4
4
0
What if you found out your Platoon Commander was a dope smoking college dropout that submitted forged documents to enter the military. On the outside, he looks like a model infantry officer, but it also has been your observation that your Platoon Commander is lazy, forgetful, and inept (can't read a map) and he relies heavily on his SNCO's to think for him... you being one of them.
You inform your Commanding Officer and he tells you there's nothing he can do about it because the Platoon Commander's father is a high ranking Senator on the Senate Armed Services Committee. The Senator had been the target of allegations of corruption and the General who leaked word of his corruption to the press was relieved and forced into retirement. Shortly after retiring, the General was the unfortunate victim of a home invasion in which his wife and daughter were brutally murdered. Coincidence?
Your Commanding Officer is worried about his career and doesn't want to make waves that could adversely impact his family or chances for promotion. He forbids you to bring the matter up again -- with ANYONE!
Your Platoon Commander finds out you told your Commanding Officer and calls you into his office. He chews you out and promises to gives you a career ending mediocre fitness report if you tell anyone else what you know... and it appears your Commanding Officer has been threatened in some way. Your Commanding Officer is clearly intimidated and refuses to do anything about it.
Your unit is preparing to deploy overseas and could be in combat. What do you do?
You inform your Commanding Officer and he tells you there's nothing he can do about it because the Platoon Commander's father is a high ranking Senator on the Senate Armed Services Committee. The Senator had been the target of allegations of corruption and the General who leaked word of his corruption to the press was relieved and forced into retirement. Shortly after retiring, the General was the unfortunate victim of a home invasion in which his wife and daughter were brutally murdered. Coincidence?
Your Commanding Officer is worried about his career and doesn't want to make waves that could adversely impact his family or chances for promotion. He forbids you to bring the matter up again -- with ANYONE!
Your Platoon Commander finds out you told your Commanding Officer and calls you into his office. He chews you out and promises to gives you a career ending mediocre fitness report if you tell anyone else what you know... and it appears your Commanding Officer has been threatened in some way. Your Commanding Officer is clearly intimidated and refuses to do anything about it.
Your unit is preparing to deploy overseas and could be in combat. What do you do?
Posted in these groups: 
Ethics
Ethics
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 35
2
2
0
Capt Jeff Schwager - Well when your unit gets to the combat zone the problem may solve itself.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Movie plot? This sounds like an excerpt from a Nelson DeMille novel (except for the part about not reading a map, which could describe a fair number of LTs). If you have evidence that can be substantiated please feel free to contact your local CID office.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I'd say continue to write this story and sell it to Hollywood! I'd pay to see it for sure! Nepotism and corruption at it's finest!!
(2)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SMSgt (Join to see)
I fully understand your plight Sir. I wouldn't want to write a manuscript like this either. This is an embarrassment to our Military and I can't believe that this kind of thing would ever happen especially in my beloved Corps! It sickens me that we could ever allow that type of corruption. I truly feel for your Marines that have to endure that type of leadership, but understand that this sounds like a classic case of the 10 percenters!!
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
You do what you were trained to do. You lead your troops and ensure their safety and other needs are met while you accomplish your mission. You did what you needed to do by reporting it. Don't get involved in Officer politics, your troops will suffer for it.
There are things a Senior NCO can do outside the chain of command that I won't mention here, but Plt. Sgt's run their platoons, not the Plt. Ldr. Usually a shave tail 2nd LT or a very junior 1st Lt. You focus on the mission and let the politics play out.
I was once told that if you stay in the military long enough you will eventually work for an asshole. It's true.
There are things a Senior NCO can do outside the chain of command that I won't mention here, but Plt. Sgt's run their platoons, not the Plt. Ldr. Usually a shave tail 2nd LT or a very junior 1st Lt. You focus on the mission and let the politics play out.
I was once told that if you stay in the military long enough you will eventually work for an asshole. It's true.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Find an AK in country and at the appropriate high stress moment apply some blue on blue. There are some scum in positions of power, that because of their character and actions, are going to cost many honest hard working innocents their lives. It has happened many times before (RVN fragging). I do not actually condone this as it has led to murderous retribution for petty reasons.....but for the truly dangerously incompetent, after all other avenues have been explored and failed...........
(2)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
I hear what you're saying, but the answer I was looking for was more along the lines of report him up the chain and if the chain isn't working, bypass the chain if you have to and go higher until somebody listens.
Edward Snowden did precisely that. That's a whole other discussion as to whether he is a patriot or not, but he knew that if he reported what the Administration was doing, that nothing would happen and that he likely would get fired out of retribution, so instead, he leaked information which alerted the public to the abuses they were being subjected to by the gov't (loss of privacy, warrantless snooping, information collected by gov't agencies used to target opposition, etc.). He knew it would end his life as a free man and that people would try to kill him for exposing the truth and he did it anyway. Again, we can argue about his motives and whether he did the right thing, but I do understand what was troubling him, and why he did what he did.
Edward Snowden did precisely that. That's a whole other discussion as to whether he is a patriot or not, but he knew that if he reported what the Administration was doing, that nothing would happen and that he likely would get fired out of retribution, so instead, he leaked information which alerted the public to the abuses they were being subjected to by the gov't (loss of privacy, warrantless snooping, information collected by gov't agencies used to target opposition, etc.). He knew it would end his life as a free man and that people would try to kill him for exposing the truth and he did it anyway. Again, we can argue about his motives and whether he did the right thing, but I do understand what was troubling him, and why he did what he did.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Since he cant read a map I'm assuming your talking about Capt Sobel from Band of Brothers. Solution is to have all NCOs quit, face possible death by treason before D-Day, and have him transfer to a CONUS for a jump school for docs. Also you need a Lt Winters around to make the NCOs do that...
(2)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
Ha ha. I don't watch a lot of movies, so I really don't know what you are referring to... but it sounds good anyway.
I was trying to make parallels so I'll just cut to the chaste:
You = We The People
When the Tea Party challenged Obama's eligiblity he could have cleared everything up by presenting the information they requested and all would have been good. But he didn't. Why? Instead of granting their reasonable request, he obfuscated and delayed, and systematically destroyed evidence of his wrongdoing so that he could get elected. Once elected Obama also launched an Alinsky style campaign of ridicule, labeling those who questioned him "Birthers" hoping to shame them into giving up. His Administration used other labels such as racist and domestic terrorist to describe those who embrace the vision of our Founding Fathers and oppose his socialist transformation of our Constitutional Republic. Obama has abused his power, even directing "his" gov't agencies to keep his detractors suppressed. He desperately wants to keep the public distracted from knowing the truth about him and fears impeachment. Those who investigate and discover too much get taken out of the equation.
LT = President Obama
Lying and misrepresenting appear to be an obsession with Obama. Liberals like to portray him as some kind of intelligent guy with Messiah-like qualities... If he's so intelligent, why won't he make public his grades in school? There's no reason for that... unless of course he has something to hide -- like the TRUTH! Records show he has used several aliases, yet he stated he had no aliases when he applied to the Illinois Bar. Is this why he let his license to practice law lapse? (Both Clintons have kept and maintained theirs.) Furthermore, he is currently using a Connecticut SSN despite never having lived there, and this SSN was previously issued to someone else. That is not supposed to happen. Multiple SSNs have been linked to Obama's multiple aliases. These things should raise flags. Personally, I prefer to deal with people who are who they say they are, and who say what they mean, and mean what they say.
Unfortunately, when Obama addresses America and his lips are moving, I find myself constantly asking, "Is he telling the truth?" In a perfect world, I wouldn't have to ask that question. If Obama had established a reputation for honesty, we wouldn't be asking that question.
Commanding Officer = Congress
Our Founding Fathers gave us a provision in the Constitution called Separation of Powers. It is a system of Checks and Balances that allows our government to ferret out corruption but it is not foolproof. Our Founding Fathers had to make the assumption that the people we elect would be moral men of upright and noble character and that they would conduct themselves with honor and integrity. IF they aren't, it all breaks down. Our gov't with these provisions can ferret out corruption if the problem is nipped in the bud early, but if it's not and corruption spreads itself in multiple branches of government, there are no more checks and balances to keep corruption in check. We are there now. If one more Progressive justice is appointed to the Supreme Court, it is going to change the court from Conservative to Progressive. We have a progressive Executive consolidating power to itself and bypassing Congress, legislating by Executive Order and "Prosecutorial Discression" < which is just another way of saying, "We aren't going to enforce laws we don't agree with." But that isn't the job of the Executive. It is supposed to faithfully and diligently execute the law as it is legislated by Congress. The Executive can Veto, but if overridden, it can't decide to just not enforce the law.
So if the Executive is out of control, why isn't Congress doing it's job to investigate the allegations of corruption and ferret it out? With so many scandals and 76 lawless actions taken by this Administration according to Sen. Ted Cruz, including impeachable offenses, why does the pResident STILL have a job? The ONLY reason he does is because Congress hasn't been doing its job and We The People can only blame ourselves for not holding the feet of those we elect to the fire and holding them accountable for their actions.
I was trying to make parallels so I'll just cut to the chaste:
You = We The People
When the Tea Party challenged Obama's eligiblity he could have cleared everything up by presenting the information they requested and all would have been good. But he didn't. Why? Instead of granting their reasonable request, he obfuscated and delayed, and systematically destroyed evidence of his wrongdoing so that he could get elected. Once elected Obama also launched an Alinsky style campaign of ridicule, labeling those who questioned him "Birthers" hoping to shame them into giving up. His Administration used other labels such as racist and domestic terrorist to describe those who embrace the vision of our Founding Fathers and oppose his socialist transformation of our Constitutional Republic. Obama has abused his power, even directing "his" gov't agencies to keep his detractors suppressed. He desperately wants to keep the public distracted from knowing the truth about him and fears impeachment. Those who investigate and discover too much get taken out of the equation.
LT = President Obama
Lying and misrepresenting appear to be an obsession with Obama. Liberals like to portray him as some kind of intelligent guy with Messiah-like qualities... If he's so intelligent, why won't he make public his grades in school? There's no reason for that... unless of course he has something to hide -- like the TRUTH! Records show he has used several aliases, yet he stated he had no aliases when he applied to the Illinois Bar. Is this why he let his license to practice law lapse? (Both Clintons have kept and maintained theirs.) Furthermore, he is currently using a Connecticut SSN despite never having lived there, and this SSN was previously issued to someone else. That is not supposed to happen. Multiple SSNs have been linked to Obama's multiple aliases. These things should raise flags. Personally, I prefer to deal with people who are who they say they are, and who say what they mean, and mean what they say.
Unfortunately, when Obama addresses America and his lips are moving, I find myself constantly asking, "Is he telling the truth?" In a perfect world, I wouldn't have to ask that question. If Obama had established a reputation for honesty, we wouldn't be asking that question.
Commanding Officer = Congress
Our Founding Fathers gave us a provision in the Constitution called Separation of Powers. It is a system of Checks and Balances that allows our government to ferret out corruption but it is not foolproof. Our Founding Fathers had to make the assumption that the people we elect would be moral men of upright and noble character and that they would conduct themselves with honor and integrity. IF they aren't, it all breaks down. Our gov't with these provisions can ferret out corruption if the problem is nipped in the bud early, but if it's not and corruption spreads itself in multiple branches of government, there are no more checks and balances to keep corruption in check. We are there now. If one more Progressive justice is appointed to the Supreme Court, it is going to change the court from Conservative to Progressive. We have a progressive Executive consolidating power to itself and bypassing Congress, legislating by Executive Order and "Prosecutorial Discression" < which is just another way of saying, "We aren't going to enforce laws we don't agree with." But that isn't the job of the Executive. It is supposed to faithfully and diligently execute the law as it is legislated by Congress. The Executive can Veto, but if overridden, it can't decide to just not enforce the law.
So if the Executive is out of control, why isn't Congress doing it's job to investigate the allegations of corruption and ferret it out? With so many scandals and 76 lawless actions taken by this Administration according to Sen. Ted Cruz, including impeachable offenses, why does the pResident STILL have a job? The ONLY reason he does is because Congress hasn't been doing its job and We The People can only blame ourselves for not holding the feet of those we elect to the fire and holding them accountable for their actions.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
This is not a ethical dilemma. This is a "what is the best way to bring this to the attention of the proper person dilemma". Your job is a to protect your people and it is a grave responsibility.
I am not going to assume this Lt. is/was Lt. Calley but a current serving officer. If you have a performance issue with a leader, you must deal with it. You cannot ignore it. You owe the men/women who have put their trust in you to make sure they have effective leadership. You are responsible for their very lives.
And never forget there is a big difference between leadership and management. These words are not interchangeable. Managers manage programs....leaders lead people. Which are you?
David
I am not going to assume this Lt. is/was Lt. Calley but a current serving officer. If you have a performance issue with a leader, you must deal with it. You cannot ignore it. You owe the men/women who have put their trust in you to make sure they have effective leadership. You are responsible for their very lives.
And never forget there is a big difference between leadership and management. These words are not interchangeable. Managers manage programs....leaders lead people. Which are you?
David
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Call the IG. After that, should the IG fail...perhaps an anonymous tip to the press, or to your own elected official...preferably an elected official of a different party of the platoon commander's dad.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Sounds like the case for a fragging. Can't do anything about him because of his political father and a commanding officer which has no backbone. Frag time!
(1)
(0)
SSG Genaro Negrete
The story sounds like a sub plot out of a tom clancy book. And your response sounds like the second act. haha. I'd read that book.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Adam Jennings
Lol, unfortunately I've heard too many stories of it happening back in Vietnam, Korea, and WWII. Don't know how true those stories are though.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Adam Jennings
Thanks for the confirmation, my grandfather told once, and only once, about an officer they had like this and a similar "incident" happening to him in WWII.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google