By Joseph on Friday, 16 July 2021
Category: Race, Culture, Nation

Diversity is the US Military’s Greatest Weapon! It Makes us Invincible! By Charles Taylor (Florida)

 

As an ex-US marine, I missed out on all the benefits that a diverse non-binary military can have as a supreme fighting force. It is not well known that diversity can repel even nuclear-armed hypersonic missiles, can detect the latest ultra-quiet Chinese subs, and gives the foot soldier, super-soldier like abilities, like Captain Diversity, if that is what Captain America has now become, but I am not sure on that one, but if Steve rogers is not transitioning, he should be. China better surrender now, because the Woke US military is the greatest fighting force in history, yes sir.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9783807/Navy-disarray-focusing-diversity-training-warfighting-report-says.html

“A scathing new report commissioned by members of Congress has claimed that the Navy's surface warfare forces have systemic training and leadership issues, including a focus on diversity that overshadows basic readiness skills.

The report prepared by Marine Lt. Gen. Robert Schmidle and Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, both retired, came in response to recent Naval disasters, including the burning of the USS Bonhomme Richard in San Diego, two collisions involving Navy ships in the Pacific and the surrender of two small craft to Iran.

The authors conducted hour-long interviews with 77 current and retired Navy officers, offering them anonymity to identify issues they wouldn't feel comfortable raising in the chain of command.

The report found that a staggering 94 percent of the subjects believed the recent Naval disasters were 'part of a broader problem in Navy culture or leadership.' 

'I guarantee you every unit in the Navy is up to speed on their diversity training. I'm sorry that I can't say the same of their ship handling training,' said one recently retired senior enlisted leader.

The report focused on issues within the Navy's surface warfare forces, as opposed to submarine and aviation, and suggested that issues in the surface fleet could be unique due to better funding and training for submarine and aviation units.

One of the key issues raised by the officers interviewed for the report was a concern that Navy leaders spend more time focusing on diversity training than on developing warfighting capacity and key operational skills.

'Sometimes I think we care more about whether we have enough diversity officers than if we'll survive a fight with the Chinese navy,' lamented one lieutenant currently on active duty. 

'It's criminal. They think my only value is as a black woman. But you cut our ship open with a missile and we'll all bleed the same color,' she added. 

One recent destroyer captain said: 'where someone puts their time shows what their priorities are. And we've got so many messages about X, Y, Z appreciation month, or sexual assault prevention, or you name it. We don't even have close to that same level of emphasis on actual warfighting.' 

'While programs to encourage diversity, human sex trafficking prevention, suicide prevention, sexual assault prevention, and others are appropriate, they come with a cost,' the report's authors wrote.

'The non-combat curricula consume Navy resources, clog inboxes, create administrative quagmires, and monopolize precious training time. By weighing down sailors with non-combat related training and administrative burdens, both Congress and Navy leaders risk sending them into battle less prepared and less focused than their opponents,' the report added.

Some of the respondents expressed concerns that when combat lethality and warfighting are emphasized, they are treated in a box-checking manner that can seem indistinguishable from non-combat related exercises. 

'The Navy treats warfighting readiness as a compliance issue,' said one career commander. 'You might even use the term compliance-centered warfare as opposed to adversary-centered warfare or warfighter-centered warfare.'

One junior surface warfare officer, still on active duty, confessed: 'I don't think that the [surface community] see themselves as people who are engaged in a fight.' 

Commander Bryan McGrath, a retired surface warfare officer who agreed to be interviewed on the record, notably dissented on the question of whether excess requirements were distracting sailors from their primary mission, argued that the main issue was was too few surface ships.

 '[The ships] are very busy,' he said. 'I think there are too few of them for what is being asked,' he argued. 'The operational requirements squeeze out maintenance, they squeeze out some training.' 

'When you're on the ship,' McGrath said, the 'sexual assault and victim stuff, all that stuff just seems like a burden. It just seems like it's never-ending…[But] the further I get from it, the more I understand why it's important and why there does have to be very clear signals sent to deck plate sailors that they're, you know, that issues that are important to them are important to leadership.' 

Report condemns Navy's 'paralyzing zero-defect mentality'

Another issue identified in the report is the overly-timid practice of treating certain errors with career termination and offering no opportunity for recovery.

Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman made the startling claim that of the four key admirals who led the Navy to victory in World War II, none would make the rank of captain in today's fleet.

'Nimitz put his first command on the rocks,' Lehman said. 'And Halsey was constantly getting into trouble for bending the rules or drinking too much…Ernie King was a womanizer and a heavy drinker'

'Admiral Leahy may be the only one that might have made it through, but he had quite a few blots on his record as well,' said Lehman.

'But in each case, there was a critical mass of leadership in the Navy that recognized that these were very, very promising junior officers,' he said of the WWII admirals.”

See, nothing to get hung about.

Leave Comments