Leaderboard

Many years ago, when one of my kids was young, he did not display the attitude/effort we expected of him during T-ball. End of season participation trophy’s get handed out, my wife makes him give it to her and she throws it into the nearest trash can, telling him he didn’t earn it (and why). All the other pussy parents looked on in disbelief. My kid basically never again had a bad attitude or lack of effort, and this incident was 9 years ago. The little things matter - coddling your kids produces shit adults.

- It’s one TDY added to a list of many. Bottom line, why are you against a TDY added amongst a sea of executed/scheduled TDYs? It’s not whataboutism to state a fact that a large portion of the military adds TDYs throughout the year. If you want to argue about justification or perceived importance/utility of any TDY, then you are very inexperienced in the military/have no idea how the gov operates with regards to in-person vs. virtual application. Example: I’ve spent many TDYs watching GOs (also TDY) sit there and stare at their eyelids/the wall for days, while adding nothing to the situation and based on their reactions, taking nothing home with them. Welcome to the real world. (Experience I’m coming from: over 100 TDYs at tac/op/strat levels). - The boss is pushing a massive cultural shift, that has seen some resistance, and he’s sick of the resistance. Do you believe something of that high of priority to him does not warrant in-person interaction? Some comments above can be boiled down to, “this isn’t a big deal and therefore could have been an email/TEAMs call.” Do you believe from the boss’s perspective this “isn’t that big of a deal” and an email/TEAMs call is all he needs to do to get this train on the right track? People are bringing up “justification” of TDY, citing the topic as “not justifiable” for a TDY. They brought that up, it is not a red herring to discuss what they previously stated. - Some literally said it could have been a virtual discussion (email, TEAMs, YouTube, etc.) Is there a third option besides one of those or in-person? Because if there’s not (I can’t think of one), it can’t be a false dilemma because it is literally a dilemma (boss had to ask himself, “do I do this in person or virtual? Which one will be most effective for my directives/message?”) Ad hominem - I’ll take that one, my bad.

More parents than you would think will take your side. I sat kids on multiple occasions across multiple sports because of an attitude and only one time did I have a parent say anything about it (and the coward didn't come to me, they went to the club admin who backed me). I set clear expectations at the start and 95% of kids met them. The few that didn't found little support from their parents. I benched one kid and he walked away crying over towards his dad. His dad took one look at him and said something like "what'd you expect?" and the kid stopped crying because he realized he wasn't going to get anywhere. He didn't have an attitude with me the rest of the time I coached him. Also gave out exactly zero participation trophies or medals.

I don't think this is a conspiracy thing at all. Our comm has been compromised time and again, if not directly via actors in foreign countries then via ppl like Snowden. This seems like a great cover for passing high level info, while also publicly providing expectations face to face. Seems fairly logical to me. Even if it was just to give direction, then an in-person brief is definitely justified. The liberals/fat retired nonners are butt hurt, sucks to suck. If Panetta had done this to provide direction on Dont Ask Don't Tell repeal it would have been justified and ppl like Rainman woulda lost their shit whilst NSAPlayer threw a rainbow party...RIP

And? One other point; nothing says sincerity/seriousness like the face-to-face interaction. Rather reinforces the point of the new sheriff in town operates differently so get on board or get out. Also, generals work for SECDEF & POTUS. If those offices chose to call generals in, said generals respond with "yes, sir." Pretty standard, I'd say. A maybe conspiracy thing is that this meeting was a cover for another purpose regarding upcoming actions.

@Smokin As it should be. We were living in a super blue state at the time, so lots of coddling, zero accountability, “everyone’s a winner,” etc. going around.

How massive of a change is it that he wants to increase lethality? Clamps down on fitness and appearance? Those aren’t massive culture changes. Those are getting back to the roots of what the military is. I’ve been screaming it for years, the military isn’t a business, it’s a military. I for one applaud the announcements.

Those are the tanker dudes I love and respect. For the ones who would not move their location to better support TICs (especially really bad ones) or EPs/low fuel states, fuck you for being a gigantic pussy. For the young guys out there - do the right thing, deal with the man later.