Oskar is that you?

bubu5073 said:

Oskar is that you?

No,Oskar the Bismarck cat/Unsinkable Sam look like this

Please delete this

I don't have much faith in the navy in this case. Their decision to call the Captain naive or stupid, then have to walk back what they said, on top of firing him before the conclusion of an investigation (as is procedure to do), which in of itself was not done with proper consultation according to what we know.

It all points to a Naval command that bungled the situation aboard the Roosevelt, and when the matter became public, they looked to attack the messenger and hope this blows over.

kibehisa said:

PotUS Trump's response in this incident is correct and isn't even the tiniest bit out of touch with reality: the man shouldn't be writing a letter - especially not to his hometown media. He has access to the ears of Navy Command all the way up to the White House directly, he should have made a call - and one is all it would have taken, as I alluded above.

The punishment toward the captain was actually harsher than it should have been and clearly an overreaction by the leadership. They've screwed up and only succeeded in painting a picture that they do not care about the health and safety of the personnel under them, and succeeded in making the captain appear as a martyr who was punished for doing the "right thing". I say that in quotations, because clearly he did screw up with this as well, but it is clear that those above him have clearly screwed up on this too and if they continue with their current course they're just going to succeed in destroying confidence in their ability to command during this crisis.

Additionally the Acting Secretary of the Navy, a career businessman, attacking the former Captain in an address to the crew of the ship is also clearly a failure in the current leadership.

Saladofstones said:

I don't have much faith in the navy in this case. (etc)

Honestly in agreement with you on what you said here and don't have anything else to add.

NWF_Renim said:

The punishment toward the captain was actually harsher than it should have been... (etc)

While I disagree about the harshness of the punishment (removal from role is standard for a loss of confidence), I do entirely agree that attacking the Captain in the language that has been thrown at him by certain parties is uncalled for and is in fact a direct violation of the UCMJ, which even the civilian parts of the military must abide by.

And absolutely the Navy themselves have fucked this entire thing up royally. There is a good chance the Captain would have known and followed the infectious disease protocols if the Navy had properly trained their commanding officers. This is moreso a failure of training on the part of the Navy than it is a failure of the Captain to follow protocol, BUT he still did fail to follow protocol which IS a loss of confidence.

79248cm/s said:
Trump tends to be right more times than wrong, but if he was just only thinking of politics, why wouldn't he be on the side of the Captain and sailors to cash in those populist brownie points? Because the decision was not about politics, it was about SOP.

Because he can have it both ways with his base. He gets someone who made his administration look bad (which is priority no. 1 for him) fired, then he can come in and protest the decision and get the boost for following what the people want. Its the same thing with everything he does. He'll be against, 100 percent, something when its popular to be against it, then reverse. Look at his views towards China any given week. Its completely mercurial and what he wants out of that week.

And please, this is the man who attacks his own administration daily over reporting the facts.

Saladofstones said:

To the Navy command, that got leaked to the press by an unknown party. They accused the Captain, but I don't think it was him.

The thing is his emails were over unsecured communications. Even if he specifically did not bring the letter to the press or intend for it to do so, he is responsible for the leak by breaking protocol. That kind of trust is pretty much impossible to get back once you lost it.

Saladofstones said:

...

Trump has no loyalty to foreign countries like China. If China does something he likes, he will praise them. If they do something he doesn't like he admonishes them. He has no obligation to always praise or always hate a certain country. Their standing with him is constantly up for review, and that is a good thing.

Same deal with his administration. Most presidents are just puppets to their cabinet/buddies, Trump is not afraid to choose sides even if it is not popular. You can't tell me that firing a Captain who is loved by his crew is going to win Trump support. That doesn't even make sense. If he wanted to look good, he would just do whatever the media wanted him to do, then he would get constant positive news coverage, and not the non-stop stream of hit pieces on him.

79248cm/s said:

If he wanted to look good, he would just do whatever the media wanted him to do, then he would get constant positive news coverage, and not the non-stop stream of hit pieces on him.

There has literally not been a single world leader in recent times that has successfully done that unless they also had tight control of their own media.