To what extent does one tolerate divisive rhetoric and dissension within the ranks?

CW2 (Join to see) - I don't know what your specific situation is, Mr. Sweesy, so i am speaking out of turn. But, among other things, if this wasn't a problem for you in the last 8 years, you either weren't privy to similar attitudes about Obama or chose to ignore them. My estimate from far outside the loop is that these expressed attitudes are nothing more than people letting off steam which will pass.

My personal standards were focused on unit performance. The polarization that this current season reveals is a deliberate political strategy to achieve exactly what you are seeing, but is has been going on, propelled by political operatives i associate with the Conservative movement, for 30 years and there is little more to it than that. I let a lot of stuff slide because it wasn't important. One benefit was that I personally and single handedly defused a racial situation because the Black troops involved trusted me in the moment and let it slide.

That pretty well satisfied my standards.

1LT Tom Wilson - Tom I agree. This too shall pass. Focus should be placed on unit cohesion outside of the political realm.

1LT Tom Wilson - As you stated, you've been out of the loop for awhile. I've seen and been privy to many things but badmouthing our CiC was not one of them. No need to make this a racial issue unless you see it as a problem. People are so quick to go there. It does not affect me any so

I didn't mean to make a connection between Obama and this particular incident in Vietnam, but if you fail to make the racial connection between Obama and the Conservative agenda for the last 8 years, you've been obtuse.

Lighten up, Francis!

I have no idea who Francis is. Your response does nothing to answer the questioned posed.

PFC Aaron Cox - he is referring to a line in the Bill Murrey John Candy movie STRIPS, but it is a well founded question rooted in history. Every President has done something that was not popular at one point or another. I think he was referring to the question that the Wermarch had to ask themselves in the 30s as well. at what point do you know that the boss has gone off the reservation and it becomes your duty to protect the people of the country, which, in the end is our ultimate responsibility and tasking. In 1945/6 the Nurnburg trials put the "just following orders" defense to rest for all times, in that, we were charged with knowing right from wrong, knowing that there comes a time in which we are obligated to disregard unlawful orders. Now we (the US Military) never really needed to have these spelled out because we are supposed to be free thinkers and know down in our guts right from wrong. And for the most part it has served us pretty well over the years. Not saying that we do not have our failings, but even those are ultimately handled pretty well (Me Lai is the prime example, an understandable if illegal response to the situation that resulted in prison for LT Calley) (apologies if I misspelled the LTs name) a prison sentence that he recently compleated a few years ago.
But again, it is a legitimate question that we are constantly tasked with asking ourselves as leaders within our military, because ultimately and in fact we do have that power, but you need to balance it against the charge of mutiny or sedition if we are wrong which I believe is a top tier Capitol offence with the Death Penalty a very real outcome if one were to fail or be wrong. Also consider that UNpopular and wrong are 2 very different terms that need to be understood, just as popular and right are different. At the beginning the round up of the Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals we VERY popular in Germany, but it was still WRONG, Schindler knew this and did what he could within his control to do the RIGHT thing and save as many as he could, Von Stauffenburg did what he could because it was the morally right thing to do and paid the ultimate price for his beliefs. Even though these men were the "enemy" we still hold them as Hero's because they did the Right thing that was not popular at the time. Now they were during a War of survival and had to take extreme measures, we are (currently) not in a war for survival (and yes it could be debated but it has not been declared) so our choices are much more limited (remember mutiny and sedition). As serving members we have 2 real choices, serve with Honor doing what you know is right, or, if you disagree with the sitting President strongly enough, then leave, finish your tour as enlisted and not reup, or if an Officer, put in your Resignation letter and get out (after serving you mandatory time). We are not conscripted, we are not held against our will with a gun to our families head, we have that choice. But remember, Choice and Freedom are not free, if you take them up, you also have Responsibility that comes as part of both and you cannot escape the consequences of what follows. Remember, all of our good to great leaders have lead from the front. they pick their course and stick with it, taking advice and altering the course when warrented, but they have reached for the GOAL what ever it was that was in front of them.
Just my 2 cents to consider

There is answer.