It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump should fire acting Secretary of the Navy Modly

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 04:09 PM
link   
He resigned (acting secretary). Real leaders fight to the end on principle alone. He'll probably write a book and go on CNN like the rest of them. He was going to get fired anyway I guess...meh. Loser.
edit on 7-4-2020 by Stupidsecrets because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Stupidsecrets

He still needed to get confirmed, because of his bad mouthing the captain it would have been an extreme side show by walking away he keeps the door open for an appointment somewhere else.

Smart move on his part.



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: face23785

another scenario that presents itself is a simple one. Modly was really a partisan player. He wanted to be part of the Trump team and hence put forth the Trump story line, that all is well.


Now I see why you can't listen to any other perspective on this story. You're looking at it through your "orange man bad" lenses and you can't see any other possibilities.

Pointless to engage you further.



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: UKTruth
Did Modly 'jump the chain of command'?
I would have thought that the Admirals are suborniate to him? No?


"Jumped" may not have been the best term, but it wasn't something the SecNav should've been involved in. There were plenty of others below him that could've handled the situation. As a general rule, the military likes to handle things at as low a level as it can be handled. The secretary jumping on something like that was improper, and then going to the ship and saying the things he said about the Captain was extraordinarily unprofessional. Good on him for resigning.


Fair enough - he's gone now so probably the best outcome. Both paid a price.



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

I've tried to explain to you how the Captain's actions were wrong.




If as Bloomberg reported thus,

'Admiral J.C. Aquilino, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, told reporters Tuesday evening that it’s not possible to move as quickly as Crozier wanted. “There are some constraints that we’re operating around,” he said. He added that he’s in touch with the governor of Guam about finding hotel rooms where sailors can stay until they are cleared to return.'

I think then, that Crozier made a good and intelligent decision for the welfare of his crew, who were really in virtual quarantine at port and not at war, and all at risk, with 155 crewmen known affected.
www.bloomberg.com...

I direct you to this,

'We must be more concerned about situations where somebody receives a massive dose of the virus (we have no data on how large that might be but bodily fluids from those infected with other viruses can contain a million, and up to a hundred million viruses per ml), particularly through inhalation.'
www.sciencemediacentre.org...

So you can see very well where the Captain was coming from...in charge of a ship so many crew, a massive dose of the virus, invokes a massive immune response, and a huge strain on the Human body, and ability, for the older people, a lagging immune response because of age, and any other ailment you can factor in.

The Captain likely knew that the best course was to have all of the crew taken off the ship, ideally split the quarantine on land according to times of the onset of symptoms, while the Admiral above was coming from somewhere else altogether.

edit on 7-4-2020 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

And again, him wanting to do what is best for his crew is not what got him in trouble. It's not what he did, it's how he went about it. There were ways he could have accomplished that without making a public spectacle of himself.



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

You seem to keep wanting to accuse me of things here Face. One was that I was not listening too you yet I was, I just missed your link. And then though I did not disprove it, which was not my intent, what I did do was offer a plausible alternative to Modly's story line. All the news outlets appear to be repeating Modly's accusations yet I where are Crozier's comments on the on going issue?

Now you put off my observations to your suspicion that it is all though my OMB perspective. My OMB lenses are definitely real, and I stand by my perspective on Trump. Folk here on this site are way more pro Trump than not. I am finding though that many here will also not listen to anything that is not pro Trump. It's not my job to keep an eye on the Dems so much as that aspect of holding the powerful to critical standards, that base is fully covered. However the aspect of keeping an eye on Trump is not, so hence, myself and a hand full of others keep our eye on him. Discounting any and all observations and critique of Trump does seem to be a short coming of all to many on this site.



posted on Apr, 7 2020 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: smurfy

And again, him wanting to do what is best for his crew is not what got him in trouble. It's not what he did, it's how he went about it. There were ways he could have accomplished that without making a public spectacle of himself.


They were not going to let the crew out of the ship, I gave you the second link as why why letting them off the ship is the imperative, beyond that, I can't help you...the ABC idea of doing things, has no legs whatsoever when it comes to this COVID-19 virus.
I will say that the provenance of this virus is also the current subject of attention by some reputable sources as a manipulated virus, 'New Scientist' for instance, who don't do 'stuff' lightly.
There's no doubt either that such a virus, very close to COVID-19 was the subject of manipulation in a highly criticised international experiment that took place in 2015-16 in Wuhan, and if you don't know about that or have just ignored it, then you cannot comment on what Crozier needed to do.



posted on Apr, 8 2020 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: face23785

another scenario that presents itself is a simple one. Modly was really a partisan player. He wanted to be part of the Trump team and hence put forth the Trump story line, that all is well.


Now I see why you can't listen to any other perspective on this story. You're looking at it through your "orange man bad" lenses and you can't see any other possibilities.



originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: face23785

You seem to keep wanting to accuse me of things here Face.



originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: face23785
Now you put off my observations to your suspicion that it is all though my OMB perspective. My OMB lenses are definitely real





posted on Apr, 8 2020 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: smurfy

And again, him wanting to do what is best for his crew is not what got him in trouble. It's not what he did, it's how he went about it. There were ways he could have accomplished that without making a public spectacle of himself.


They were not going to let the crew out of the ship, I gave you the second link as why why letting them off the ship is the imperative, beyond that, I can't help you...the ABC idea of doing things, has no legs whatsoever when it comes to this COVID-19 virus.
I will say that the provenance of this virus is also the current subject of attention by some reputable sources as a manipulated virus, 'New Scientist' for instance, who don't do 'stuff' lightly.


You still don't get it. No one is saying he shouldn't have been trying to get help for his crew. Find one person in any coverage or commentary about this who is like "Yeah he should've just let his crew die, for chain of command's sake."

He did not get removed from command for trying to help his crew. He got removed from command for making a public spectacle of himself and exposing sensitive--some sources say classified--information into the public domain.

Discipline was warranted. Good intentions don't excuse bad behavior, especially in the military.


There's no doubt either that such a virus, very close to COVID-19 was the subject of manipulation in a highly criticised international experiment that took place in 2015-16 in Wuhan, and if you don't know about that or have just ignored it, then you cannot comment on what Crozier needed to do.


Two things make me think I can still comment on it:
1) This has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether what Crozier did was militarily appropriate
2) You're nobody, so your determinations on who can comment on what are equally as irrelevant as #1

Now, this thread has been rendered moot since the acting SecNav resigned. And the only people replying to it at this point are people who are adamantly opposed to trying to understand the issue, so I'll take my leave of this subject for now.
edit on 8 4 20 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2020 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Insults. Yeah I had a guess that that was where you were headed. Nice talking with you for a moment or two



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join