Navy Community - discussions, photos, video - Navy Times

Letters

What's in a name

Name a destroyer after novelist Robert Heinlein? Are you kidding? Naval tradition holds that destroyers are named for heroes [“Sci-fi destroyer,” Frontlines, April 9].

There are far too many heroes in our naval history who go unnoticed and forgotten. For example, [there is] Cmdr. Ernest E. Evans, a 1931 Naval Academy graduate posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for actions taken while in command of the destroyer Johnston in the Battle of Samar, during the Battle of Leyte Gulf, on Oct. 25, 1944.

For almost two hours, Evans and his crew relentlessly attacked the Japanese force interceding for task force Taffy 3's six aircraft carriers. While inflicting heavy damage upon various Japanese ships and crippling the heavy cruiser Kumano, the Johnston finally succumbed to naval gunfire and sunk with 184 of her crew, including Evans.

It was Evans' inspiring and steadfast leadership in the face of a no-win scenario that was instrumental in writing one of the most glorious chapters in our naval history.

One need look no further that Evans when one seeks to define honor, courage and commitment. Evans remains the finest of our “Tin Can” captains and the greatest of my naval heroes. Name a library for Heinlein. Name a destroyer for Evans.

IT1(SW/AW) Joseph M. Wert

Pearl City, Hawaii

Was justice done?

I have this horrible feeling lingering in my heart and mind that justice has not been served in the trial of [my Naval Academy roommate], Midshipman 1st Class Kenny Ray Morrison.

Here are some points to ponder:

• The prosecution said that Morrison's accuser wouldn't want to have sex with Morrison because she had vomited earlier in their night together. But she concedes that she kissed him in bed after she vomited.

• The accuser's credibility must be questioned because she disregarded all rules against underage drinking that night. This could be the reason she made her accusations — many upper classmen saw her drinking and sleeping with Morrison, which would be cause for equal punishment on her end. A sexual assault charge gave her total immunity and the chance to graduate and get commissioned.

• The accuser asked Morrison for a condom. How many men have had women ask them for a condom in a dark hotel room? What does that usually imply?

• Of the 400 officers at the Naval Academy, about half of them are the rank of O-3, but only two of the 30 officers presented as potential jurors were of that rank. A jury of his peers should still be allotted in the naval service.

All of these elements may not have been aptly exploited during the trial, but can anyone honestly lead oneself to believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that an assault happened that night? A life has been ruined, and Naval Academy alumni need to ask themselves if a fellow member of the Naval Academy family has been sacrificed for political purposes.

Ensign Evan Beard

Norfolk, Va.

Bad advice

With the recent release of the Individual Augmentee Family Handbook, the proponents of “intrusive leadership” have once again exposed their insidious and paternalistic agenda. To be sure, the IAFH contains much useful and long-overdue advice on preparing for IA duty. For that, I am thankful.

Yet within its pages, several troubling passages encourage families to remain blissfully ignorant. On Page 25, the IAFH warns readers, “It's also a good idea to limit how much news you watch and listen to ... bad news drains anyone.”

While I certainly appreciate the Navy's concern for the mental well-being of my family and me, watching “Frontline” is hardly the cause of great anguish. Moreover, some news should stir emotions in readers, who may become righteously indignant. If not for the media reports on conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, soldiers might still be rotting away in Building 18.

The IAFH also assures us that “The most accurate news comes from military sources.” Really? Go tell that to Pat Tillman's family.

Almost as insulting as the admonishment to watch less news is the implication that military families do not read to get news — something that will surprise readers of Navy Times. Heaven forbid that a lonely spouse should read The Atlantic magazine rather than watch a sitcom or attend a wives' club meeting! Perhaps mom and the kids should forsake all but the comics pages of the newspaper, as suggested on Page 22.

Those of us in uniform serve for disparate reasons. My motivation — and I suspect the motivation of many others — is to protect and preserve a free society. In concert with a vigorous and independent press, our representative form of government demands an informed and engaged citizenry. I contend that “15 to 30 minutes” of “major news channels,” and a daily dose of schadenfreude at “Cathy's” expense does not an educated voter make.

I respectfully request that Naval Installations Command's future publications focus on practical advice — leave “Father Knows Best” to Nickelodeon.

Lt. j.g. C. Randolph Whipps

Washington, D.C.

Is America at war?

“America is not at war. The Marine Corps is at war. America is at the mall.” So says the message in a photo floating around the Internet, popular on several Marine-related Web sites. On one site a fourth line has been added: “And Congress is out to lunch.”

If this is correct and America is really “at the mall,” maybe what we need is a 1 percent federal sales tax specifically to pay for the war. Let Americans do what they appear to do best, “shop us to victory.” Then everyone in the U.S. will be sacrificing for their country. How many Starbucks coffee sales would it take to buy a new Humvee vehicle or M16 rifle?

Air Force Maj. Van Harl (ret.)

Altus, Okla.

Kick Owens out

I have been debating for a couple of weeks about writing to respond to the appalling letter from Lt. Gen. Charles Cooper to the secretary of the Navy regarding Lamar Owens [“Reinstate Lamar Owens,” Letters, March 19].

I served for 32 years in the Navy, almost half as an enlisted man and half as an officer. I have dealt with many officers in nearly every environment imaginable, from junior enlisted persons to sharing the wardroom as a fellow officer. Frequently, those officers have been academy graduates. It amazes me that Cooper would sink to being a “ring knocker” and trying to justify the commissioning of an obviously unqualified midshipman as an officer and gentleman in the Navy.

I am all about fairness, so let's look at this as fairly as possible. First, Owens did complete all of the requirements for his degree with satisfactory grades. Therefore, go ahead and confer his degree on him.

Second, he was an outstanding football player for the academy and led them to a successful season. Therefore, do not charge him for the time he spent at the academy. But there is absolutely no doubt that being a good football player is not a prerequisite to becoming an officer in the Navy. Owens should be released from his military obligation and be free to pursue a career in the NFL, which is more in line with his personal behavior.

Having been exonerated of the rape charges, he was still held responsible for “conduct unbecoming an officer.” It's mind-boggling to think that anyone with Cooper's military experience would support the concept of conferring a commission on a person who has been found guilty by a jury of his peers of conduct unbecoming an officer.

Besides, with a conviction in his record for conduct unbecoming an officer, how could he ever expect to be promoted to lieutenant junior grade? And if an ensign is not worthy of promotion, what good is he to the Navy? He is nothing more than excess baggage and is taking an officer slot that could be filled by another highly qualified and motivated individual.

He deserves an administrative separation. He does not deserve to wear the uniform of a naval officer or to expect any kind of respect from his enlisted personnel or his fellow officers.

CWO4 Terry Ody (ret.)

San Antonio

As a former command master chief/chief recruiter of two of the largest districts in the recruiting command, promoting the recruitment of high-caliber candidates for our officer programs was an essential element of my position.

The academy's decision to deny Lamar Owens a commission for disgracing the naval officer corps can only serve to enhance the quality control efforts of our recruiting professionals and retain the stellar reputation of our Naval Academy graduates in the future.

NCCM Denny Croner (ret.)

Payette, Ind.

Since Lamar Owens was acquitted of the primary charge and the jury recommended no punishment on the charge of conduct unbecoming an officer, he should be able to resume his life — that is, graduate from the Naval Academy — since his accuser was allowed to continue with her life in this way.

If he is not permitted to graduate solely because of his conviction on the conduct charge, even though the jury recommended that he receive no punishment, his accuser should suffer the same fate.

Jen Harris

Bowie, Md.

Prior-enlisted pay woes

I cannot agree more with Lt. Cmdr. Wayne Kulick regarding the disparity that exists for those of us who are prior enlisted [“Blind spot in the pay table?” March 19].

I am at 20 years for pay and I did not receive a longevity raise when I hit that mark. I maxed out at O-4 pay two years ago. Those of us with prior service do not get any consideration when it comes to promotion, neither do those officers who have prior time as officers in other branches and other career fields, who opt to move laterally into or remain in the Navy.

Those congressional “aides” who have worked on military pay issues who have never heard about a pay disparity are simply not bothering to ask questions or are turning a blind eye. It is a good attrition scheme, if you ask me. If you get rid of an O-4 at 20 years, the government saves money because it doesn't have to pay you the higher retirement salary. The “E” pay scale should be continued through the O-4 paygrade, not discontinued after O-3. High-year tenure would be the balancing force that keeps parity in the pay scale, not the sacrificial pay of those of us who actually came up through the ranks.

The other solution is to allow those of us with prior time, officer or enlisted, to promote sooner than our counterparts. Of course, we know that will not happen. That is where the other blind spot in the pay tables exists. It has to do with the assignment of lineal numbers for promotion.

For example, I am a prior-enlisted physician. I served eight years and got out as an E-6 in 1990. I attended medical school and received my commission in the Navy in 1995.

The Navy assigns lineal numbers for physicians based on the medical school graduation date. So, here I sit, at the 20-year mark, waiting 14 months to put on O-5 (I was selected for promotion last June). Meanwhile, I watch those with no prior service time get promoted months ahead of me simply because they graduated medical school in May as opposed to June, as I did. Promotion is supposed to be based on performance, but that is not the case. The military promotion system is lazy.

Lt. Cmdr. Edwin Taylor

Pensacola, Fla.

Promise remains broken

Retired Gunnery Sgt. Arthur Cotton's letter [“A broken promise,” Letters, April 9], has brought up an issue that has been pushed aside far too long — the promise made to thousands of service members of free health care for life in exchange for a career in the armed forces.

In the same issue of Navy Times, an article [“Pay & Benefits,” FastTrack, April 9], mentions action to restore free health care to retirees for the promise made before 1956. Why 1956? Could it be a money-saving measure? Those eligible for the benefit are approaching their average life expectancy and would not receive the benefit much longer.

What about those of us who were promised the same thing after 1956? I entered the service in 1983 and was promised free health care. I would encourage Navy Times and its sister publications to conduct an online survey with the question: “Were you promised free health care, and if so, what year did you enter military service?” I believe the results of that survey could prompt further attention.

Any member of government who signs his name to a budget to pay for pork and pet projects should be ashamed of himself. Retirees have been pushed away far too long. Retention is down? I wonder why. An unpopular war is not the only cause.

Maybe the young men and women of today's armed forces are also tired of broken promises.

AM1(AW/NAC) David A. Nawara (ret.)

Portland, Texas