Leadership Failures ?

[tomahawk6]

Ft Hood is a large base like a big city. You have good soldiers and bad. At the end of the day I think MG Efflandt gets a pass. Similar issues have happened at Bragg through the years.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/fort-hood-commander-s-transfer-is-put-on-hold-amid-investigations-1.640491

WASHINGTON — Army leaders have delayed the planned transfer of the Fort Hood commander, as a team of independent investigators heads to the base to determine whether leadership failures contributed to the murder of a soldier earlier this year, and several other deaths.

Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt, commander of Fort Hood, Texas, was slated to go to Fort Bliss, which is near El Paso, and take over leadership of the 1st Armored Division. Command of a division is a key step in an Army officer's career. The Army said in a statement Friday that he will now stay at Fort Hood, as Army leaders consider whether there were systemic problems at the base, and who should be held accountable.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Ft Hood is a large base like a big city. You have good soldiers and bad. At the end of the day I think MG Efflandt gets a pass. Similar issues have happened at Bragg through the years.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/fort-hood-commander-s-transfer-is-put-on-hold-amid-investigations-1.640491

WASHINGTON — Army leaders have delayed the planned transfer of the Fort Hood commander, as a team of independent investigators heads to the base to determine whether leadership failures contributed to the murder of a soldier earlier this year, and several other deaths.

Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt, commander of Fort Hood, Texas, was slated to go to Fort Bliss, which is near El Paso, and take over leadership of the 1st Armored Division. Command of a division is a key step in an Army officer's career. The Army said in a statement Friday that he will now stay at Fort Hood, as Army leaders consider whether there were systemic problems at the base, and who should be held accountable.

The military obsession of affixing blame to every incident stymies me, and it seems the higher up the food chain you can pin it, the better. Sometimes bad shit happens to good people, sometimes bad shit happens to bad people, and, sometimes, shit just happens.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

I dunno. Sometimes there comes a point when a concentration of incidents (big & small) in one location needs to be examined further. There’s been a ton of talk by American soldiers (including that of substantial rank) through #Miltwitter, and many believe there’s a need for a close eye looking into happenings there. Edit to add: The murder of Army Spc. Vanessa Guillen was the straw...Ft Bragg had come up too.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I dunno. Sometimes there comes a point when a concentration of incidents (big & small) in one location needs to be examined further. There’s been a ton of talk by American soldiers (including that of substantial rank) through #Miltwitter, and many believe there’s a need for a close eye looking into happenings there. Edit to add: The murder of Army Spc. Vanessa Guillen was the straw...Ft Bragg had come up too.

And I don’t disagree with any of your points, but the military, US in particular, always seems to need a pelt to nail to the shed, no matter the circumstances.

 

[FJAG]

Most of my full-time service came during the latter portion of the Vietnam War and the period thereafter when much soul searching went on within the US Army about where it failed. The controversial book, "Crisis in Command" by Gabriel and Savage at the time offered a variety of reasons mostly focusing on the "managerial" v "leadership" style of officership generated by the McNamara era.

What was typical at the time, was the thought process amongst the US Army officer corps at the time that it was better to climb the career ladder via staff positions rather than command positions for the simple reason that staff positions offered an opportunity to shine through your personal good work while command positions merely offered an opportunity to crash and burn, not because of what you did, but because of stupid things that your subordinates did for which you, as their commander, were often held responsible (at the same time consider the white washing that happened after events like My Lai).

That same attitude is still alive and well in many militaries including ours through the practice of risk aversion. Simply put, one avoids a path that has a risk of failure, even if it is the path that will most likely lead to the most successful outcome.

I frankly do not know if there is a leadership issue at Fort Hood, but in my humble opinion, Efflant, as a base commander for some 50,000 souls is firstly, not the leader of these men, their line command officers are, and secondly cannot effectively prevent the acts of the odd psychopath who might live within this small city (A community of this size will have a critical mass of idiots in it regardless how good your leadership is). Investigate by all means but holding up a posting and tainting his career because there "might" be systemic problems seems to me to be a prime example of risk aversion by Efflant's leaders.

:cheers:

 

[lenaitch]

. . .
That same attitude is still alive and well in many militaries including ours through the practice of risk aversion. Simply put, one avoids a path that has a risk of failure, even if it is the path that will most likely lead to the most successful outcome.

. . .

:cheers:

It is alive and well not only in militaries.

 

[Eaglelord17]

I frankly do not know if there is a leadership issue at Fort Hood, but in my humble opinion, Efflant, as a base commander for some 50,000 souls is firstly, not the leader of these men, their line command officers are, and secondly cannot effectively prevent the acts of the odd psychopath who might live within this small city (A community of this size will have a critical mass of idiots in it regardless how good your leadership is). Investigate by all means but holding up a posting and tainting his career because there "might" be systemic problems seems to me to be a prime example of risk aversion by Efflant's leaders.

:cheers:

Its like saying the CDS at the time was responsible for the actions of Russell Williams.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Personally, if rumours are persistent enough lasting mths and mths to years about either a single individual, event or series of events of similar nature, usually there’s some level
of truth to them, and at some point things need to start being looked into. If the top tier(s) are entrusting those in charge below them to do something, but clearly a resolution isn’t being found or the same issues persist, then it’s eventually going to fall on the shoulders of who’s in charge.

Yes, it’s impossible for a top Cmdr to manage every single person below him/her. That’s what those in charge below them are supposed to be doing. But there’s no way he didn’t hear any grumblings over time—so it’s up to him to make sure those below him are doing what they’re supposed to be doing and wholly taking care of appropriate discipline, investigations, etc.

Wrt CAF, what happened when, clearly, those who should've been weren’t adequately addressing and dealing with issues of harassment and whatnot? Those unresolved matters that kept being swept under the rug, dismissed, ignored, scoffed at, etc etc became so bad that ultimately the CDS did need to step in.

We’ve all learned that ignoring issues doesn’t make them go away. They often become compounded and magnified. If each level of supervision isn’t following through, then the responsibility is going to keep moving higher and higher up the chain until someone’s held to account.

Although it’s (somewhat) accurate and understandable to a degree, it’s also a cop-out to say the highest levels of cmnd shouldn’t be held responsible.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Personally, if rumours are persistent enough lasting mths and mths to years about either a single individual, event or series of events of similar nature, usually there’s some level
of truth to them, and at some point things need to start being looked into. If the top tier(s) are entrusting those in charge below them to do something, but clearly a resolution isn’t being found or the same issues persist, then it’s eventually going to fall on the shoulders of who’s in charge.

Yes, it’s impossible for a top Cmndr to manage every single person below him/her. That’s what those in charge below them are supposed to be doing. But there’s no way he didn’t hear any grumblings over time—so it’s up to him to make sure those below him are doing what they’re supposed to be doing and wholly taking care of appropriate discipline, investigations, etc.

Wrt CAF, what happened when, clearly, those who should've been weren’t adequately addressing and dealing with issues of harassment and whatnot? Those unresolved matters that kept being swept under the rug, dismissed, ignored, scoffed at, etc etc became so bad that ultimately the CDS did need to step in.

We’ve all learned that ignoring issues doesn’t make them go away. They often become compounded and magnified. If each level of supervision isn’t following through, then the responsibility is going to keep moving higher and higher up the chain until someone’s held to account.

Although it’s (somewhat) accurate and understandable to a degree, it’s also a cop-out to say the highest levels of cmnd shouldn’t be held responsible.

So, you’re a WO. One or two of your young private’s get a skin full at the mess on Friday, go downtown and kick shit out of someone. Your fault? Yes there are certain toxic environments that breed, and possibly even promote that sort of behaviour, but sometimes there are just assholes out there being assholes.

 

[tomahawk6]

Eventually its the company commander that may be the weak link or even the squad/platoon leader.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

So, you’re a WO. One or two of your young private’s get a skin full at the mess on Friday, go downtown and kick shit out of someone. Your fault? Yes there are certain toxic environments that breed, and possibly even promote that sort of behaviour, but sometimes there are just assholes out there being assholes.

Those types of instances (the one-offs, the kid who can’t handle themselves, etc) isn’t what’s at the forefront here. It’s the potentially systemic patterns of repeated criminal behaviour(s), and them not being brought forward and tackled—not getting to the route of the issues—not creating an overall environment of safety and equality in an environment where they refer to each other as ‘brothers and sisters.’

 

[ballz]

So, you’re a WO. One or two of your young private’s get a skin full at the mess on Friday, go downtown and kick crap out of someone. Your fault? Yes there are certain toxic environments that breed, and possibly even promote that sort of behaviour, but sometimes there are just assholes out there being assholes.

Purely being the devil's advocate here, what if your platoon seemed to have that kind of crap happen every weekend? It's certainly no longer just "one-offs."

That's be an interesting challenge to be the OC for that particular sub-unit.....

 

[Kat Stevens]

Purely being the devil's advocate here, what if your platoon seemed to have that kind of crap happen every weekend? It's certainly no longer just "one-offs."

That's be an interesting challenge to be the OC for that particular sub-unit.....

Even if it was happening every weekend, how do you prevent a collection of assholes from assholing? Wrangling young testosterone, estrogen, or any other applicable hormone fuelled troops is like raising teenagers, you can control them within the sound of your voice and the reach of your arm. Even more so in these days of “its not an adventure, it’s just a job”, and demands that the big machine stay out of troops lives. Disbandment doesn’t work, it just spreads the infection. I dunno.

 

[tomahawk6]

If we are allowing gangsters into the service then we have huge problems. When I joined the Army there were still a few of McNamera's 100000 in the service. During Vietnam there was a need for recruits so the standards were lowered and the result were soldiers who would charge a machine gun but could barely write. Recruits were offered prison terms or the option to enlist instead.

 

[Kat Stevens]

If we are allowing gangsters into the service then we have huge problems. When I joined the Army there were still a few of McNamera's 100000 in the service. During Vietnam there was a need for recruits so the standards were lowered and the result were soldiers who would charge a machine gun but could barely write. Recruits were offered prison terms or the option to enlist instead.

When I got in there were a few NCOs that had made the choice of three paid years in the army or five years making license plates for a dime a day. They found the army to their liking, and were some of the finest soldiers I ever served with.

 

[tomahawk6]

Ft Hood is circling the drain as is MG Efflandt's future. So many soldiers have become missing and or dead. Whats the cause of the missing and dead ? It makes me suspect an MS13 or similar gang presence on Ft Hood. Maybe the FBI and CID can get to the bottom of the mess.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/why-is-fort-hood-the-army-s-most-crime-ridden-post-1.642104

 

[tomahawk6]

SF Colonel is charged with sexual misconduct, he of course is innocent until convicted.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/special-forces-colonel-s-court-martial-on-sexual-assault-charges-is-set-to-begin-1.642454

 

[mariomike]

The murder of Army Spc. Vanessa Guillen was the straw...

Recently saw a Netflix documentary regarding the murder of Army Spc. Vanessa Guillen.

CNN — The family of Army Spc. Vanessa Guillén, who disappeared from Fort Hood, Texas, in 2020 and was later found dead, filed a case Friday seeking $35 million in damages from the Department of the Army, according to a court filing and Natalie Khawam, attorney for Guillén’s family.

 

[dimsum]

Recently saw a Netflix documentary regarding the murder of Army Spc. Vanessa Guillen.

That was a really good doc.