Skip to main content

View Diary: Old white man decides to leave military sexual assault decisions in the hands of old white men (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  78 years old, 34 years in the Senate (5+ / 0-)

    His world view is out of touch with what the world has become, just like the military brass. Which is double stupid given how much the military has changed just with technology, changes in how wars are fought, etc.

    A few folks can keep the vision thing into their 80s. Others not so much, or not at all.

    "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

    by Ginny in CO on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:05:18 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Kennedy was an old white man, so not all (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ginny in CO, Ian Reifowitz

      are out of touch.

      I think, therefore I am. I think.

      by mcmom on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:18:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

      And what exactly is your military law expertise?  How many years have you been a commander?  How often have you had to impose restrictions on the liberty of a citizen?  

      It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

      by ksuwildkat on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 11:19:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Are you saying that American civilians (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mint julep, RoseWeaver, splashy

        and legislators cannot input into the military system? I think there is something in the constitution about that.

        FWIW  I married into a military family, FiL was an AF wing commander. Worked with a lot of military and have had many patients. BiL was a civilian in charge if the Elmendorf fighter jet electronic repair shop. Vet and military issues have been a major activist issue since I met my first PTSD vet, from WWI, in '75. I have cared for many vets, including women with PTSD from sexual assault. I also cared for many prisoners in lock down situations. Restricting liberties of patients is actually quite common. In critical care (16 years) it is all shift long.

        We don't all have to have that kind of experience to form opinions. My other degree in BS is sociology. People have well established tendencies to error. Military structure is very authoritarian. It has to be. Which means the problems can be very predictable. Preventable, solvable.

        43 years ago when I started at KSU, up until mid 30's, I was a hot enough babe to attract all kinds of unwanted attention. Fortunately I had a very wise grandmother who explained all that to me and my middle sister (a blue eyed blonde babe) during the summer of '65 when we stayed with them. I paid attention and only had one attempt go to force - mine.

        I don't throw out arguments without paying attention or listening to all perspectives. 55 years ago from personal experience as a  Brownie Scout, I learned that the media tells the story to make it interesting to the public. Had many repeat lessons on that. I have been around long enough to remember the big events and smaller ones.

        Ultimately the careers of fourteen admirals and almost 300 naval aviators were scuttled or damaged by Tailhook. For example Secretary of the Navy H. Lawrence Garrett III and CNO Admiral Frank Kelso were both at Tailhook '91. Garrett ultimately resigned and Kelso retired early two years after the convention
        I don't know if the cost of that loss of trained professionals was ever released. Should have been a big reason to do something. But, the Pentagon has never had much reason to be concerned about spending those taxpayer dollars. The costs currently have to be at an ugly amount.

        The only thing that changed was not having something like that go on so openly. (Although the information on the DC Marine barracks covered in Invisible War is too damn close.) The military command has had more than enough time, and further scandals, to get this done. Gillibrand is not even proposing the cases be taken by civilian law enforcement.

        Understanding the Constitution has been a big issue for me. My copy is laminated.  My middle sister worked in a law office here for 2 decades that had world wide offices and reputation. Wonderful friend and former SO is a lawyer. One thing that is very clear to me is that law is a very tough field to understand. Military law is it's own specialty. I still think we should be able to express opinions, preferably informed. Might be a very good idea to expand high school civics classes to two semesters and include more basic law.

        I would be willing to have the military legal defense limited to a period of 3-5 years and then transferred back. Changing the embedded culture of an institution has also been well established as requiring an immense and sustained effort. You almost have to shock everyone into the new expectations. Seen it done in hospitals to get rid of the authoritarian physician mindset. It is not easy, it is totally worthwhile - in better patient care, nursing turnover ($$$) and everyone's job satisfaction.

        Do you honestly think a woman like the one who was stationed at a remote Alaska base (Adak) and repeatedly drugged and raped, will be successful filing sexual assault charges with this change?

        So yeah, as an American citizen I am trying to responsibly exercise my right to free speech. Which my father, uncle and FiL, who was a German POW for 18 months, defended in the Army, Navy, Army Air Corps and Air Force. 'K?

        "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

        by Ginny in CO on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 04:54:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No once (0+ / 0-)

          did I say that Congress did not have a say in military justice.  In fact 100% of the UCMJ comes from Congress.  If Congress wants to set up an alternate justice system for sex crimes they can.  I doubt it would pass Constitutional muster but they can try.

          While I think its wonderful that you married into a military family that was not the question.  Having a father in law in the AIr Force is not the same as being the person who has to make actual decisions about punishing another citizen.  It is not the same as reading and rereading the law so you are absolutely sure you are getting it right.  I didn't take Constitutional Law because I really enjoyed 24 hour take home exams that took 20 hours to complete, I took it because I had this crazy notion that if I was going to swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution I should know as much as possible about it.

          "Military law is it's own specialty" - Really?  You say that you have studied the Constitution so please tell me what part of it allows punishment for speech?  While the Constitution specifically prohibits punishment for speech the UCMJ specifically allows it.  The Constitution give two people in this country the ability to restrict the liberty of another citizen - a judge and a military commander.  Yet you think military law is not its own specialty?  No state has a law against being a jerk and they certainly dont impose capital punishment for it yet the UCMJ allows the death penalty for "conduct unbecoming."  At the same time, the minimum punishment for murder is "oral admonishment."  But no, its not a specialize type of law.

          You can absolutely express your opinion but when you say things like:

          "which is double stupid given how much the military has changed just with technology, changes in how wars are fought, etc.  A few folks can keep the vision thing into their 80s. Others not so much, or not at all"
          you put yourself in the category of uninformed opinion.  Nothing - NOTHING - about technology or how war is fought has changed rape.  Rape was no different in the '86 when I was first sworn in than it is now.  Actually that is not totally true since CONGRESS significantly expanded Article 120 of the UCMJ to move offenses formally under Article 134 to Article 120.  Congress did.  Not the military, Congress.  Why?  Because only Congress can.

          P.S. Yeah, I know about Tailhook.  Like most military professionals I was disgusted by the behavior of  the officers involved and thought they got off easy.  What disgusts me more is that there has been little change in the Air Force or Naval Aviation communities.  They remain mostly poor excuses for leaders and officers.

          It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

          by ksuwildkat on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:19:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site