Politics

[mdwest]

Do you find something wrong with the diversity? I didn't get the point of this post.

DEI is not simply "diversity" DEI is a policy of "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion".. which sounds on the surface like it would be something positive/good..

The problem is when you start looking at how DEI has been applied and even demanded to be executed.. there is little about it that is equitable or inclusive.. it intentionally gives "extra" consideration to some people, and less consideration to others..

Where DEI goes wrong is when it is used to force "diversity" as a priority over competence and experience...

DEI is a proven flawed/failed strategy.. large, liberal investment firms like Blackrock have driven more companies off a cliff than can be counted by demanding DEI commitments that are simply ridiculous and nonsensical.. but meet your numbers and obtain the proper rating.. OR ELSE!

I knew the business world was headed for a shit storm far worse than its been through previously when I attended a program at Univ of Penn's Wharton School a few years back.. titled "Boards that Lead"...

The purpose of the course was to provide information to board members of large scale companies, as well as would be board members hoping to transition from executive roles into board positions about critical decisions boards should be making, where boards should be focusing their strategic efforts for next several years, etc..

I can summarize the entirety of the curriculum, taught by what many consider to be the best business school on the planet, in a single paragraph..

If you want to be successful as a board, you must hire more LBGTQ+, and you must hire more minorities, and you must hire more women, even if they lack experience, lack knowledge, and lack skills. These people will bring diverse thinking to the table. Which is more valuable to you than knowledge, skills, and experience.

A complete load of horseshit..

So much a load of horseshit, the COO of Grindr, the LBGTQ+ online dating app/website who was among the student group even got frustrated with the team of lecturers and started calling them out for their absolutely ridiculous statements..

If all things are otherwise equal.. youve got 2x Harvard MBA's sitting in front of you, both with 10 years of industry experience, both with proven track records of success... would hiring the guy/gal that is a hindu rather than a baptist be the better call? or would hiring the openly gay guy/gal be the better call?

perhaps? MAYBE there is an argument for diversity in that case.. certainly having a diverse group of people that look at a complex problem differently and potentially come up with new/different solutions is a good thing...

But does that demanded diversity meet your corporate culture requirements? Is this person actually going to benefit your business? Or are they going to be a detriment?
Who here thinks hiring Dylan Mulvaney to be the face of an advertising campaign for Bud Light was a smart business decision?

When youve got a Harvard MBA with 10 years experience and a proven track record of success who happens to be a 35 year old white male Christian... and a HS educated, 2 years of experience, only moderately successful person who happens to be a black female lesbian atheist to chose from..

the choice is clear...

yet.. much of society.. to include the military on many accounts... is making the exact opposite choice.. because Blackrock, George Soros, MSNBC, and the Wharton School (among others) have told them thats the right thing to do..

You'd hope senior executives in major corporations, flag officers in the military, and SES employees in government would have enough balls to stand up and demand that their organizations do the right thing as opposed to allowing their organizations fall victim to yet another social experiment.. that they would want the highest possible performance from their people, and be completely blind to what color, sex, age, race, religion, etc.. anyone is... the only question that really needs to be asked is.. "is this person the best person available for the mission at hand?"...

but clearly in many cases they do not..

 

[Tundra Tiger]

@mdwest

"If you want to be successful as a board, you must hire more LBGTQ+, and you must hire more minorities, and you must hire more women, even if they lack experience, lack knowledge, and lack skills. These people will bring diverse thinking to the table. Which is more valuable to you than knowledge, skills, and experience."

Just... freaking... WOW.

"A complete load of horseshit.."

Thank you sir, for that astute assessment. I can quit reading anything online today because I simply will not read anything more true.

 

[Tanks]

@Red Leg can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the military has been at the forefront of diversity before it was a thing for many decades. Obviously, it had not affected readiness in the past.

Yes, recruitment videos have gotten a bit nuts in order to appeal to the TikTok generation.

 

[Doubleplay]

@Doubleplay ... I did (got his point). Diversity? Nothing wrong with it. Making it the focus of hiring? Absolutely an issue.

Maybe the runway overshoot was coincidental. Maybe it was the result of utilizing people who did not have the requisite skills, in the name of satisfying some other criterion.

Flying in military is a serious job.
No one will lower standards for that job diversity or not.
Yes the standards are lowered for recruiting but not for pilot training and the ones who are not qualified will wash out.
Also we don't know who was the pilot in command or what were the circumstances during the incident.
Our military is the best organization in this country as far as diversity and secularity.
As a father of an active duty officer this kind of posts rubs me the wrong way and I'll leave it at that.

 

[mdwest]

@Red Leg can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the military has been at the forefront of diversity before it was a thing for many decades. Obviously, it had not affected readiness in the past.

Yes, recruitment videos have gotten a bit nuts in order to appeal to the TikTok generation.

Its having incredible negative impact right now..

recruitment is a problem..

but it pales in comparison to retention..

junior NCOs and company grade officers are leaving military service at an alarming rate.. with a significant number of them specifically citing DEI policies as the cause (they cant effectively lead, cant effectively train, cant effectively reward, cant effectively punish/hold accountable, etc..etc.. because of all of the DEI policy in place that prevents/prohibits it.. and the fact that their careers will be damaged if they tried..

 

[WAB]

How many die before the Russian population has had enough!?!

 

[PARA45]

@Red Leg can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the military has been at the forefront of diversity before it was a thing for many decades. Obviously, it had not affected readiness in the past.

Yes, recruitment videos have gotten a bit nuts in order to appeal to the TikTok generation.

I've seen the cluster phuck this has caused and continues to cause in the AF. Here is one example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Jones_(politician)

He sucked as a pilot, he was dangerous in the air, no one wanted to fly with him, and messed up the F-16 speed breaks on three separate landings. He was finally grounded.

 

[mdwest]

As a father of an active duty officer this kind of posts rubs me the wrong way and I'll leave it at that.

As a former military officer, DEI and all that it is doing to damage our military rubs me the wrong way..

I'd be willing to bet my next check that the vast majority of those that are active on this forum, that have served in any capacity (officer or NCO) in the last 20 years.. would be in rabid agreement with my position..

I work with the military daily.. and am personally witnessing (daily) things deteriorate..

Are we still the most powerful and capable fighting force in the world? absolutely...

Are we as good as we could be, or even should be? sadly, no...

And when the military isnt as good as it could be.. people get hurt, die, etc.. unnecessarily.... whether we can win a war or not becomes inconsequential.... LOTS of people sustain lifelong injuries and/or die every year in the military... its a dangerous job.. and for some, its a lot more dangerous than others..

Putting policy in place that encourages a greater degree of injury/death.. because its more important to have diversity rather than competence.. should offend you as the father of an actively serving officer (its his life that is at greater risk)..

Is this something "new"? no.. not really... in the 90's numerous white/male captains got passed over for promotion simply because they were white males... Togo West, the then Secretary of the Army got caught pulling highly qualified white males off the promotion list and replacing them with less qualified black males.. because "diversity!"... ultimately some people at PERSCOM did the right thing, ratted him out, and provided indisputable proof of what had been occurring.. and those that got passed over got their promotions (albeit 6 months late)..

DEI just gives people like Togo West the ability to do it now.. and get away with it...

 

[Doubleplay]

As a former military officer, DEI and all that it is doing to damage our military rubs me the wrong way..

I'd be willing to bet my next check that the vast majority of those that are active on this forum, that have served in any capacity (officer or NCO) in the last 20 years.. would be in rabid agreement with my position..

I work with the military daily.. and am personally witnessing (daily) things deteriorate..

Are we still the most powerful and capable fighting force in the world? absolutely...

Are we as good as we could be, or even should be? sadly, no...

And when the military isnt as good as it could be.. people get hurt, die, etc.. unnecessarily.... whether we can win a war or not becomes inconsequential.... LOTS of people sustain lifelong injuries and/or die every year in the military... its a dangerous job.. and for some, its a lot more dangerous than others..

Putting policy in place that encourages a greater degree of injury/death.. because its more important to have diversity rather than competence.. should offend you as the father of an actively serving officer (its his life that is at greater risk)..

Is this something "new"? no.. not really... in the 90's numerous white/male captains got passed over for promotion simply because they were white males... Togo West, the then Secretary of the Army got caught pulling highly qualified white males off the promotion list and replacing them with less qualified black males.. because "diversity!"... ultimately some people at PERSCOM did the right thing, ratted him out, and provided indisputable proof of what had been occurring.. and those that got passed over got their promotions (albeit 6 months late)..

DEI just gives people like Togo West the ability to do it now.. and get away with it...

I did not bring my personal credentials into discussion as being a father to a service member is more important to me than being a former military officer.
Having said that the reason the post rubs me the wrong way is the stereo typing a certain group and trying to relate it to an accident which he knows nothing about.
I'm from a different era but I'm aware of the issues the current policies are causing in our military but the post is unfairly targeting a certain minority group and gender!

 

[Red Leg]

Flying in military is a serious job.
No one will lower standards for that job diversity or not.
Yes the standards are lowered for recruiting but not for pilot training and the ones who are not qualified will wash out.
Also we don't know who was the pilot in command or what were the circumstances during the incident.
Our military is the best organization in this country as far as diversity and secularity.
As a father of an active duty officer this kind of posts rubs me the wrong way and I'll leave it at that.

@Red Leg can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the military has been at the forefront of diversity before it was a thing for many decades. Obviously, it had not affected readiness in the past.

Yes, recruitment videos have gotten a bit nuts in order to appeal to the TikTok generation.

The military has been in the vanguard with respect to "inclusion" since Truman presidency - but not in the way people think about it in woke world. The military has been and still is a meritocracy. Even at the height of affirmative action (sort of like wokism with a plan) promotions were based upon merit. They continue to be based upon merit. That doesn't mean that the military hasn't worked hard to open opportunity to anyone regardless of what identifiers they may chose or, more importantly, may be dictated to them by our bureaucracy. For instance, women flying combat aircraft is an important fairly new opportunity for women in all the services. But none of that effort is designed to dictate outcomes and none of them are being promoted because of their gender.

Today, the leadership struggles more so than at any point since integration which was a generally very positive thing, to placate the demands of their elected masters. It often sounds nonsensical in testimony, or seem ridiculous in a recruiting video approved by a political appointee, but no promotion board has an alphabet quota list driving outcomes. Generally speaking, few people, even the most devoted social engineers, really want their son or daughter led in combat by someone promoted by quota. The return of more traditional recruiting efforts hopefully signals a return to some level of common sense.

as far as diversity and secularity

I have no clue what "secularity" is intended to mean in this sentence. Every battalion in the United States Army has a chaplain assigned to it. They play a daily, important, and supportive role in the lives of those soldiers and families - particularly during an age of combat deployments. Every notification team for a fallen soldier includes an Army chaplain. When I retired, there were approximately 3,000 in the US Army alone representing all denominations and faiths, though the vast majority are Christian. I would argue the armed forces are one of the few places in our country where the traditional relationship between belief and governmental service have survived much to the benefit of those who have chosen to serve.

 

[mdwest]

completely understand your position.. I sincerely do...

Im just saying that I absolutely cherish everything about my military service... while there were absolutely things less than perfect about the army when I was in... I could never repay the service for all that it provided me.. when people tell me "thank you for your service", the first thing that comes to my mind is I should be thanking the service for allowing me to be a part of it... No matter how hard I tried I could never put in as much as I was able to get out of being a soldier..

so.. it saddens me that I feel incredibly thankful and grateful that none of my kids have sought out a commission or enlisted..

20 years ago, despite all of its warts, I would have highly encouraged any/all of them to seek out a career in the military if they showed any interest at all.. the Army/Navy/USAF/USMC will never be perfect.. but it had the potential to be a wonderful place to spend a career for a lot of people then...

Today, I am watching close friends kids who did choose to join (one was just promoted to 1LT yesterday.. to the armys credit they actually did an excellent job with his promotion ceremony)... all bemoaning that the military they grew up in (their fathers were all officers or SNCO) isnt the military they are serving in today.. and to my knowledge none of them.. not a single one.. intends on staying long enough to retire.. one, a senior CPT dropped his paperwork a couple of weeks ago.. he will ETS in February.. he is over the hump.. 12 years in.. and would rather leave than have to deal with the insanity for another 8 years to reach retirement.. .

Sadly I think that is very telling... and its not something that can be fixed in a short period of time... its going to take years of reversing out of the lunacy and retraining the NCO and officer corps to make things work the way they should again.. .

I hope your son, if he choses to stay until retirement, gets to be part of helping the military fix itself.. (although admittedly the USMC seems to be the least impacted by all the DEI craziness... theyre getting a taste of it here and there as well)...

 

[Tundra Tiger]

Flying in military is a serious job.
No one will lower standards for that job diversity or not.
Yes the standards are lowered for recruiting but not for pilot training and the ones who are not qualified will wash out.
Also we don't know who was the pilot in command or what were the circumstances during the incident.
Our military is the best organization in this country as far as diversity and secularity.
As a father of an active duty officer this kind of posts rubs me the wrong way and I'll leave it at that.

As a dad myself, I respect your right to feel the way you do sir. And I believe Wheels said we don't know anything about the specifics of this incident, but the way I read his post, the Air Force celebrated a "diversity win" for this specific type of aircraft, so mathematically I get the point of/connection to what he was trying to say.

 

[Doubleplay]

completely understand your position.. I sincerely do...

Im just saying that I absolutely cherish everything about my military service... while there were absolutely things less than perfect about the army when I was in... I could never repay the service for all that it provided me.. when people tell me "thank you for your service", the first thing that comes to my mind is I should be thanking the service for allowing me to be a part of it... No matter how hard I tried I could never put in as much as I was able to get out of being a soldier..

so.. it saddens me that I feel incredibly thankful and grateful that none of my kids have sought out a commission or enlisted..

20 years ago, despite all of its warts, I would have highly encouraged any/all of them to seek out a career in the military if they showed any interest at all.. the Army/Navy/USAF/USMC will never be perfect.. but it had the potential to be a wonderful place to spend a career for a lot of people then...

Today, I am watching close friends kids who did choose to join (one was just promoted to 1LT yesterday.. to the armys credit they actually did an excellent job with his promotion ceremony)... all bemoaning that the military they grew up in (their fathers were all officers or SNCO) isnt the military they are serving in today.. and to my knowledge none of them.. not a single one.. intends on staying long enough to retire.. one, a senior CPT dropped his paperwork a couple of weeks ago.. he will ETS in February.. he is over the hump.. 12 years in.. and would rather leave than have to deal with the insanity for another 8 years to reach retirement.. .

Sadly I think that is very telling... and its not something that can be fixed in a short period of time... its going to take years of reversing out of the lunacy and retraining the NCO and officer corps to make things work the way they should again.. .

I hope your son, if he choses to stay until retirement, gets to be part of helping the military fix itself.. (although admittedly the USMC seems to be the least impacted by all the DEI craziness... theyre getting a taste of it here and there as well)...

Thanks.
My son is an 05 0202 with the marines and have two years to hit the magic 20.
Although he got multiple very lucrative offers throughout his career he loves whet he does and probably will stay as long as he can.

 

[mark-hunter]

Do you find something wrong with the diversity? I didn't get the point of this post.

It depends of reasons why a diverse team is created.
The reason how a diverse team is created makes it right or wrong.

I work on international company.
Job can vaguely be described as "challenging job in international environment", a standard HR phrase.
So, yes, it's diverse.

But:
When employees are basically recruited from all over the World, and just because of cheap labor available in third world countries then it does not guarantee quality labor, nor does it make high performance team.

I hope I managed to put it in politically correct terms.

For case in question (P8 downing), I cannot say anything as I dont know the details.

 

[Ray B]

My son is an 05 0202 with the marines and have two years to hit the magic 20.

Oh my, another dad of a lifer'n A-hole.

and for @Red Leg how many general's got their star for sending troops on meaningless suicide missions to increase their promotion review stats?

 

[John Wasmuth]

To many people living in fantasy island if their not seeing the destruction of the military from the inside out…….

 

[Red Leg]

Oh my, another dad of a lifer'n A-hole.

and for @Red Leg how many general's got their star for sending troops on meaningless suicide missions to increase their promotion review stats?

I wouldn’t know. Though Chesty Puller might offer an example.

Odd response to a proud father. I personally celebrate his son’s service. I hope you were trying to be humorous.

 

[Ray B]

Chesty Puller wasn't the flag officer who demanded the battle of Peleliu (to secure an imaginary flank)- it was the guy who a few years later ordered soldier in summer uniforms to pursue North Koreans into a Winter whiteout and a Chinese ambush.

and I have had my issues addressed, at least I recognize the issues as opposed to those who are in denial.

 

[WAB]

Oh my, another dad of a lifer'n A-hole.

and for @Red Leg how many general's got their star for sending troops on meaningless suicide missions to increase their promotion review stats?

This post is wildly inappropriate. I for one am thankful for those willing to serve.

 

[mdwest]

I'll echo @Red Leg .. I applaud @Doubleplay 's sons commitment to service.. this is not an easy time to be a field grade leader in the military.. between the RIF, a shift in focus from asymmetric warfare to near peer conflicts, the DEI challenges noted above, and everything else senior leaders traditionally have to deal with, I'd venture a guess that being a good leader of Marines in this day in age is significantly harder than it was when I served (which was also during a RIF).

While I never came close to reaching general officer rank, I have had numerous former general officers that I have worked along side as peers, and an even greater number on my firms payroll in subordinate positions, and have over the years worked directly for a couple as their direct reports..

I'd offer that while some general officers are far more politically motivated and career advancement focused than they should be, and that some build reputations for being the antithesis of good leaders.. the vast majority that I have known, worked with, have had work for me, etc over the years are far more like Sam Damon than they are like Courtney Massengale (if you havent read Once an Eagle by Anton Myrer, I strongly recommend it. An excellent book, and a genuinely good read.. but also gives a lot of insight on the key differences between officers who place duty, honor, country, and the welfare of their men above themselves vs those who get to their goals by being great at playing the political game and making the right connections throughout their careers)..

Sure there are some turds that make their way into the punchbowl.. thats true of every career field however.. there are rotten doctors.. terrible attorneys.. despicable CEOs.. etc.. rotten humans exist out there that will take advantage of others for their own self gain.. hell.. I'd be willing to bet there are some narcissistic, horrible people among the membership here.. there are far too many members for that to not be the case... the military is no exception to that rule..

But I'd offer that as a rule the military does a pretty decent job of weeding out most (but certainly not all), before they reach flag officer rank..