The next thing I notice — linked at Drudge — is "Theodore Roosevelt captain followed in footsteps of ship’s namesake by writing bombshell letter" (Navy Times). The Navy relieved Capt. Brett Crozier of command of an aircraft carrier named for Theodore Roosevelt after Crozier wrote a letter asking for help with the coronavirus outbreak on that ship. The San Francisco Chronicle got hold of the letter, which said:
“This will require a political solution but it is the right thing to do... We are not at war. Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset — our Sailors.”The acting Secretary of the Navy, Thomas Modly, justified relieving Crozier of command. He said that the letter "undermines our efforts and the chain of command’s efforts to address this problem, and creates a panic and this perception that the Navy’s not on the job."
The Navy Times article recounts the parallel in the live of the man Theodore Roosevelt. At the end of the Spanish-American War in the summer of 1898, Roosevelt and his Rough Riders were in Cuba facing malaria and yellow fever:
Regardless of the outcome, the commanders were compelled to put their request [to leave Cuba] into writing –– a task that fell to Roosevelt because, as the only non-general among the senior officer group, [he] had less to lose career-wise. The eventual U.S. president drafted what is now known as the infamous Round-Robin Letter...The full text of the letter is at the link. Excerpt:
[I]n this division there have been 1,500 cases of malarial fever. Hardly a man has yet died from it, but the whole command is so weakened and shattered as to be ripe for dying like rotten sheep, when a real yellow-fever epidemic instead of a fake epidemic, like the present one, strikes us, as it is bound to do if we stay here at the height of the sickness season, August and the beginning of September.The text of the letter found its way into the newspaper, enraging President William McKinley, who was working on peace negotiations with Spain, but the men were moved out of Cuba. History credits Roosevelt "with cutting through the red tape of bureaucracy and saving the lives of 4,000 men," says the Navy Times. The article ends:
Quarantine against malarial fever is much like quarantining against the toothache. All of us are certain that as soon as the authorities at Washington fully appreciate the condition of the army, we shall be sent home. If we are kept here it will in all human possibility mean an appalling disaster, for the surgeons here estimate that over half the army, if kept here during the sickly season, will die.
Despite the hasty dismissal of Capt. Crozier, the large crowd of Theodore Roosevelt sailors who gathered Thursday to chant his name and cheer as he departed the hulking ship for the last time may indicate how fondly the skipper’s actions will be viewed in the years to come.
Posts
71 comments:
I see both sides of the issue.
That said, 1 man is responsible for getting his sick men evacuated to Guam, possibly saving lives and certainly keeping the his boat fully operational.
7th Fleet strikes again.
My first thought was that the Navy relieved him for making them look bad. Then I read the acting SecNav’s statement. If everything in it is true, then I could believe that the captain made a poor and unnecessary choice.
What I don’t question from the SecNav’s statement is that the first flag officer in the captain’s chain of command was right down the hall from him. By e-mailing his letter out to, I gather, 20-odd people, the captain was either a naive idiot to think it wouldn’t be in the newspapers immediately; or he knew exactly what would happen, he knew the consequence to his career, and he judged it worth it to sting the Navy bureaucracy into faster action. And I don’t believe the Navy puts naive idiots in command if aircraft carriers.
I can admire that as far as it goes, a senior officer torpedoing his career to safeguard his subordinates’ welfare. I don’t love the message his letter sent our enemies, starting with “We are not at war.” And I can’t help wondering if could have been handled more discreetly.
Curious whether the Navy really was offering as much support as the SecNav’s statement insists, or if this is self-serving BS: Why, we were giving him anything he asked for and he had an open line to ask for more! We have no idea why he felt this necessary!
Having served in the military, I am supportive of the concept of "Chain of Command" and this concept does not include the media.
If you raise your issue up the Chain of Command and it is rejected, you have two choices: obey or resign. Crozier knew this and chose media involvement anyway. I support his firing.
Further, I would like to know who appointed him to command the ship. This smells of a political appointment, and I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that he was appointed by Obama, who undertook to politicize the military.
Do you think Crozier will find his way to speak at the Democratic Convention in Milwaukee?
When Teddy Roosevelt became President he fixed a number of problems he found during his time commanding troops in Cuba, starting with the Quartermaster Corps issuing wool uniforms to soldiers fighting in tropical climates. He also tried to get “Black Jack” Pershing promoted from captain to colonel (Pershing had been a temporary, or “brevet” major in Cuba). The Army said no, so Roosevelt exercised his constitutional authority to name generals, and Pershing got a star instead of an eagle.
When you go outside your command, you end up outside your command.
brylun said...
Do you think Crozier will find his way to speak at the Democratic Convention in Milwaukee?
Ask yourself why there's an acting SecNav, then ask yourself who's more likely to be political--skipper of a flat-top or career Navy brass.
@Browndog: Ask yourself who is supposed to be a political appointment, the Secretary of the Navy, or the Captain of a ship.
@Browndog: Check out page 8 of this: Presidential Appointments to Full-Time
Positions in Executive Departments During the 114th Congress, otherwise known as The Plum Book.
https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=112537
The only reason Crozier should have acted as he did was if he was being ignored on the issue, and based on the SecNav statement that doesn't appear to be the case. Following this very closely, as our son is currently deployed on another carrier.
Blogger brylun said...
Do you think Crozier will find his way to speak at the Democratic Convention in Milwaukee?
4/4/20, 6:28 AM
Yes. And probably with his husband beside him.
The devil you say.
A code red would have been sufficient. Short-sheet his bed.
The only reason Crozier should have acted as he did was if he was being ignored on the issue, and based on the SecNav statement that doesn't appear to be the case.
Agreed, with the exception of giving acting SecNav the benefit of doubt.
I do not. I do know that once again the command structure of the 7th Fleet broke down yet again, and sailor's live were put at risk, yet again.
Relative to the merits of judging his actions, I would say the following:
1) In considering the behavior of a subordinate, I would always consider "what if everyone did it"? So what if every Navy captain insisted that his ship be allowed to disembark its sailors? In effect we would have no Navy.
2) What would be the effect on the organization if there were no personal consequences for him? Do we want all military officers writing to the San Francisco Chronicle every time they feel they are forced to accept a decision they don't like?
3) In times of war, Naval vessels are subject to mass casualties, and we need officers who are able to sacrifice men for the mission. If Captain Crozier had been in command at Midway, would the outcome have been the same? I doubt it. The likely casualties on that carrier were not high.
4) It all seems in keeping with the modern PC Navy, and it seems a bad idea to me. I think that an honest assessment would show that the officer corps is filled with political choices. I have a feeling that Crozier may check one of the preferred boxes.
Browndog is right about the 7th Fleet: US Navy 7th Fleet commander dismissed after a series of ship collisions.
And it is beyond dispute that Obama left the military without ammunition.
in another story about boats, water, and quarantines; we first hear that:
two members of the Kennedy family who went missing Thursday during a boating trip on Chesapeake Bay
Wow! that sounds tragic! Then, we get More details:
Both McKean and her son were seen struggling to return to shore during a canoe trip near Herring Bay
A CANOE TRIP? on Chesapeake BAY? which, is like: THE OCEAN????
then we hear:
The mother and son had gotten into the canoe to chase a ball that had gone into the water during a family gathering,
Some 'boating trip'! and How many people were at this Kennedy 'family gathering'?
50? 100? do we count servants and chauffeurs, or Just family and friends?
I read the article by Ward Carrol in the USNI Proceedings yesterday and found the comparison interesting, although it attempts to relate the outcomes of two different times. What is missed by many is the "professional" commanders in Cuba let the "volunteer" commander write the letter for he had less to lose if there were ramifications.
While I don't know enough of the factual information to second guess the Captain of the USS Teddy Roosevelt, I am quite certain he realized the likely career outcome of the publication of his letter.
JPS said...
the captain was either a naive idiot to think it wouldn’t be in the newspapers immediately; or he knew exactly what would happen, he knew the consequence to his career, and he judged it worth it
here's a FUN QUESTION:
how LONG has Capt Crozier been a Captain (O-6)?
did he have ANY chance at a flag (Admiralty?)
He's been in the Navy since 1992 (which, by my math is more than 27 years)...
How many times was he in front of a promotions board?
Was THIS his last tour?
Gilbar, good questions. But I noticed that the previous captain, who has been selected for Rear Admiral, is coming up on thirty years this year. I thought they pin that first star a few years sooner, if they’re going to at all.
my entire knowledge of the Navy comes from my cousin, who was a O-4 (Lt Commander)
he missed promotion to O-5 (three times, I THINK), and they forced him out after 20 years
According to a commenter on InstaPundit, Navy tradition is for sailors to cheer the departure of unpopular officers and boo the departure of those they like. Makes sense, but it would be nice to have confirmation of that.
gilbar, I’m sorry your cousin didn’t get the nod - but LCDR isn’t nothing, and my hat’s off to him for those 20 years.
JPS; it get's sillier!
My cousin was teaching at San Diego as a LCDR, making whatever LCDR's make
when they retired him; They IMMEDIATELY hired him as a civilian to teach the SAME class
so, he's got retirement pay, VA benefits; AND a higher salary to do the same job.
Not bad for someone that started as a enlisted man (then college, with ROTC)
So, he's Still in San Diego; and Still complaining about the horrible weather :)
it's only supposed to get up to 65 there today; and it got down to 58 last night
Brrrrr!
AFAICT, Navy Times is just another magazine written by journalists with the usual politics. They have been in the news before showing the same political slant.
gilbar,
Glad he gets the last laugh! Sounds like he earned it.
So, what is the risk of actual sickness to the sailors? Did anyone suffer any complications? Was the carrier worse off than the Diamond Princess, and if so, why?
March 17, 2020
Guam Harbor
Dear World
I am the Captain of the USS Theodore Roosevelt. At this time my Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is not battle ready due to a Wuhan Virus outbreak. I have park in Guam to seek medical attention for my Crew. We are non-operational at this time.
We are not at war,
Captain Brett Crozier
PS Martha the yeast infection cleared up, my vagina is like new.
I think some media are reading too much into the crew cheering the skipper as he left the ship for the final time. By all accounts he was a well-liked captain before this incident, and this could just be a crew sending off someone with whom they have years and years of shared service. That seems more likely than a specific endorsement of whatever his final action happened to be.
Ok,
I spent 6 years in the Navy as an enlisted, 2 westpac cruses on a destroyer.
I don’t understand the “not at war” comment. When you’re on the other side of the world in a living in a large piece of steel designed to float you’re always at war. When we left San Diego in the fall of 79” no one could have predicted that we would be spending Christmas floating around in the Arabian Gulf off the coast of Iran. The Captians primarily responsibility is not to protect the lives of the sailors. It’s not summer camp. If you can’t tolerate some risk then don’t join the military, and especially don’t assume the responsibility of commanding the most terrible show of force your country has at its disposal.
Life is not without risk.
As far as the actual risk involved, it occurs to me that as a demographic group, the sailors on that ship because of their age and assumed level of physical fitness would almost all be assumed to survive the virus. As compared to the Diamond princess where about 700 positive cases, an at present 11 deaths.
To me it seems like the Captain turned his entire crew into a ship of cowards.
The true hero’s of today’s Navy are the captains and crew of the Navy hospital ships that sailed into, not away from possible exposure to coved 19.
In the grand scheme of things where we're at right now during the Apex portion of our pandemic ride it still seems like a nothing Burger to me. There are too many details that are unknown which makes it impossible to draw any reasonable conclusion as to what should have happened what did happen and who is in the right and who is in the wrong.
Levi said...
the sailors on that ship because of their age and assumed level of physical fitness would almost all be assumed to survive the virus.
Last i heard, NONE of the sailors needed hospitalization. You could make an argument, that they should have inoculated each sailor, to give them resistance to the virus.
as Levi points out; it's ALWAYS dangerous on a ship. And the Navy is ALWAYS 'at war'
If they weren't 'at war' do you think they'd be crazy enough to land a jet on an acre of steel?
Loose lips sink ships!
The loving Captain wanted our Navy warships run like Cruise line ships for the pleasure of the crew. Therapeutic Commanding. And the Red Chinese bio-warfare lab laughed and worked on a newer Coronavirus gene insert.
Lots of informed opinions from naval personnel in the comments section of this naval blog:
https://blog.usni.org/posts/2020/03/23/managing-the-strain-on-the-lines
Certainly not a black and white issue, at least based on facts available to the public.
The Navy has had a lot of trouble the past few years with political correctness killing sailors.
This captain seems to be another PC warrior, but I agree with Howard. We don't know the facts yet,
The military chain of command, like a government bureaucracy, values its own importance more than it values the purpose for which it exists.
How did the captain know it was the coronavirus? If they were at sea, how did they get tests?
Those who insist on the Chain of Command, are the pathetic wife beaters appointed to power from political contributions, success in dodging the draft, or even serving a tour of duty in their youth.
“No good decision was ever made in a swivel chair.” - General Patton
Tomcc said..."How did the captain know it was the coronavirus? If they were at sea, how did they get tests?"
An aircraft carrier is like a floating city. It has a complete surgical bay, medic stations, and very intelligent doctors, nurses, and medics.
The commander of the ship doesn't have to know anything, he has people under him that worry about the milieu of men in close quarters.
Etienne: I would expect that to be the case. What I'm curious about is how a ship at sea gets a test for a disease that's only been around for 6 weeks. (I'm assuming they were at sea prior to and during the current pandemic.)
Tomcc said..."...how a ship at sea gets a test for a disease."
This particular ship has cargo planes coming and going several times a day. They are fully connected to the world.
But even without a "super-duper-no-shit-virus" test, I think doctors know if someone has a virus, based on the symptoms. Especially if the young patient is struggling to breath and showing signs of dying, and where the morticians need to be alerted, to make room in the freezer for corpses.
Etienne: thanks for that; my understanding of Naval practices comes from Patrick O'Brian, and may be a little dated!
Here is what you don't do if you are a captain of a naval vessel- you don't advertise to the entire world your weaknesses. That is a court-martial level offense.
What I'm curious about is how a ship at sea gets a test for a disease that's only been around for 6 weeks
the ship was Just in port in SE Asia
Back in my day, the Commanders instructions were: "I don't want any messages from the front, coming to me from the rear."
"the ship was Just in port in SE Asia"
As a matter of fact, they specifically went to Da Nang because Hanoi had a large incidence of the virus.
They reported no cases initially, but I think there was 1 case reported in Da Nang just as the ship was leaving.
So obviously they knew about the virus, and made plans for a safe place to call.
Who ever believed the military brass ever had any more honor, integrity, or concern with the health and safety of the large body of men and woman who comprise its predominant workforce than any other large, powerful, and wealthy institution?
"I can admire that as far as it goes, a senior officer torpedoing his career to safeguard his subordinates’ welfare. I don’t love the message his letter sent our enemies...."
Who are our enemies, as such, and why are they our enemies, rather than working partners, (even if somewhat adversarial partners)? All our present wars are wars of choice, our choice, and none are wars of self-defense, (as has almost always been the case throughout our history).
Crozier's stupidity has consequences
https://mobile.twitter.com/ongtuong2000/status/1246306612718886912
Robert Cook:
"Who are our enemies, as such, and why are they our enemies, rather than working partners, (even if somewhat adversarial partners)?"
Glad you asked. I should have written adversaries.
My personal definition of enemy is anyone who would kill Americans given the chance, facilitate their deaths at the hands of others, or cheer their deaths if someone else killed them, because they're Americans. Right now these are mostly non-state actors. The governments of North Korea and Iran.
Adversaries are countries I could see becoming enemies, but are not there yet and I hope they don't get there. China is a prominent one.
"All our present wars are wars of choice, our choice, and none are wars of self-defense,"
The war in Afghanistan was our choice, but it wasn't our idea for the Taliban to give al Qaeda a sovereign state to hide in. Given what they planned and executed from territory the Taliban controlled, I think there's a pretty good case for self-defense, whatever else you can say about how that war evolved.
If China ever moves from adversary to outright enemy, I expect it would be because they moved to swallow up Taiwan, and we moved to stop them. I suppose that would be a war of choice. Way back in 2000 a Chinese general bragged that we wouldn't stop them, that we wouldn't risk losing Los Angeles to protect Taipei.
I hope we never fight that war, or anything leading up to it. I also hope we don't give China the impression that they can go right ahead, because we're afraid to stand up to them. So I'm glad we have things like carrier battle groups. Their sailing sends the message that we're interested. And their coming out of action sends the message that we might not be able to back up that first message.
Carriers have 5,000 personnel on board. All within the age range that shows a 0.2% fatality rate from corona19. That's 10 people. Now, reality 101- most deaths occur among the obese, asthmatic, or others with preexisting conditions. There aren't any of those among the crew.
The ones that test positive are tested and can be because a carrier has a full medical department. Now, let's talk about putting the crew ashore versus keeping them on board. Staying on the ship, they expose each other. actually- everyone on board has already been exposed. Until they start testing antibodies we'll have no idea how many actually had it. Now, let's send them ashore. Great ides. They're now in barracks. And need to walk to the chow hall. Are they going to have separate seating? Away from everyone else? They're going to need their laundry done. So exposure to more people outside the command. Are you going to lock them in their rooms? That's what you get- a room. There's rec rooms and pool tables and other things in COMMUNAL areas. You're now potentially exposing others to the virus.
Overall the best thing to do would be to keep them at sea and let the virus run through the crew.
3-4 fleet ballistic missile submarines leave on patrol every month. When I was doing it the patrols were 72 days; I assume they're the same today. And since corona started spreading, at least a few fast attacks have left on specops. Crew about 100. Some of those sailors departed with coronavirus. And they'll infect others. The subs won't turn back. First 2-3 weeks of each patrol we'd all get sick sharing each other's respiratory infections, then, magically, nothing more for the rest of patrol. Same exact thing is going to happen with coronavirus. With a longer incubation period, maybe 4-5 weeks of shared illnesses. Unless someone gets bad enough to be medevaced, those subs will stay on patrol, incommunicado. The only way anyone will know if coronavirus was on board will be to check for antibodies. A sub's medical department is one independent duty corpsman. Always had good care from the ones I had.
The worst I ever saw with disease underway was when an improperly refrigerated meal was served for midrats. Half the crew was upchucking. Those with watchstations they couldn't leave were carrying buckets with them. We stayed underway, no messages were transmitted. Shit happens. And everyone recovered.
Concern trolling from The Global Times
https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2020/04/03/chinese-state-media-capitalizing-on-carrier-chaos-u-s-wrong-to-fire-captain-crozier/
No mention of whom approved the Danang visit...
Still a lot of unknowns about what happened, state of the Captain's career, and was the Navy being super responsive.
My gut was the Navy was going super slow to solve the issue, and the Captain decided to fall on his sword and solve the issue.
Crozier acted in accordance with the communications security protocol promulgated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and endorsed by the head of the FBI, so what's the problem?
tcrosse
In a nut shell.
tcrosse said..."...so what's the problem?"
I don't know. Maybe we should ask Ambassador Stevens?
Trivia: Ambassador Stevens used the chain of command.
”The governments of North Korea and Iran.”
Iran has given many indications it was willing to work with the US. North Korea has always kept to itself but is also apparently willing to work with us. It is we who are belligerent to them.
"It is we who are belligerent to them."
We currently have an armistice with them, and technically are in a state of war against North Korea and its allies. The war started when the South was invaded, and five million people died.
Robert Cook,
“North Korea has always kept to itself”
Leaving aside that unfortunate business when they invaded the south, and took Seoul in three days, I think the families of CPT Arthur Bonifas and 1LT Mark Barrett would disagree with you. Also the surviving crew of the ROKS Cheonan.
“Iran has given many indications it was willing to work with the U.S.”
Yes. It has also killed Americans, for being American. However you and I want to disagree on the apportioning of blame, they are by my definition an enemy. They have their reasons every time. I might even listen sympathetically, if they didn’t kill Americans or equip others to do so.
Only America is a nation with evil intent, right Cookie?
Informing the entire world that a Navy ship at sea has a problem and is therefore vulnerable is gross negligence. The man deserves a court martial, much as he would have had any hostile actor chosen to take advantage of the situation with him making it public to the whole world and lives were lost.
Unless the Navy was informed of the problem and refused to send aid or deal with the problem, there is zero justification for making the presence of this virus on the ship public knowledge.
And much as the chain of command in the military may be downright incompetent, inefficient, fossilized in old ways of thinking, or otherwise acting stupidly at times, the military absolutely cannot function if officers do whatever they please and ignore protocols or orders.
Quoting TR and comparing him to the captain is absurd. In 1898 "Those men in Washington" had no idea what was going on in Cuba. They were old Cavalry men who knew nothing of yellow fever.
In the case of the 2020 Captain, his superiors were constantly informed of the situation, and decided upon a course of action that the Captain was duty bound to follow. Instead, he decided to go over their heads to the Press. He should have been relieved of command and kicked out of the US Navy. BTW, what the hell has happened to the US Navy? Doesn't anyone follow orders anymore or respect the chain of command? We had Navy Seals and the Sec. of The Navy defying the Commander in Chief. We had crazy Admiral Raven. Now this.
Aircraft carriers just don't float around and go wherever they wish. They have missions assigned to them. The Captain seems to have decided his mission should be cut short and the ship docked in San Diego against the orders of this superiors. This is intolerable.
The Navy used to get the cream of the crop, especially during the Draft years when people wanted to stay out of the infantry. This no longer seems to be the case. Maybe its just nicer/easier to be in the air force or the army these days.
Yeah. For those supporting this Captain, you are part of the problem. If you need to convey some issue that IS NOT obvious, sure, communicate that to your immediate superior. Not frickin twenty people. He was justifiably relieved of command. It was not revenge or a gotcha, he got what was coming to him and he should have known better. The chain of command is there for a reason. As seen in this instance, disregarding it leads to fear and uncertainty.
V/R CTIC(SS) (RET)
Post a Comment