GOP Erred in Naming SEALs at Convention
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...,6461849.story
Quote:
The appearance by the active duty military members troubled some at the Pentagon because of rules against active duty personnel participating in political activities.
On Wednesday, Navy officials said they had given permission for the SEALs to attend the convention on the condition that the Republican National Committee neither showcase them in the media nor publicly recognize them.
After Swindle clearly identified the two in his remarks, Republican officials initially told the Navy that the retired lieutenant general had ad-libbed. A Times article Thursday, quoting Navy officials, reported that conclusion.
I don't get it. If I really wanted to protect my anonymity, the last place I'd go is a place with hundreds of reporters and dozens of cameras to take part in an event watched by millions of people.
OK here's where I gotta draw the line
Quote:
Originally Posted by
oblong
The military needs to be viewed as impartial (OK), but if so set a reasonable rank structure for who can or can't go anywhere. I think anywhere any of them go there should be recognition of them all. And that shouldn't be percieved as either endorsement of or against any particular party. Its just going to a darn convention. The military on the other hand is just trying to do the right thing.
But its the media and/or politically oriented groups which will make this into more than it needs to be.:mad:
Someone please tell me how in the world it sounds like the rules for those who fight to retain our freedoms is they cant attend any political function at all for fear someone might actually say their name. Setting ROE is cool lets just make sure they don't take away the very thing these guys represent and fight for in the first place.
Personally I think its quite well known why the concern is there and so its understandable there would be attempts to address it, but honestly most of those who have created the situation aren't in the service any more so they really don't have to listen:(
The military members did nothing wrong
This issue is being directed at the wrong party. The service members were present for the right reason, support the family that paid the ultimate price. This positive example of how we take care of our own is the story that the american people need to read about. The sailors got permission and remained a part of the audience. Regardless of how they were presented, the fact is, that family deserves to be surrounded by the men that their loved one served with and made the ultimate sacrafice. The US Navy did the right thing by approving the men to be alongside the family and in my eyes put the family first. What a novel idea.
Ryan Bedner
Good intent, bad execution
I don't fault the Navy, Monsoor's family or his fellow SEALs for attending the event to show support and honor an American hero. I believe the intentions were good.
Ethically, I believe that active duty servicemembers should try and remain non-partisan and apolitical.
I don't believe the GOP's intention was to use Monsoor's story for political gain, but it could certainly appear that way.
The truth is that the media generally ignores our nation's heroes, in regards to what they choose to report in regards to War. Jump on Lexis or any search engine and type in "Abu Ghraib" or "Haditha"...see the results. Then type in Michael Monsoor, Paul Smith or Ross McGinnis. Results for news stories are much lower. I say kudos to the GOP for trying to recognize these heroes on a national televised event. Unfortunately, the perception will be that they are trying to use them for political gain.
There is no easy answer here. I'm glad heroes like Monsoor get the accolades, respect and honor that they deserve, I just wish it wasn't at a political convention.
Have to agree with jkm_101_fs0 and rjbedner
Much ado about nothing, I think. Yeah, it was a political convention but it was done by the Navy at the request of Monsoor's family. What are they supposed to do, say 'No' to a MOH winner's family? They'd have been criticized for that. The Navy properly asked they not be publicly recognized and Swindle apparently elected to disregard that. Oblong got it wrong, the GOP didn't ID the SEALs; Swindle just blew it and he should've known better.
All the ire should be directed at him.
Rules regarding military/politics/partisanship
On the same note, I saw a few folks IN UNIFORM at the convention. Not sure if these were retirees, reserve component or Active duty folks. Some of them did not appear to be retirees. The one that stood out was a younger-looking SFC in Dress Blues, seated in one of the state areas.
Are there any rules or regulations prohibiting the military (particularly active duty) from taking part in partisan/political events? I haven't heard of any regulations specifically, but just always understood that it wasn't ethical to do so. I am aware there are state reps, senators that serve in the NG, AR, etc. I guess it would be different for them since they are not active.
Any regulations would probably prohibit servicemembers from participating in uniform, representing the Armed Services in support of a polictical party, I'd assume. Can anyone cite any regs specifically? Just curious.
Exactly what I was looking for
Thanks Niel and WM. So apparently, some of what was going on at the convention was in violation of regs.
Unless they were retired or discharged
or National Guard folks not on Federal Active Duty, possibly so...
My suspicion would be that most would fall in those exempted categories (legally exempt by still very bad practice, IMO) and there may have been one or or a very few serving Federal troopies who made a bad decision.
How could this be controlled?
You are probably right, Ken. Although, I suppose it's plausible that an Active Duty member took leave and went to the RNC, on his own dime and wore his uniform while there. I doubt anyone called him on it, especially in that venue. Not sure there would be anything that could be done, if an active duty servicemember chose to do this. Unless his Chain of Command saw him on TV in uniform at the convention. I guess they could choose to reprimand him for regulation violations.
This could lead to another discussion, probably not one we want to get into, about the perpetuation in the military of the Republican Party as the "Pro-Military Party".
Consider this: Active Duty Servicemember attends RNC in uniform and his chain of command finds out and reprimands him for violating regulations. Servicemember claims that he is supporting the political party (and the candidate) that are the most "pro-military" (in his opinion). He doesn't understand how that is wrong, even though he obviously violated regulations by attending the event in uniform, among other things. To him, he was supporting his profession by attending the RNC and thus supporting the Republican Party and John McCain, the man he feels should be his next Commander-in-Chief.
I've always been aware of this cultural stigma and have seen military folks chide each other on their respective political affiliations. (guys who will actually admit they are Democrats) I've talked to a lot of folks that survived (or didn't) the Reduction in Force in the 90s that are pretty bitter towards the Dems, citing how "good" we have it now under a Republican Administration. I'm sure they are referring to general support of the DoD; but also specifically to the DoD budget, in regards to pay, benefits and money for training.
Not sure what I would do if I was in said servicemember's Chain of Command.
I'm certainly non-partisan and apolitical; just thinking about what I would do if one of my Soldiers had been in this situation.:confused:
You're good at standing out,
But can you blend in ?
I've attended countless receptions overseas and abroad in 23 years of active service, but where and when I wore my Blues was always common sense to me.
The press and political parties took advantage of an opportunity that should have never been made available to them. If we think those folks are slick, wait til you get a taste of foreign Bravo Sierra at its best!
Ignorance of the regs is no excuse to anyone above the grade of E-1.