Senior military officials sanctioned for more than 500 cases of serious misconduct

[DonViejo]

Source: USA Today




Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY Published 4:14 p.m. ET Oct. 24, 2017 | Updated 1:48 p.m. ET Oct. 25, 2017

WASHINGTON — Since 2013, military investigators have documented at least 500 cases of serious misconduct among its generals, admirals and senior civilians, almost half of those instances involving personal or ethical lapses, a USA TODAY investigation has found.

Many cases involve sex scandals, including a promiscuous Army general who led a swinging lifestyle, another who lived rent-free in the home of a defense contractor after his affair fell apart and another who is under investigation for sending steamy Facebook messages to the wife of an enlisted soldier on his post.

Yet despite the widespread abuses, the Pentagon does no trend analysis to determine whether the problem is worsening, nor does it regularly announce punishments for generals and admirals — all public figures, USA TODAY has found. Senior officers found to have been involved in adulterous relationships, a violation of the military’s code of justice, have been reassigned with no public notice and allowed to retire quietly, in some cases with full honors.

-snip-

In the military, as with the Weinstein case, sexual harassment by top brass in many cases is considered an open secret, documents show. Yet many stay quiet, and efforts on Capitol Hill to reform the system and call senior officers to account have often failed. Instead, the military has often closed ranks. The Pentagon doesn’t publicly discuss most cases, though USA TODAY has identified several, including five since 2016 that have involved senior officers in the Army, Air Force and Navy. Nor does the military seem interested in getting to the root of the problem. In 2014, then-Defense secretary Chuck Hagel created an office to investigate ethical problems among senior leaders. It was shuttered two years later without determining the depth of the problem, a task Hagel gave it when he opened the office.

Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/10/24/generals-sex-misconduct-pentagon-army-sanctions-hagel-gillibrand/794770001/

[HopeAgain]

1. Thats why we should not be surprised Mattis, McMasters or Kelly are no better than Trump.

[Baconator]

2. Kelly aside....

What are your big beefs with McMaster or Mattis?

[HopeAgain]

3. They are willing to serve the agenda of this demented President.

What makes you think these guys are any better than any other Republican just because they used to wear stars?

The military lies as much at the politicians.

[Baconator]

4. So why the push to have an administration entirely comprised of flunky idiots...?

It's reasonable, based on what I know about Mattis and McMaster in particular, to think they are serving because if they don't do it then someone worse will.

Some people won't serve and I can understand that. Mattis and McMaster are top tier influencers and policymakers though. It's worth it.

If you just poo poo someone based on their military affiliation then I can't help you.

[HopeAgain]

5. Same thing was said about Kelly until a week ago...

I poo poo them based upon their Trump affiliation. Do you give anyone else in that administration a pass? I didn't think so. Trump needs to fail on his own, not be kept in office by his staff.

Besides, no one can control Trump...I think that's beyond obvious.

[Baconator]

7. I had positive impressions of both McMaster and Mattis prior to this administration...

... and no reason to change it so far.

It's all well and good to hope that Trump fails in a spectacular ball of fire but that's just not acceptable in DoD or the SA in general.

It should be the same at DoS as well.

It's not an option because people will fucking die. So we limp along and deal with it instead of throwing our hands up in the air and saying 'fuck it'.

[samir.g]

6. the military attracts the worst elements of society

[Baconator]

8. We could do worse than people who understand what service actually means...

[donotpissoffacow]

9. How often is a military takeover

attempted in order to restore order, fight corruption or replace incompetent governance? (Not here, in history...get your fingers off the keys...unless your know the number)

I have become convinced that our military is now an egregiously insular, exclusive, self-protective organization with all the secrecy of a communist cadre and the morals of any fraternity.

Consequently, it is not difficult to imagine august generals deciding they are the only ones who can save us. Self-aggrandizement is another attribute of closed societies. For god's sake, a general is a man with some metal stars pinned on. Men who fight are just that, men who fight. They've been doing it since we crawled out of the ocean. Probably in it too. History has repeatedly shown that the ones who can actually win wars are lousy politicians in civilian life. Examples: Grant and Eisenhower. Brilliant when they are in total command, incompetent in the chaos of politics.

Pundits complain that the American people do not support our military. We don't know them. They are not our neighbors or our friends. How many of you personally know a soldier or a soldier's family? They have become sad young strangers, paid sacrifices whose loyalty is to their unit. We are grateful it is them and not us. The drama of widows weeping over coffins is as remote as television, separate from our lives. Them and us becomes more and more descriptive.

Did no one catch General Kelly's offhand remark informing reporters that only men who had been in combat were real men? That's scary. These generals are no longer confined by military structure but continue to think they know better than the rest of us. Certainly better than anyone not in the military.

These top men are not protecting us. They are congratulating themselves on finally reaching a position of real power. Need I reiterate my belief that is extremely dangerous.

Now I'm gonna stick my foot in it. I firmly believe we should reconstitute the draft. There is really no choice. Either everyone has a stake in our wars or we cede America to mercenaries.

[nitpicker]

10. Link to militarycorruption.com

http://militarycorruption.com/index.html

((It's pro-soldier, but does name and shame some of the dirtbags.))

[donotpissoffacow]

12. This site makes me decidedly uncomfortable...

with its sleazy, sensationalized breitbartish reportage.
Look at their links:
Gun Owners of America
InfoWars
Keep and Bear Arms
National Coalition for Men (They need one?)
The Power Hour
Among other freaky groups.
Don't think the information on this site is trustworthy.

[coolsandy]

11. But they keep being rewarded with huge budget increases.