintain the Core Values after I'm gone. I'm not worried about the GENs at this level, simply worried about my "two up, two down" and making sure that everything that I do has the opportunity to benefit my Soldiers and make "my corner of the Army" better, and teach others to do the same. Additionally, I have the responsibility to mentor those at two levels below me to develop them into the leaders that will benefit their own troops and guide them on a positive Army career. By doing that, we are able to instill in the future leaders those values which we hold dear and hope that when the time comes that they will receive the baton, they will carry it proud and make the Army a better place.
With one million people, it is naïve to assume that we will never have bad apples. Attempting to control the actions of EVERYONE is overwhelming and will lead to burnout and negative attitudes that are detrimental to morale. Focus on the "two up, two down" and instill the values....from there it is up to that individual to determine their own fates and career path.
v/r,
CPT Butler
I won't presume to know the whole stories. Whether intentional or not, every document will reflect the bias of the writer and thus cannot be relied upon without firsthand knowledge of the incident. Take a review of the Rolling Stone article on Gen McChrystal. He was relieved for supposedly trash-talking President Obama, but it was revealed by Rolling Stone later that one of his AIDES had made the derogatory comments. That bias was very strong and went heavily against the General. Then there are those that are pretty seriously messed up, such as the Brig Gen that was accused of forcible sodomy against some of his CPT aides. Definitely a messed up situation there, but he did have action taken against him. Not all information is released in every case, so jumping to a conclusion is dangerous.
My job as I see it is to be the "Bullshit Umbrella". I protect my Soldiers from the negative aspects of the Army, and teach them to lead so that they can hopefully carry and maintain the Core Values after I'm gone. I'm not worried about the GENs at this level, simply worried about my "two up, two down" and making sure that everything that I do has the opportunity to benefit my Soldiers and make "my corner of the Army" better, and teach others to do the same. Additionally, I have the responsibility to mentor those at two levels below me to develop them into the leaders that will benefit their own troops and guide them on a positive Army career. By doing that, we are able to instill in the future leaders those values which we hold dear and hope that when the time comes that they will receive the baton, they will carry it proud and make the Army a better place.
With one million people, it is naïve to assume that we will never have bad apples. Attempting to control the actions of EVERYONE is overwhelming and will lead to burnout and negative attitudes that are detrimental to morale. Focus on the "two up, two down" and instill the values....from there it is up to that individual to determine their own fates and career path.
v/r,
CPT Butler
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This is unfortunate and I think this is related to the lack of leadership training at all levels.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This statement speaks loud and clear "The services—and the Army, in particular—must look inward. There must be a desire to initiate a cultural shift that reassures service personnel that the institutions under which they serve won’t let them down, and they will receive the support—whether through legal, administrative or operational channels—that is worthy of their service. They want to know their best interests won’t be disregarded."
In my experience, senior leadership cares more about saving their own ass and serving their own interests then taking care of those under them. I wouldn't be suprised if this is what happened in Clint Lorance's case. I've heard stories that his teammates supported him until they spoke with the prosecutor. It's disgusting what some people will do to save their own skin, no matter how morally or ethically wrong it is.
My AF friend asked me an interesting question a few weeks ago, "if they aren't playing fair then you need to stop playing fair." My answer, "no, because someone has to maintain honor and integrity." I am no better than anyone else if someone else's behavior influences me to act in a way that contradicts my personal values.
The abuse of power by senior military leadership that I have directly had experience with is disgusting and makes me ashamed of those I serve with. The military is not a dictatorship, senior leaders need to be held to regulations and military standards just as much as anyone else. Lead by example, morally and ethically, because having your soldiers trust you speaks volumes over nonsensical leadership traits such as a high APFT score.
Hard to trust leaders right now when all we hear are rumors of our benefits being cut.
In my experience, senior leadership cares more about saving their own ass and serving their own interests then taking care of those under them. I wouldn't be suprised if this is what happened in Clint Lorance's case. I've heard stories that his teammates supported him until they spoke with the prosecutor. It's disgusting what some people will do to save their own skin, no matter how morally or ethically wrong it is.
My AF friend asked me an interesting question a few weeks ago, "if they aren't playing fair then you need to stop playing fair." My answer, "no, because someone has to maintain honor and integrity." I am no better than anyone else if someone else's behavior influences me to act in a way that contradicts my personal values.
The abuse of power by senior military leadership that I have directly had experience with is disgusting and makes me ashamed of those I serve with. The military is not a dictatorship, senior leaders need to be held to regulations and military standards just as much as anyone else. Lead by example, morally and ethically, because having your soldiers trust you speaks volumes over nonsensical leadership traits such as a high APFT score.
Hard to trust leaders right now when all we hear are rumors of our benefits being cut.
(0)
(0)
SPC Todd Fitzgerald
He absolutely did not make an appropriate decision at his, or any level, of leadership. It is not appropriate to order fire upon unarmed, non hostile civilians. It is not appropriate to order anyone to fire upon women or children. It is not appropriate to lie and send up false reports to facilitate the act of a crime. It is not appropriate to ask someone else to send up false reports. Nor is it appropriate to attempt to cover up your crimes or obstruct justice in order to prevent crimes from being discovered. That story from the WaPo is inaccurate. We did not have aerial support upon leaving the base that day. The helicopter pilot testified that she did not show up as air support until after the two Afghans had been killed. (source: http://www.stripes.com/news/us/army-lieutenant-sentenced-to-20-years-for-afghan-killings-1.233529)
As for the Allen West article, I don't know of any evidence that the Army ever had that wasn't presented. I have no knowledge of any evidence that those two men were connected to terror. The defense lawyer does not have any evidence that they were directly connected to terror and has said as much himself. There was never any doubt about who those men were until recently. The documents that allege those men were bad only just came out, from the man being paid to represent a convicted murderer, after the conviction was upheld as part of the appeals process. It seems very convenient to me for them to just now have this story. As for first hand evidence? Yes, I was there, I saw them, we knew them. We were operating in that area for months before Clint showed up and had formed a familiarity with each other. They had been friendly towards us and had provided us with good information. The area got significantly more dangerous after they were killed and we no longer received support from the locals.
Edit: To add to this, Clint's former defense lawyer even said he was wrong. "After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack. " (source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/03/us-usa-military-murder-idUSBRE97201H20130803)
As for the Allen West article, I don't know of any evidence that the Army ever had that wasn't presented. I have no knowledge of any evidence that those two men were connected to terror. The defense lawyer does not have any evidence that they were directly connected to terror and has said as much himself. There was never any doubt about who those men were until recently. The documents that allege those men were bad only just came out, from the man being paid to represent a convicted murderer, after the conviction was upheld as part of the appeals process. It seems very convenient to me for them to just now have this story. As for first hand evidence? Yes, I was there, I saw them, we knew them. We were operating in that area for months before Clint showed up and had formed a familiarity with each other. They had been friendly towards us and had provided us with good information. The area got significantly more dangerous after they were killed and we no longer received support from the locals.
Edit: To add to this, Clint's former defense lawyer even said he was wrong. "After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack. " (source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/03/us-usa-military-murder-idUSBRE97201H20130803)
(0)
(0)
SPC Todd Fitzgerald
Kristin, am I supposed to infer from your lack of response that you're not open to any conversation?
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
"Hard to trust leaders right now when all we hear are rumors of our benefits being cut"
This is what I am going to infer based off of the last line of your comment: I don't trust anyone that is not for exactly what I want, and this is what is wrong with the force today. The force that has grown out of persistent conflict of the past 14 years is one that knows very few limitations, and that fits this generation that is coming in because those that have grown up in the 2000's have known only instant gratification.
So to say others are hard to trust because they are having to make hard decisions is in my opinion the crux of the issue.
This is what I am going to infer based off of the last line of your comment: I don't trust anyone that is not for exactly what I want, and this is what is wrong with the force today. The force that has grown out of persistent conflict of the past 14 years is one that knows very few limitations, and that fits this generation that is coming in because those that have grown up in the 2000's have known only instant gratification.
So to say others are hard to trust because they are having to make hard decisions is in my opinion the crux of the issue.
(0)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
SPC Todd Fitzgerald
I'm suggesting it's a possibility. I don't know you or anyone else in this situation, so I can't make a character judgment on your ethical values. I do know from experience that many soldiers who I have thought had strong ethical values, will not uphold these values when things get heated and it could negatively impact their future. It's a situation that I'm trying to educate soldiers in Hawaii as we speak.
The command climate out here is horrendous, yet when I ask these soldiers about their battle buddies they claim some of them are really good people. I’m of the opinion that good people would not let toxic behaviors exist unopposed. The fact that no one is willing to stand up and speak the truth to ignite change, makes their values questionable to me. I am the only one fighting my command to obey regulations and treat their troops fairly, yet I know these issues involve the vast majority of my command. I see these people as cowards, and yes I question their ethical and moral values. I question a lot of people’s values, because if they actually lived those values they would be doing more about the injustices in our military. I’ve been given a negative counseling based solely on an NCO’s imagination so she could enforce ‘corrective action’. I’ve been given a negative counseling for talking to a chaplain about an illegal order from another NCO. I’ve been refused attendance at the promotion board without a regulation-based justification. I’ve seen my battle buddies suffer and die around me because of the immoral actions and abuse of power of many leaders in the military. IG does nothing, EO does nothing, and the command does nothing. They act like they have values when someone is looking, and our leaders choose to remain ignorant. So yes, I ‘m calling out anyone and everyone on a public forum and questioning their values, because I have found more reasons to question them then to blindly assume they have values.
@MAJ Trey Guy
Infer all you want, you would be incorrect. I have many reasons for not trusting leaders; however, most of my reasons are based on my personal experiences throughout my military career. I spoke about benefits being cut, because all soldiers can relate to that not that it is the sole cause or reason for my lack of trust. I do know many soldiers that depend on some of these benefits, and for them this is a huge issue. What concerns me most about military benefits is what is written in my service contract. If something in my contract is revoked or minimized that would deeply affect my trust, because the military would not be upholding their end of the contract. In my opinion that makes a contract void. Most military benefits are not outlined in a service contract, so we can not insist we are obligated to recieve those benefits.
I'm suggesting it's a possibility. I don't know you or anyone else in this situation, so I can't make a character judgment on your ethical values. I do know from experience that many soldiers who I have thought had strong ethical values, will not uphold these values when things get heated and it could negatively impact their future. It's a situation that I'm trying to educate soldiers in Hawaii as we speak.
The command climate out here is horrendous, yet when I ask these soldiers about their battle buddies they claim some of them are really good people. I’m of the opinion that good people would not let toxic behaviors exist unopposed. The fact that no one is willing to stand up and speak the truth to ignite change, makes their values questionable to me. I am the only one fighting my command to obey regulations and treat their troops fairly, yet I know these issues involve the vast majority of my command. I see these people as cowards, and yes I question their ethical and moral values. I question a lot of people’s values, because if they actually lived those values they would be doing more about the injustices in our military. I’ve been given a negative counseling based solely on an NCO’s imagination so she could enforce ‘corrective action’. I’ve been given a negative counseling for talking to a chaplain about an illegal order from another NCO. I’ve been refused attendance at the promotion board without a regulation-based justification. I’ve seen my battle buddies suffer and die around me because of the immoral actions and abuse of power of many leaders in the military. IG does nothing, EO does nothing, and the command does nothing. They act like they have values when someone is looking, and our leaders choose to remain ignorant. So yes, I ‘m calling out anyone and everyone on a public forum and questioning their values, because I have found more reasons to question them then to blindly assume they have values.
@MAJ Trey Guy
Infer all you want, you would be incorrect. I have many reasons for not trusting leaders; however, most of my reasons are based on my personal experiences throughout my military career. I spoke about benefits being cut, because all soldiers can relate to that not that it is the sole cause or reason for my lack of trust. I do know many soldiers that depend on some of these benefits, and for them this is a huge issue. What concerns me most about military benefits is what is written in my service contract. If something in my contract is revoked or minimized that would deeply affect my trust, because the military would not be upholding their end of the contract. In my opinion that makes a contract void. Most military benefits are not outlined in a service contract, so we can not insist we are obligated to recieve those benefits.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It comes as no surprise to me. When US troops are ordered to take part in unlawful combat operations and the JCS doesn't step in to refuse the C-in-C's unlawful orders until he makes them lawful by getting Congressional authorization under the Constitution's Article I and the War Powers Act, why would the troops trust their Generals and Admirals? A perfect example of this was operations over Libya and whatever SAR and SF troops we may have had on the ground. We all took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Putting career over lawfulness is neither supporting nor defending it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google