Naval War College Graduates First Command Master Chiefs

Same

Jim,
And you were embarrassed at our responses? Please point out my errors and get out of the mud.

 

Same

And there is nothing in my box.

 

Same

Reckon I'm a lying pig. Explains his expert opinion on the matter. Anyone else mail this gentleman?

 

Re: Same

No, but I would like to add my $0.02 regarding the topic of this thread as a former member of the USN. Whatever the DoD thinks is a good reason to send two MCPOs to the War College, I think that it will be great for enlisted morale. I would have loved to have heard about something like this when I was in. Others on the board who are currently active duty Navy can chime in with what they think, but if I'm right about the morale boost, then this is money well spent.

The message seems clear to me: The Navy cares about and supports the career ambitions of both its officers and enlisted personel. That's a damn good thing.

 

Same

RobCD,
Makes sense to me. Good point. Too bad Jim can't accept differing opinions.

 

Same

Need to check with Gregg and see if I have an ass filter on this thing. He could have saved time just cussin' me out rather than playing the mail game.

Michael, I can imagine what his response to you was, "It's all a misunderstanding. Scumbag!"

 

Same

At least someone did get through. Although, I failed to see this in your mail. Is it in Jim Code? I reckon your arm is tired?

I'm glad my ass filter worked. You don't think I wouldn't have advised of your response with all on board? You failed to say it was a secret, hush-hush.

"I see no point in rolling in the mud with a pig."
"I simply can't believe anything you say." = "I agree with Janko."

Thanks Uncle for the rescue.

Lying Pig Pug

 

Re: Same

And the only one who can say that for sure is you

Although the e-mail was a "reply to" so I don't see how it could have gone anywhere else - one of the bennies about being a CIS professor and an MCSE+I with Exchange Sever certification

It IS possible that it was never delivered (in which case I would have received a "failure to deliver" message), but it's also theorectically possible that two identical DNA tests results can came from different people.

Clay, the "situational ethics" you picked up (wasn't there an admiral who was caught wearing combat decorations he wasn't entitled to and he killed himself when he was exposed?) will hopefully not carry you very far in the civilian sector - Enron has folded. I am only slightly amazed that you would have postured that "no answer was received".

And I don't see your behavior or your "buds" changing - hence the "pigs rolling in the mud".

You are free, of course to "deny, deny, deny" and say that I'M the pig

Just go to the bar with your support group, down some brews, and tell everyone how you're going to "kick my ass" - one day.

 

Same

One can only hope.
Clay

 

Same

One can only hope.
Clay

 

Same

While we are rolling in the mud, anyone want some turkey?

 

I'm surprised to see this topic generate so much interest, and animosity.

I expect to see more enlisted involvement at the Navy War College, the Naval Postgraduate School, and other institutions of higher learning.

The Navy is becoming a more trained and educated organization.

As exciting as it is to see the Navy sending senior enlisted personnel to graduate school is, in what I think is a far more significant move, the Navy is phasing out undesignated seamen, firemen and airmen, also known as general detail Sailors. All Sailors will now attend a formal school at the beginning of their enlistment. Until now, many Sailors only attended a short apprenticeship training course before being assigned to the fleet, at which time they could learn their rating via on the job training and possibly attend a formal school later.

By including formal school training on the front end for every Sailor, the Navy will gain a more professional force while providing even greater career opportunities for its Sailors.

 

Charles,

I agree with you totally.

I enlisted in the Navy in June 1969 as an Seaman Recruit (E-1) and advanced to Chief Personnelman in a little over nine years (16 September 1978). At that time, it was rare if an enlisted had college at all. Additionally, when I obtained a commission under the Limited Duty Officer Program in April 1980, I still only had a high school diploma. Furthermore, when I was selected for Lieutenant Commander (0-4), I had accumulated only about 30 semester hours towards a Bachelors Degree. I subsequently completed a BS while on active duty, and a Masters after completing Naval Service.

Since retiring from the Navy on 1 July 1995, I have maintained my relationship with the Navy first as a management consultant with Booz, Allen and Hamilton and then later as a Human Resources Specialist as a civilian employee with the Department of the Navy at the Board for the Correction of Naval Records, Director of Personnel Support Detachment Bethesda and in my present job at Strategic Systems Programs. What I have noticed is that the enlisted personnel often have two years of college or more when they get selected for E-7 now and some have a bachelors or higher. Furthermore, a significant number of enlisted personnel selected by the in-service procurement boards to Chief Warrant Officer or Limited Duty Officer have at least an Associate Degree and some have BS or higher. Furthermore, the Navy is going to require enlisted personnel selected to Senior Chief Petty Officer to have an Associate Degree in the future. I would not be suprised if the Navy does not put an educational requirement on advancement to Master Chief. Finally, I think that the Navy might also look at requiring enlisted personnel applying for a commission under the in-service procurement boards to have a BS.

The military is requiring people to become more educated, in part, because of new technology. Sending select enlisted personnel to the Naval Postgraduate School show progressive thinking in my opinion.

Having stated all that, I probably overstated my position on this in previous posts in this thread to Jim. Like everyone, he is entitled to his opinion.

All the best,

Fred

 

turkey, or artificial fartspiration

Not after you gave it CPR.
Jim, untwist yer knickers.
Ach Scheiße, now I'm off topic.
New German keyboard. Whee!

 

Fred,

A wonderful post that absolutely does not the address the waste of taxpayer funds - the original point I made -and the one an amazing number of people seem unable to comprehend.

How about this - quite a few people (especially in the government service) honestly can't understand the concept of not wasting money or time - it is NOT the governments money - it's our money - and the waste of two highly trained persons who should have been pulling their weight in a war zone?

 

Disagreement with you does not mean inability to comprehend.
It means disagreement with you.

 

Quite so. Amen.

 

Just once it would be nice to have some basis for contentions. maybe even cite a reference, study, or position paper that lead to the Master Chiefs attending. You know, that scholarly stuff. Without knowing all the particulars how could an assumption be made on whether attendance was a waste of money or not.

For the sake of the debate I will agree with your position if the purpose of the education was only for the sake of senior command. And to continue in this vain I would say that sending officers to academic schools (on full salary outside of military obligations and purview) to obtain additional degrees for the sake of advancement is also a waste of taxpayer money. Especially when those schools include the likes of Duke, and other private schools. Further, I believe it is a waste of taxpayer money to send these folks to school for social science degrees, are we training them to pull their weight in a war zone or what? It is also a waste of time for military schools to waste taxpayer money for accreditation purposes if the training is to be used for the purpose of training service members to pull their weight in a war zone.

I absolutely understand your issue with taxpayer funds and only wish you would address why the officers who don't stand a chance of being promoted but also attend these schools as part of the mandatory training aren't pulling their weight in a war zone instead. How about even dicing this issue down to the career field level? Surely some occupations never see the business end of this training.

But, as a retired E-9, I am glad that these folks attended and I have no doubt that their feedback will decide whether this type of offering continues, as their high level of expertise provides them with a unique perspective on the benefit, or lack thereof, of this type of training.

 

Jim,

You state that two highly trained people should be pulling their weight in a war zone instead of attending college at taxpayers money. But let me attempt to enlighten you about the Navy's rotational policies. In almost all the cases, Navy personnel that are selected for degree completion programs must be eligible for shore duty. Therefore, the two Master Chiefs would not be going to sea duty or arduous shore duty such as a war zone. Since they were more likey shore duty eligible, the Navy made the decision that a select few Master Chiefs would go to Naval Postgraduate School. Furthermore, these two Master Chiefs were probably better screened to insure that they would be able to complete a demanding academic program.

Contrast these two Master Chiefs selected to attend graduate school to the young officers who, in most cases, are completing a first tour of sea duty. All they have to do to get orders to Naval Postgraduate School is to have a pulse or fog a mirror with their breath. As I mentioned before, about 30% of these officers that attend Postgraduate School will never go beyond 0-3 for twice failing to select to 0-4. That is more of a waste of taxpayers money than sending two highly qualified individuals that have unique experience, expertise, and pure olld "common sense" that is often lacking with a significant number of officers that have no prior enlisted service. Finally, this is no way of knowing if the training that senior officers receive will improve their ability to serve in command. So, it could be agrued that its a waste of taxpayers money to send anyone regardless of paygrade to Postgraduate School.

Fred

 

I don't know what all those little classification numbers mean, but I'd a lot rather have my tax money "wasted" on educating sailors than on bribing Kim Jong-il or Jacques Chirac or whatever other third world despot we're trying to buy off at the moment.