• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

All Things "Mad Dog" Mattis (merged)

  • Thread starter Thread starter ark
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
. Moralizing, and high-handed self-assignation of intellectual and spiritual superiority in the field of soldiering from an individual who can't now, nor ever will understand what soldiering is really about is refreshingly ridiculous.And I'll bet you think Dallaire is the greatest General since Hannibal. Thanks for your time.

Jawohl Mein General! Let's start the Junta now and get it over with....
 
Mad Max said:
I am also a career Infantryman- NOT an Infanteer, for you PC whiners out there.

Good to know I'm a PC whiner.  :)
 
Mad Max said:
Moralizing, and high-handed self-assignation of intellectual and spiritual superiority in the field of soldiering from an individual who can't now, nor ever will understand what soldiering is really about is refreshingly ridiculous.And I'll bet you think Dallaire is the greatest General since Hannibal. Thanks for your time.

No No ... thank you for yours!!!![except for the PC bit]
 
I've been around long enough to know your type PKaye, you're the type to argue for an hour about receiving a poor assessment yet won't spend one minute considering if it was accurate. How many posts have you made since my last and you still haven't admitted you were wrong. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you won't, people like you never can. Your ego gets so attached to your position that when your position is threatened so is your ego and you'll do everything you can to defend both, right or wrong.

Here is the bottom line: you are in no position to judge Gen Mattis on anything. You may not like what he says, it might offend you or upset you, and that is fine, it's your right to be offended by whatever you choose. If that is the case, say so, don't wrap it in some kind of "professional ciriticism", you aren't qualified to judge him as a professional (few are) and probably never will be.

That is the last I'm going to say on the matter. Goodnight everyone, sleep tight.
 
Some of the posts are truly dopy, others very thoughtful, although I don't always agree (i.e. PBI).  The flipant remark, an American thing to say, truly priceless!

What? Did I say that.....?

Cheers.
 
Does anyone else notice that our young new privates and officer cadets seem to continiously butt heads with, well, everyone?  Whats up with that?  

This whole "he said something bad" deal reminds me of someone overhearing a tasteless joke between two other people int he mess and going off the deepend.
He stepped on his dick and said something dumb at the wrong time.  Sounds to me like he was trying to target a certian audience.  I talk to my section buddies differently than i would talk to the media. A CO speaking to his battalion speaks differently than he does speaking at a public school. You cater your language, terminology and tone to your audience.  Sure he said something stupid.  Lets just kick him out of the military and replace him with some officer that has zero experience in combat, zero respect and trust from his troops (in the middle of hell) BUT a great public speak that doesn't swear. That'll win the day.

I for one would like to believe the soldiers in the most powerful army in the world are not robots and an off handed comment by a general will not brain wash troops into thinking its fun to kill people and have them turn into monsters.

He said something stupid, we all do. Some even say the odd dumb comment on these forums believe it or not.  Everyone can have an opinion. You can think the world is flat. I persononally don't care.  As Andyboy pointed out, I think there are very very few of us here who are qualified to make comments regarding this Generals professionalisim or soldier skills.
It's like a bunch of brand new privates critiquing a Colonel. Sure they can have theior opinion but before anyone takes them even remotely seriously, they better get some TI.
 
mdh,

I think that the General's remarks will largely be forgotten, with the exception that his chances at becoming Commandant of the Marine Corps are now probably in jeoprady.  He was on the short-list to become the next.  However, I think that General Mattis is not one that is motivated at becoming top dog so to speak.  He is more the type that's happiest in the field, conducting the business of war.

P Kaye,

I wouldn't necessarily say my career is all that admirable... ;D  More victim of circumstance than anything.  Try not to be too much on the high horse until you find yourself having some time on the field of battle.  That said, stick to your convictions, but please realize that there are different leadership personalities.  General Mattis happens to have one all of his own and it works.
 
Ghost778 said:
Does anyone else notice that our young new privates and officer cadets seem to continiously butt heads with, well, everyone?  Whats up with that?  ...

... It's like a bunch of brand new privates critiquing a Colonel. Sure they can have theior opinion but before anyone takes them even remotely seriously, they better get some TI.

Bang on.  The colloquial expression is "too big for their britches".  Fire for effect.

Okay, young officers - pay attention:
If you ever intend or expect to receive respect, you first must earn it.
If you demonstrate a lack of respect for your superiors, you are setting the example for your troops (i.e. and therefore are implicitly telling them that it's okay for them to disrespect you, too).

"If a man who serves indolently and a man who serves well are treated in the same way, the man who serves well may begin to wonder why he does so."
- Asakura Toshikage (1428-81)

Remember - you're at the bottom of both the experience and rank ladders ... so there are more people above you than below - you've got quite a few people to whom you should be looking up to and respecting.

"The Army taught me some great lessons -- to be prepared for catastrophe -- to endure being bored -- and to know that however fine a fellow I thought myself in my usual routine there were other situations in which I was inferior to men that I might have looked down upon had not experience taught me to look up."
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (1841-1935)

 
mdh,

I think that the General's remarks will largely be forgotten, with the exception that his chances at becoming Commandant of the Marine Corps are now probably in jeoprady.   He was on the short-list to become the next.   However, I think that General Mattis is not one that is motivated at becoming top dog so to speak.   He is more the type that's happiest in the field, conducting the business of war.


Matt,

Thanks for your post. It's a dangerous world for Marines like you - so take care, good luck, and God Speed, cheers, mdh :salute:
 
Folks, I am getting old, (and I was already rather stupid), so I need something explained to me here.

Are we forgetting that Army.ca is supposed to offer a "level playing field", or have I got that wrong? Have I misunderstood the tone of a few more senior posters here (and on other threads too, I might add...) to suggest that like Victorian-era children, our junior members should be "seen but not heard"? Are we to introduce our posters' rank as a distinction of status? Hopefully not.

If I was a junior poster I might acquire that impression. While I certainly understand and accept that experience does bring with it a certain wisdom (well--anyway....it's supposed to...) and a greater right to speak with authority, does it also carry with it the right to shut down those who do not have it? Surely that is not our aim here?

I unloaded on P. Kaye, but on re-reading my post I realized that I sounded a bit like some pompous old high-collared port swiller dressing down a young subby. I recalibrated and explained myself, but in so doing I asked myself the questions I have articulated here.

The young and the inexperienced have the right to challenge the old and comfortable, albeit in an intelligent manner. In fact, I would look for that liveliness on these pages, so that we do not end up preaching to the choir, which is an intellectually useless exercise (although fun over lots of beers in the Mess...).

So---am I exaggerating? Have we merely give P. Kaye (or others) a reminder that they needed, or are we turning this into an old boys' club?

Cheers
 
pbi:

I alluded to the issue in the recent (and well known) thread over in admin. If we are going to maintain the civility, there had better not be any double standards. Make ALL the rules apply to ALL the posters and mods and we won't have so many penis size contests. Want to ban personal attacks? Start with the senior posters, let the mods handle the idiots with administrative action. It seems that many of us are so caught up with our parade square personas, we forget where we are.
 
In an effort to promote professional and reasoned debate on this thread, we've really focused on members substantiating their statements.   If we didn't do this, it would quickly regress back into the general Bulletin Board chaos where the peanut-gallery rules.   This thread would have quickly degenerated into "Stupid American General" comments.

However, this is not the case.   Army.ca has made the effort - we've even written into the forum policy -   to demand substantiation of any claims or statements so that we can avoid chaos, confusion, and misinformation.   Generally, the policy has worked.   People who know what they are talking about (usually from first-hand experience or a good general knowledge) generally do the talking and people lacking any real exposure to the issues refrain from confusing the situation by contributing with baseless statements.   This way, the discussion is relevent and, hopefully, everyone can learn something.

With regards to this particular thread, anybody was welcome to criticize the General, something like; "I don't think General Mattis should be so brazen about his combat experience - other Marines and Soldiers may not see it that way and may feel that the General is trivializing something that deeply affects them."   I would have agreed with this full-heartedly.   It doesn't take much to substantiate a statement like this - being human is good enough.

However, the post that started the debate went beyond general criticism.   It was an attack along the lines of - "What is this General talking about?   This guy is such a fool that he doesn't deserve to be a General because he has no professional bearing.   It's a good thing Canadians are better then this when we approach operations, but lately, we've been acting like this too."   Clearly, claims like this demand substantiation to ensure that they are an informed opinion on Marine Generalship and the behaviour of Canadian soldiers on operations rather then just another baseless opinion on the General.

Clearly, calling someone to task on their statements is not a problem.   Many felt that the statements regarding both General Mattis's comments and of behaviour of Canadian soldiers were grossly incorrect in P Kaye's post, so he was "called" on it.   This is not "picking on him" or "preaching", it is vehement disagreement.   If it was done in not-so-pretty manner, like I did, then so what - if one can't take the heat, they should stay out of the kitchen.   The more outrageous the statement (like "Mattis is an unprofessional plug") the more outrageous the replies.   People are liable to get "caught up" in the heat of the moment (I'm just as guilty of this), but as long as the attacks aren't personal we can finish the argument, have a beer, and move on.   Remember, we're all on the same team here.

However, PBI is right when he is wary of the "dogpile" that seems to be occurring now.   No one should be discouraged from taking a lump or two here - God knows I've received a few both in public forums and via PM.   But conversely, no one should be discouraged from posting here because of their rank or status (civilian, etc).   I'm a 24 year old with a few years of experience as a rifleman and I wouldn't last long if every post I made was followed by "Shut yer cakehole, you're just a reservist corporal!"   Administer the "verbal thrashing" on whatever needs to clarified, and move on with it.  

If everyone stays in their lane (ie: you won't see me saying "Canadian Helicopter Pilots aren't trained enough and their helicopters suck") and takes their lumps and admits their "foul" when they stray out of it, then this bulletin board should maintain the high quality of professional debate that we've managed to foster here.

Cheers,
Infanteer
 
Thanks Infanteer. Wisely said. I agree with you.

Cheers
 
>> I've been around long enough to know your type PKaye
You've never met me (that I know of).  Based on one argument in a discussion forum you claim to have me figured out?  Give me a break.

>> you're the type to argue for an hour about receiving a poor assessment yet won't spend one minute considering if it was accurate.
That is actually a totally inaccurate assessement.  The last time I did poorly on a PO, I spent an hour hitting the books, not arguing about whether it was accurate (it was accurate).

>> How many posts have you made since my last and you still haven't admitted you were wrong...
Again, that is inaccurate.  You're just all fired-up and don't want to acknowledge that I did try to back-pedal and soften my statemnets after some of the responses made me realise I had posted way to rashly.  Quoting myself from my second post on this thread:

"Okay, certainly I over-generalized, and this was not fair of me to do.  When I read news reports like this, I get angry, and that obviously came out in my post."

I also made a number of other comments explaining that I recognised my position needed to be refined and more carefully thought through.  So, no Andyboy, I did not get up and say "I was wrong", because I still beleive I have made some valid observations.  I did, however, stand up and say "ok, my observations need to be re-examined and refined".

>> Here is the bottom line: you are in no position to judge Gen Mattis on anything.
No, here is the bottom line.  This is a discussion forum, and this is exactly the place where we should feel free to comment and even criticise our superiors.  Obviously, were I under the General's command, I would never make such a crticism.

In summary: my response to Gen. Mattis' remarks was rash.  I made every effort to adjust my comments accordingly, and to remain good-natured to all those on the forum.  I reached the end of my rope on this with your unconstructive derisions, Andyboy.  I won't make any comment about "your type", because I've never met you.  You may be a fine soldier, but I don't think you have the right approach to a discussion forum like this.









 
                                                      MODERATOR WARNING
......I think the original topic is being lost here, Andyboy and P Kaye if you wish to continue this conversation about what you have to offer each other, do it via PM"S....Thanking you in advance,
                                                                            Bruce

...........................back to the original topic, folks...
 
It is pretty much is done.   I think the article was really a non-issue t begin with and any debate has been long settled.   Give it a lock.
 
This from Stars & Stripes, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.
Marine Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, is a tough guy. In fact, if you parachuted him unarmed onto an island inhabited by psychotic ninja robots, he would get more kills than famed Scottish warrior William Wallace.

But one reader asked The Rumor Doctor about a story that shows Mattis has a compassionate side to him. The story goes that Mattis stood duty on Christmas back when he was a brigadier general so that a younger Marine could spend the holiday with his family.

Since the privilege of rank makes it extremely rare for general officers to pull duty for their subordinates, The Doctor was intrigued.

Unfortunately, Mattis was unavailable to talk. That’s not surprising considering revolution is sweeping through the CENTCOM theater, putting several vital U.S. allies at risk.

However, The Doctor was able to find out what happened from retired Marine Gen. Charles Krulak, who was commandant when the story took place. Every Christmas during his tenure, Krulak delivered cookies to every Marine duty post around Washington and Quantico, Va.

Back in 1998, he was making his final delivery to Marine Corps Combat Development Command headquarters at Quantico when he asked the Marine on duty who the officer of the day was.

“The young Marine said, ‘Sir, it’s Brigadier General Mattis.’”

Krulak thought the Marine had misunderstood him, so he asked again, but he got the same answer.

“I looked around the duty hut and in the back, there were two cots: One for the officer of the day and one for young Marine. I said, ‘OK, let me cut through all of this: Who was the officer who slept in that bed last night?’

“And the Marine said, ‘Sir, Brigadier General Mattis.’”

At that moment, Mattis walked around the corner.

“So I said to him, ‘Jim, what are you standing the duty for?’ “And he said, ‘Sir, I looked at the duty roster for today and there was a young major who had it who is married and had a family; and so I’m a bachelor, I thought why should the major miss out on the fun of having Christmas with his family, and so I took the duty for him.’ ”

Never before or since has Krulak run into a general officer standing duty on Christmas Day.

“I think it says volumes about Jim Mattis and his leadership style,” Krulak said. “He did it very unobtrusively. He just took the duty.”

THE RUMOR DOCTOR’S DIAGNOSIS: Gen. Mattis once famously said he likes to shoot Taliban, so no one is going to call him a softie. But by standing duty so that a young Marine could spend Christmas with his family, he showed you don’t have to be heartless to be a leader. But don’t expect him to pull that stuff on Presidents Day.

:salute:
 
Not reported on the major US networks except FOX.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-how-top-defense-analysts-just-devastated-obamas-failed-policies-in-an-unforgettable-way/#VIHkbuSvWr7Q26fC.97

Top Defense Analysts Just Devastated Obama’s Failed Policies
    See video at link

Barack Obama is coming under withering and sustained fire from U.S. military experts who say in no uncertain terms that the president’s defense policies are a failure.

Before Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn retired in the summer of 2014, he was the top guy at the Defense Intelligence Agency. So Flynn’s stinging criticism of the Obama administration’s sputtering terror-fighting efforts carries significant weight.

The Daily Beast says that Gen. Flynn leveled his harsh charge against the administration’s anti-terrorism policies at a Washington industry conference. He reportedly told the gathering of special operators and intelligence officers that, under Obama’s leadership, U.S. efforts to combat al Qaeda and the Islamic State have been paralyzed by the complexity of the fight.

Flynn further blasted the Obama administration, saying, “You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists.”

 
He said the administration is unwilling to admit the scope of the problem, naively clinging to the hope that limited counterterrorist intervention will head off the ideological juggernaut of religious militancy.

    He also slammed the administration for refusing to use the term “Islamic militants” in its description of ISIS and al Qaeda.

And on Fox News Tuesday night, another highly decorated U.S. military veteran and defense analyst lit into the Obama administration with a similar charge of incompetence in the war on terror.

Retired four-state general and former Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, Gen. Jack Keane, told Megyn Kelly that Obama lacks a comprehensive strategy to protect America from the very real threat of radical Islam.

Earlier in the day, Keane had testified about terrorism before the Senate Armed Services Committee. In his appearance on “The Kelly File,” Gen. Keane said, “This administration has been paralyzed by the fear of adverse consequences in the Middle East driven by the realities of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

You can watch Megyn Kelly’s summary of Gen. Michael Flynn’s harsh criticism as well as the eye-opening interview with Gen. Jack Keane by clicking on the video above.


http://www.c-span.org/video/?323991-1/hearing-national-security-threats    See C-SPAN video at link

January 27, 2015- National Security Threats

Generals James Mattis (Ret.), General John Keane (Ret.), and Admiral William Fallon (Ret.) testified at a Senate Armed Services committee hearing on threats to U.S. national security. Topics included Islamic extremism, efforts to combat Islamic State militants, as well as potential threats from Iran and Russia. Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) chaired the hearing as committee chair Senator John McCain (R-AZ) attended the funeral of Saudi King Abdullah.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/28/inside-the-ring-gen-james-mattis-criticizes-obama-/?page=all

Gen. James Mattis criticizes Obama defense, security policies

The Washington Times - Bill Gertz - January 28, 2015

Retired Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, former commander of the U.S. Central Command, delivered a harsh critique of the Obama administration’s defense and national security policies this week — without ever mentioning the president or his security team by name.

Gen. Mattis, in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, pulled no punches in criticizing policies and strategies ranging from confronting Chinese bullying in Asia and pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan to sharp defense cuts and putting women into combat roles.

The former four-star general, who held the Centcom post from 2010 until his retirement in 2013, said international order is breaking down and requires sustained American leadership to promote freedom. He called on America “to adapt to changing circumstances, to come out now from our reactive crouch and take a firm, strategic stance in defense of our values.”

Calling for a “refreshed national strategy,” Gen. Mattis urged Congress to play a key role in crafting a more coherent way forward.

“Doing so requires us to look beyond the events that are currently consuming the executive branch,” he said Tuesday. “There’s an urgent need to stop reacting to each immediate vexing issue in isolation. Such response often creates unanticipated second-order effects and even more problems for us.”

Posing a series of questions for the committee, Gen. Mattis called first for the panel to bolster U.S. intelligence about threats to national security so the military can have more warnings of dangers.

“Today, ladies and gentlemen, we have less military shock absorber in our smaller military, so less ability to take surprise in stride, and fewer forward-deployed forces overseas to act as sentinels. Accordingly, we need more early warning,” he said.

Gen. Mattis said it is also imperative to halt the damage caused by the across-the-board defense spending cuts under the 2011 Budget Control Act. “No foe in the field can wreak such havoc on our security that mindless sequestration is achieving today,” he said. “This committee must lead the effort to repeal sequestration that is costing military readiness and long-term capability, while sapping our troops’ morale.”

Noting that U.S. influence in the Middle East is at the lowest point in 40 years, Gen. Mattis urged setting up a new security architecture that would allow the United States to “take our own side in this fight” against political Islam.

“The fundamental question I believe is, ‘Is political Islam in our best interest?’ If not, what is our policy to authoritatively support the countervailing forces?”

Gen. Mattis said violent jihadi terrorists cannot be allowed to hide behind false religious garb and at the same time “leave us unwilling to define this threat with the clarity it deserves.”

Outlining a counterterrorism strategy against the Islamic State in Iraq in September, Mr. Obama said the United States would seek to counter the ideology of Islamic terrorists. The administration, however, has done little in the way of undermining radical Islamic terrorist ideology and appears to have banned use of the term “Islam” in describing terrorist threats.

Gen. Mattis noted that potential U.S. allies around the world are ready to support the United States, but “we have not been clear about where we stand in defining or dealing with the growing violent jihadi terrorist threat.”

On Afghanistan, he indirectly criticized Mr. Obama’s policy of setting a deadline for pulling out U.S. troops and warned that gains in Afghanistan are reversible and could be a repeat of the failures of U.S. policy taking place in Iraq.

“Notifying the enemy in advance of our withdrawal dates or reassuring the enemy that we will not use certain capabilities like our ground forces should be avoided,” he said.

A smaller U.S. military must fight across the spectrum of conflict from nuclear war to counterinsurgency to cyberwar, he said, adding that nuclear forces must be upgraded and possibly reduced to bomber and submarine forces without land-based missiles.

Gen. Mattis called for building more naval power and warships in light of Beijing’s increasing aggression in the South China Sea. “While our efforts in the Pacific to keep positive relations with China are well and good, these efforts must be paralleled by a policy to build the counterbalance if China continues to expand its bullying role in the South China Sea and elsewhere,” he said.

China must be denied “veto power” over the territorial claims, security and economic conditions in the Pacific.

On Russia, Gen. Mattis said “we must ask if the NATO alliance efforts have adjusted to the unfortunate and dangerous mode the Russian leadership has slipped into” — a reference to Moscow’s takeover of Ukraine’s Crimea and continuing armed support to pro-Russian separatist rebels in the eastern part of the country.

Gen. Mattis hit the administration for a lack of detainee policy, an outgrowth of Mr. Obama’s push to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

“We have observed the perplexing lack of detainee policy that has resulted in the return of released prisoners to the battlefield,” he said. “We should not engage in another fight without resolving this issue up front.”

In a criticism of the administration’s social engineering policies in the military, such as allowing gays to serve openly and planning to integrate women into combat roles, the retired Marine issued a warning.

“No matter how laudable in terms of a progressive country’s instincts, this committee needs to consider carefully any proposed changes to military rules, traditions and standards that bring non-combat emphasis to combat units,” he said.

“There is a great difference between military service in dangerous circumstances and serving in a combat unit whose role is to search out, close with and kill the enemy at close quarters,” he said.

Fixing the country’s faulty defense strategy is urgent “because in an interconnected age when opportunistic adversaries can work in tandem to destroy stability and prosperity, our country needs to regain its strategic footing,” Gen. Mattis said. “We need to bring the clarity to our efforts before we lose the confidence of the American people and the support of potential allies.”






 
What an awesome pick to be SECDEF !!

https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/1055906/message-to-the-department-of-defense-from-secretary-of-defense-james-mattis

It’s good to be back and I’m grateful to serve alongside you as Secretary of Defense.

Together with the Intelligence Community we are the sentinels and guardians of our nation. We need only look to you, the uniformed and civilian members of the Department and your families, to see the fundamental unity of our country. You represent an America committed to the common good; an America that is never complacent about defending its freedoms; and an America that remains a steady beacon of hope for all mankind.

Every action we take will be designed to ensure our military is ready to fight today and in the future. Recognizing that no nation is secure without friends, we will work with the State Department to strengthen our alliances. Further, we are devoted to gaining full value from every taxpayer dollar spent on defense, thereby earning the trust of Congress and the American people.

I am confident you will do your part. I pledge to you I’ll do my best as your Secretary.

MATTIS SENDS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top