Guess he was right--a lot of folks do including the DoD."I think a lot of people had the misconception that if you're not getting bullets slung by your head, you're not serving your nation in a time of war."
Guess he was right--a lot of folks do including the DoD."I think a lot of people had the misconception that if you're not getting bullets slung by your head, you're not serving your nation in a time of war."
Unfortunate Policy Change for 2LT Campbell
I maybe in the slim majority that is unhappy that 2LT Campbell won't be playing Free Safety for the Detroit Lions this year. I've read most of the posts on this from all of you (although I vehemently disagree with some) and it seems that we must consider this reversal of policy in terms of logic:
Apparently, 2LT Campbell is too valuable as a PL (ADA) to release to the NFL and recruit for Army football. Grounds for the decision:
*He went to West Point knowing of the military obligation and service requirement, in a time of war. He should fulfill his commitment.
*The taxpayers footed the bill for his education; not to play football, but to serve.
I SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING WITH UTTER FACETIOUSNESS:
If this is the logic for the decision, then in fairness, the following programs must be abolished, IOT "get these Soldiers in the fight", because they enlisted or were commissioned into the Army to fight wars, not do “other non-essential activities” at the expense of the taxpayer:
-Golden Knights Parachute Team
-Army Marksmanship Team (who routinely sends shooters to the Olympics)
-Army Athlete Program (also sends Soldiers to the Olympics)
There is also another solution. Do away with competitive sports teams at West Point. Then we don’t have to have this discussion. The Cadets aren’t there to play games; they are there to learn and prepare to lead troops. Or, one could say that if USMA doesn’t want to put (quality) athletes on the field with potentially professional talent, then why put a team on the field at all? Either do it well, or don’t do it at all, right?
Can you see where this could go?
****FACETIOUSNESS CONCLUDED*******
I’m not jealous of Caleb Campbell because he has a talent that I don’t. It doesn’t make me angry that he can play professional football and not have to serve in combat, just like me and so many others. It doesn’t upset me that he could make millions of dollars playing a pro sport and just “do some recruiting for USMA in the off-season”, even though he took the same oath I did. I don’t have any animosity for the guy at all. I happen to believe that West Point’s Division I competitive sports programs are a great thing, and anything they can do to improve them into habitually victorious organizations should be done; to include recruiting ballplayers with professional potential; and letting them serve as a reservist to recruit other superior athletes to USMA in their respective off-seasons. What a phenomenal recruiting tool and morale booster that would be! It’s incredibly unfortunate this is not the case, dooming West Point football to mediocrity until the policy is once again re-instated.
Sometimes the level of martyrdom on this forum is amazing. Not just with this thread, but others as well. Remember this one? http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=5611
Sir, what the hell are we doing?
I think there's more to it than logic...
Sure can. It can lead one to make this sort of statement:"Can you see where this could go?"Which may be logical but I suspect misses the emotional and psychological aspects by a great distance."Sometimes the level of martyrdom on this forum is amazing."
Logically, no one would ever go to war; it is undoubtedly one of the most stupid if not the most stupid of human endeavors. Logically, no one would ever want to be a soldier, it's entirely too risky -- yet people do want to be and are Soldiers. Why is that?
War transcends logic.
That would be about the only thing in your post I agree with. I believe that taking the King's coin means serving in the field. That does not mean recruiting to fill football teams at the Point or slots in the Golden Kinights--many of whom in the 70s I knew and jumped with. Some of the Knights then were recruited and became instant corporals after basic so they could try out. As for the marksmanship unit, it has in the past done good work. But in the current environment, I fail to see the need for a pellet pistol champion.Originally Posted by jkm_101_fso
In the case of the LT in question, I would not criticize him as an officer had he not opened his mouth first. That aside, I would criticize the priorities of the Academy and the Army that said he could side step his obligation.
If that is what you call martyrdom, then I am a martyr and a taxpayer.
Tom
Reference the other post, well that was started by someone essentially using the forum as a lab.
You and I both know the level of media coverage he's recieved would eventually lead to him saying something "questionable" (he's 21 years old), resulting in criticism from those in the peanut gallery. I'm sure that his intentions were good regarding any quote he made that you found unfavorable or controversial.
I don't consider anyone a martyr in this case, unless your stance is "well, I had to serve in war and in the field, so should he". IMO, that viewpoint is immature and is a result of jealousy and anger, not actual reasoning...not to mention a failure to see the big picture beyond one's self.
Sir, what the hell are we doing?
He is 21 years of age and old enough to swear his oath as an officer. As for his intentions, his actions speak much louder.
Interesting that you say that as you brought up the term. My stance is as I stated: you take the King's coin, you serve. I did not have to serve in a war; I did so as a volunteer who trained to do so as part of my job.I don't consider anyone a martyr in this case, unless your stance is "well, I had to serve in war and in the field, so should he".
You are welcome to your opinion. I am neither jealous nor angry at the Lieutenant. He is a disappointment. You seem to equate the big picture with West Point football. I would say the issue is larger than that; apparently DoD thought so, too.IMO, that viewpoint is immature and is a result of jealousy and anger, not actual reasoning...not to mention a failure to see the big picture beyond one's self.
Tom
I don't see how he is a disappointment...what do you mean? Because he agreed to the now-defunct policy of letting him play?
I think the big picture, at least initially, was West Point Football. The original policy (letting him play in the NFL) was designed to attract more quality players to USMA, thus resulting in the program becoming more successful. The policy was reversed, which means at some point, someone "in charge" thought it was a good idea. Apparently they were "trumped" by either a non-football fan or someone who was sick of hearing the collective whining from the force about 2LT Campbell's unique opportunity.
Sir, what the hell are we doing?
Again all your opinion and that's ok. As for disappointment, an officer that takes an oath during wartime who feels playing football is more important than service fits that bill. I would say the same thing applies to those who framed the policy. DoD does in fact trump Army; whether it was a non-football fan or reaction to comments from the field is debatable.
We will have to disagree that West Point football is "Big Picture".
Finally I would also suggest you avoid the use of "whining" when dismissing other's opinions.
Tom
Martyrdom? Just my perception, but I viewed the issues brought out in both threads as more along the lines of personal integrity and operational ethics as opposed to entitlement and what's in it for me attitudes.
I see no difference between my position in this thread and my position with field grade officers. I have problems with officers getting special treatment when Soldiers are not afforded the same benefits. I say that as a senior Captain who has seen it happen too often.
Example is better than precept.
To quote jkm_101_fso,
this:strikes me as a typical Army reaction to being caught wrong. Grudgingly comply but do so with bad grace and while thumbing the collective nose at Congress, DoD or whomever. In this case by not just putting his name in the hopper but in assigning him as a Graduate Assistant Coach. Puh-lease...."...looks like he's not headed to IZ anytime soon..."
Talk about an example ofWay to go DA -- Shades of Apaches into Bosnia or the great M4 debacle. "You can't tell me what to do...""IMO, ... immature and is a result of jealousy and anger, not actual reasoning...not to mention a failure to see the big picture beyond one's self..."
With a caveat that in this case someone may just be trying to assuage a bitter pill as the Army offered to let him go in good faith and got overruled, ergo they'll try to make up for that to an extent. If that's the case, I'd say laudable bur not too smart. All things considered, it's a policy that should logically on a popular consumption basis have been suspended for the duration and this is not a great response by the Army to the DoD edict IMO. YMMV.
stop loss
Would the Army compassionately reassign Joe if he was expecting to ETS and play pro football, but one day from release, he was stop lossed? Would they give him a cushy coaching job? The stop lossed Soldiers I know, were sent to Iraq for a year (and though they were not NFL caliber, they were awesome people).
I joined ROTC my sophomore year, and took the oath right before i left for ROTC basic camp that summer. When I passed the camp, I was told that I could still quit, but if I showed up to ROTC, I was obligated from that point on, and to get out of it, would take a pretty damn good reason, and repayment of my scholarship. That was 2001-2002. LT Campbell entered USMA after 2001, knowing we were at war. He took the oath, and if he knew he would be happier playing football, he should have transferred. The reaction of every officer I've talked to about this topic was disgust, and no pity. I can understand he is disappointed in not going to the NFL, but there are worse fates in life. He is not dead, wounded, or scarred. He's not even going overseas anytime soon. He should be going to Fort Bliss or Fort Sill for ADA Basic Course, but will he even do that if he is coaching?
Bad policy on the Army, but bad on him for taking the free ride, then using a loophole to try and sit out the war, and maybe ride the pine.
thanks for the good example, patmc
I also had this same discussion at work, among a group of a dozen officers and NCOs; including 3 USMA grads (one of whom played basketball at West Point). The general consensus was: "Hey good for this guy, I hope he excels for the Lions and makes the All-Rookie team, great PR for the Army, etc." Seriously only one guy in the discussion disagreed; and it was the same SFC that bitches about everything.
Maybe I'm jaded by my passion for football and competetive sports. I desperately want West Point to field a great team, just like Navy has done recently. And if it means one or two guys like Campbell get out of active their service obligation every year, then so be it. I think he's much more of a value to the Army and West Point playing special teams for the Lions then by being an XO of a Patriot Missile Battery; Any LT can do that. Campbell has special talent; it must be utilized to the benefit of USMA and the Army. I was really rooting for the guy to make the team. But I guess it doesn't matter now since DoD stepped in and squashed the Army on this one. Too bad. It really is a shame.
Last edited by Jedburgh; 07-25-2008 at 03:11 AM.
Sir, what the hell are we doing?
If he doesn't graduate BOLC III, he will never see 1LT. He's going to have to go to either Sill or Benning first for BOLC II. Knowing that BOLC II is backlogged until around January, I would imagine he won't go until the season is over (for West Point that should be right after the Army-Navy game).
Example is better than precept.
Regarding the belief that Campbell would be a good PR move for the Army if he played in the NFL, I think that is bizarro thinking. The bedrock of being a Soldier is adherence to the Army Values. Duty and Selfless Service really jump out in this case. They are about fulfilling obligations and putting the welfare of the country and the Army before your own. If Campbell's move to the NFL had any PR effect (and we can now only speculate, since it is not happening), it would have been negative. It would have only appealed to individuals who have no desire to be Soldiers, but rather individuals desiring to use the Army as a catapult for their non-service aspirations.
I also sympathize with the view that Campbell is immature and probably not ready for the attention that his situation received. The Army is more to blame for this than a newly minted 2LT. Young leaders look for professional guidance to their superiors and the institution. The Army provided a unique, but legitimate avenue for this guy to pursue an NFL career, making it very easy for the 2LT to rationalize the decision and even embrace it as a legitimate career move. The Army failed Campbell by leading him to believe that this was acceptable.
Had it been clear to Campbell that he was going to serve 5 years active duty as a US Army Officer, no exceptions considered, then I think that he would have accepted this. Just imagine if he had that mindset as he neared the end of his education at West Point, then served 5 honorable years in whatever capacity with no expectation of special treatment, then made a decision of whether to separate or stay in, opting to pursue an NFL career. Now THAT would be good PR for the Army. Instead, we now have a young 2LT who made headlines because he was going to get special treatment due to a poorly thought out policy and misguided expectations, got his hopes up, then had his hopes dashed following a policy change foisted upon the Army, and grudgingly followed according to the letter of the policy, while defying the spirit of it. This creates the impression that the Army is willing to give unequal treatment, renege on its obligations, and defy the values that it is expected to embrace, and when corrected by DoD, it will behave like a small child who, when told to go to his room, does so, but stamps his feet all the way there, slams the door, and shouts, "I hate living here!"
This incident should be a case study in the schoolhouses.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks