Jump to content

Commanders are dropping like flies this year


Recommended Posts

Just now, HeloDude said:

Dude, are you still drunk?  How is what I’m saying have anything to do with a Marine spreading naked pictures of chicks online?

Go ahead and make your own posts, but if you’re commenting on mine, then stick to what I’m saying:  Someone’s past that has nothing to do with said crime is irrelevant as to whether or not someone committed said crime.  

 

 

Try to follow along: the fact that bro bro was sleeping around on his wife and hid a kid from that relationship is VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE that his morals were not, in fact, impeccable.  Yet his senior officers made the statement that his morals were, in fact, impeccable.

How is this difficult for you?

Edited by pawnman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Jaysus... sick douche bag.   **break break** I'm grateful to say that I got through my sq/cc tour without a link being posted in this thread about me getting fired.  Today was my last d

Two points that have irked me. First, nothing in the letter he sent was classified information. Having spent 18 years in the Navy, I’m pretty familiar with what reporting requirements are classif

Well, this must be the first time that someone who reads Baseops.net has been the subject of a roiling speculative discussion about some publicly embarrassing, scandalous event that happened to them,

Posted Images

1 minute ago, pawnman said:

Try to follow along: the fact that bro bro was sleeping around on his wife and hid a kid from that relationship is VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE that his morals were not, in fact, impeccable.  Yet his senior officers made the statement that his morals were, in fact, impeccable.

How is this difficult for you?

He wasn’t charged with his morals being out of whack when he was stationed in Italy...he was charged with rape (aggravated sexual assault—see link below).

I have yet to make any argument as to whether or not the dude had good character or not.  Nor have I made any comments as to the leadership’s decision on why they overturned the original conviction.  I have clearly said that someone’s past is irrelevant as to if someone committed a crime or not.  Oh I’m sure lawyers use that as a way to sway a jury, but again, just because someone was a dirt bag (cheating on a spouse, for example), doesn’t equate to him also raping someone.

So who are you arguing with?  “How is this difficult for you?”

https://www.stripes.com/news/former-aviano-ig-is-found-guilty-in-sexual-assault-case-1.195656

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

He wasn’t charged with his morals being out of whack when he was stationed in Italy...he was charged with rape (aggravated sexual assault—see link below).

I have yet to make any argument as to whether or not the dude had good character or not.  Nor have I made any comments as to the leadership’s decision on why they overturned the original conviction.  I have clearly said that someone’s past is irrelevant as to if someone committed a crime or not.  Oh I’m sure lawyers use that as a way to sway a jury, but again, just because someone was a dirt bag (cheating on a spouse, for example), doesn’t equate to him also raping someone.

So who are you arguing with?  “How is this difficult for you?”

https://www.stripes.com/news/former-aviano-ig-is-found-guilty-in-sexual-assault-case-1.195656

 

So...why even make the statement if it has no bearing? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pawnman said:

So...why even make the statement if it has no bearing? 

Read my original comment is this thread:

Pitt4401 made this comment:

You forgot the part where people claimed the convicted was morally impeccable...while having a previously undisclosed love child.”

I then replied:

Kind of irrelevant as to if one committed rape or not, right?”

The whole reason we’re even talking about Wilkerson in this thread is because he was convicted of rape, and then the conviction was dismissed by Franklin.  So again, discussing Wilkerson’s character on a completely different matter (cheating on his spouse, etc) is irrelevant as to whether or not he raped someone.  Franklin dismissed the conviction because he said the evidence presented in the trial didn’t lead to a conviction.  Now if we want to argue that point then that’s totally fine—I have yet to comment on whether or not I believe Franklin was right (not to mention I haven’t seen the evidence presented in the trial).  But bringing up the fact that that dude later was shown to be a dirt bag should have zero relevance on whether or not that guy raped someone earlier.  

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting note on that recent story about the Marine mentioned sharing naked photos within the unit. She makes a tiktok where she’s crying and talking about facing the accuser and all that. Turns out, the pictures he shared were from this girls only fans account (aka she made them herself for sale if you subscribe to her site for $4.99). The real part that pissed her off was all of this “exclusive content” was showed without people paying.

What a world!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Interesting note on that recent story about the Marine mentioned sharing naked photos within the unit. She makes a tiktok where she’s crying and talking about facing the accuser and all that. Turns out, the pictures he shared were from this girls only fans account (aka she made them herself for sale if you subscribe to her site for $4.99). The real part that pissed her off was all of this “exclusive content” was showed without people paying.

What a world!

 

How dare you say that about the "victim!"  You're clearly a misogynist, victim-blamer and everything that is wrong with our military today!  Innocent until proven guilty is an old-fashioned way of thinking!  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Any new rumint from Vance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I’ve heard that the issue wasn’t him being involved in any type of sexual assault, but how he, as Wing CC, had handled an incident. It was also coupled with an increase in assault allegations, compared to previous years, during his brief time at Vance.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
Link to post
Share on other sites

He probably insisted on not wrecking someone’s career over a currently unsubstantiated allegation, following the idea of innocent until proven guilty through the legal process. What a piece of shit leader...burn him!

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

have it from a trusted source at Vance that during a recent sexual assault hearing he referred to a female in question as a slut. not sure if said female was present or not and along with that he made some decisions that apparently Gen. Wills didn't like. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, TX dude said:

have it from a trusted source at Vance that during a recent sexual assault hearing he referred to a female in question as a slut. not sure if said female was present or not and along with that he made some decisions that apparently Gen. Wills didn't like. 

Not a great look.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TX dude said:

have it from a trusted source at Vance that during a recent sexual assault hearing he referred to a female in question as a slut. not sure if said female was present or not and along with that he made some decisions that apparently Gen. Wills didn't like. 

So, was she a slut or not?  Was Scooters involved?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.enidnews.com/news/local_news/concerns-about-danielson-raised-in-last-30-days/article_96aea666-7bae-11eb-a657-d302caa452a0.html
 

VANCE AIR FORCE BASE, Okla. — Concerns about the former commander of the 71st Flying Training Wing at Vance Air Force Base were raised “within the last 30 days” before he was relieved of command last week.

Col. Timothy Danielson has been reassigned to a staff position within the Air Force, said Marilyn C. Holliday, chief of operations for Air Education and Training Command public affairs, in an email. Danielson was in charge of the 71st FTW at Vance for about eight months.

“Leaders at 19th Air Force became aware of the concerns through the chain of command, within the last 30 days,” Holliday said in an emailed statement. “The former commander is not suspected of misconduct or illegal actions. This decision was based on the loss of trust and confidence in the commander’s ability to lead the 71st Flying Training Wing.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
9 hours ago, MEMguy said:

He must've touched u for u to be so pro-Roux.  not that there's anything wrong with that.

I was in a community that knew what airfield they were landing at, so he wasn’t part of mine. Of course United announced yesterday they’re hiring like mad so his timing is impeccable to play the sport of kings.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 08Dawg said:

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/04/08/maintenance-squadron-commander-removed-dyess-air-force-base.html

 

AMXS commander fired at Dyess. Wonder what the story is here?  She’d already commanded the AMXS at Minot before this. 

It's not uncommon for non Aircrew types to command multiple times. Met an SF Lt Col once going to his 4th squadron command. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FLEA said:

It's not uncommon for non Aircrew types to command multiple times. Met an SF Lt Col once going to his 4th squadron command. 

God wouldn’t one command be enough to lose all your hair? 
 

The Dyess situation is toxic, not to mention the IG is under the scope as well.  Not surprised.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, dream big said:

God wouldn’t one command be enough to lose all your hair? 
 

The Dyess situation is toxic, not to mention the IG is under the scope as well.  Not surprised.

Funny you say that because this dude had a shiny waxed cue ball up top. 

Link to post
Share on other sites



God wouldn’t one command be enough to lose all your hair? 


That's what's expected out of them in their career fields. I mean, where else do you put them after sq/cc? Only so many spots on staff, and it's not like they can just go back to the line like a flyer
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, jazzdude said:


 

 


That's what's expected out of them in their career fields. I mean, where else do you put them after sq/cc? Only so many spots on staff, and it's not like they can just go back to the line like a flyer

 

There's also enough flyers you can cycle different people through. The number of officers per squadron is quite high amongst rated fields. For SF, MX and other squadrons though that ratio is much much much lower. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...