Military Community, military installations, discussions, blogs, photos, videos - Military Times

Letters

Fitness for fighters

Warrior ethos ... who are we kidding? I could not disagree more with the change to include fitness test performance on performance ratings. Eight years ago, I chose the Air Force over sister services because I could be promoted based solely on primary job performance and knowledge. I prefer working for people who get ahead because of career field competence rather than how fast they run. Yes, fitness is crucial for those (such as cops, aircrew members, civil engineers and explosive ordnance disposal airmen) who work long hours in ridiculously hot weather to take the fight to the bad guys. But there are many more of us desk jockeys out here who are still part of the team, and, realistically, we need to be in good enough shape only to walk from the air-conditioned tent we live in to the air-conditioned tent we work in. As long as our physical appearance does not disgrace the military image, run times should be irrelevant. I hate to pick on nurses, but it’s no secret that many of them are not exemplary specimens of physical fitness. But there is a huge nursing shortage in this country. Can we really afford to get rid of these folks who are taking awesome care of our frontline troops? Of course, we can’t. So those in the critical fields will always miraculously find a way to get that 75 on their test (integrity first!), and the rest of us will be shown the door.

I realize that we need to weed out people because this is a boots-on-the-ground war, so I say let us at least be honest about it instead of forcing airmen to become de facto soldiers. Give the Army a couple of hundred thousand more troops to win this thing, and cut all the active-duty Air Force jobs except for those who fly and fix planes. Give everyone else the chance to pick up a civilian slot, and give those who love this new physical training system so much the opportunity to go Army.

Tech. Sgt. Matt Greene

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio

Religion in the ranks

Robert F. Dorr’s column [“Keep the faith (to oneself),” Back Talk, Aug. 20] accurately describes the “religious” cancer infecting the military. The undermining of our Constitution by senior military officers must end.

On Sept. 1, 1997, after a series of ethics violations by senior officers, Air Force Secretary Sheila Widnall issued “The Little Blue Book.” About religious tolerance, it states:

“Military professionals must remember that religious choice is a matter of individual conscience. Professionals, and especially commanders, must not take it upon themselves to change or coercively influence the religious views of subordinates.”

The destructive influence of Christian-right ideology within the military has become endemic from the service academies to the Pentagon, with no accountability. Brig. Gen. Johnny Weida, former Air Force Academy commandant, was investigated and struck from the major general promotion list for pushing his religious beliefs publicly and in official correspondence to subordinates and cadets, but later was promoted with back pay. Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin’s now infamous religious speeches in uniform preceded his promotion to deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence, becoming the senior military officer in charge of Abu Graib. Maj. Gen. Jack Catton was cited for soliciting votes in official e-mails for a fellow Christian running for Congress. In the Christian Embassy video, several generals proselytized their brand of faith. Maj. Gen. Catton even suggested his religious ideology had priority over his oath to the Constitution.

In the “Blue Book,” Secretary Widnall accurately states: Ethics violations “do the most damage when they are displayed by the leader. If the leader is unwilling to sacrifice individual goals for the good of the unit, it’s hard to convince other unit members to do so.”

These flag officers have publicly and in uniform placed their religious ideology above their oath to the Constitution. Their actions to “coercively influence the religious views of subordinates” betray the men and women they serve. They must be removed from command, demoted and discharged to restore integrity in the ranks.

Col. David Antoon (ret.)

Dayton, Ohio

An Air Force Times article [“DoD-linked group backs off faith-based care packages,” Aug. 27] and editorial [“Inappropriate message,” Aug. 27] reveal a new assumed authority has been imposed that denies free expression of religious beliefs and deprives citizens from sending critical counsel and aid to our troops in harm’s way in war, in our Christian nation in which 90 percent believe in God.

Abundant evidence of original authority, our Constitution, our Supreme Court and our founding fathers have all been superceded and canceled by some unknown dictators ordaining one Mikey Weinstein as our new nation’s god, imposing his beliefs on all, as he professes religious freedoms, a big lie, as he destroys freedoms.

It is easy to understand Mikey’s problem with Jesus Christ and the New Testament, but rather difficult to understand or accept the same problems with our Air Force.

God is bigger, and this too will pass, soon I hope.

Maj. Don Bagby (ret.)

Macon, N.C.

System didn’t fail

I’ve been reading a page of complaints [“Hernandez case,” Letters, Sept. 3] about the Airman 1st Class Cassandra Hernandez case and found it interesting that three out of five were from women complaining that the “system” failed. One stated that if the prosecution thought it had a good enough case to bring it to trial, that should have been enough to keep them from prosecuting Hernandez. True; however, they may only have had a good enough case for rape with testimony from the victim. In this case, the alleged victim failed — failed to follow through. Yes, it would have been traumatizing to have to tell the story over and over. Yes, there were most likely going to be questions with limited or questionable validity to the accusation. Personally, I don’t find anything embarrassing about telling someone if I wear underwear.

Do I believe Hernandez consented to the acts in question? No. Is that rape? Yes. Do I take pity that she is being charged after failing to take the stand and having the rape charges dropped? No. I believe that all airmen, E-1 through O-10, have to be held accountable for their actions. Did she drink too much? Yes, definitely — she was underage, so one drop is too much. By doing this, instead of what she was supposed to do, she enabled the act. This does not take the blame off the other three for executing the alleged rape, but it does not relieve Hernandez of responsibility for her actions leading up to it.

I believe more can be done to prevent such situations, but most airmen won’t like it. “Dry Dorms” servicewide and stricter enforcement of dormitory rules would be a good start.

Should Hernandez have to recount the events of the night in question? In a perfect world, no. All she had to do was tell them what happened and answer a few embarrassing questions. Is that really so hard to guarantee a conviction?

So, in the end, did the system fail? I believe not. Prosecutors took the case to court and charged one individual. Not everything can be a slam-dunk, especially in a he said-he said-he said-she said case in which she says nothing in court and settles on pressing charges and hoping something magical will happen. Did the system fail by turning on her when officials couldn’t prosecute the alleged rapist? No, accountability is the name of the game. Do the right thing the first time. A lot of bad choices were made that night and not all of them were made by the one side. Integrity, service before self and excellence in all we do, not some of what we do. You can cry foul all day, but when it comes down to it, no one should be let off for anything that happened that night.

Staff Sgt. Albert Hunsiker

Barksdale Air Force Base, La.

UAVs should be Air Force’s

I agree wholeheartedly with Charles Sutherland’s opinion piece on unmanned aerial vehicles [“Function comes first,” Sept. 3]. These platforms are prime examples of air power. The Air Force is not asking to purchase Patriot missile batteries, even though they are a counter-air capability. Sutherland brings out a point being overlooked. Air power is best employed in the hands of airmen.

Lt. Col. Russ Mathers

Newport, R.I.