Navy Community - discussions, photos, video - Navy Times

Letters

Constitution questions

I do not want to comment specifically on the case of the USS Constitution’s skipper, Cmdr. Thomas Graves, because I do not know anything about the case [“Ship adrift,” Sept. 24]. But with shrinking Navy budget and downsizing of Navy personnel moving so fast, I just wonder how much money the Navy could save by taking the USS Constitution out of the fleet and turning it over to the city of Boston to run as a museum. Then take the 60 sailor billets there and move them to the real fleet.

I don’t know Graves, nor do I know anyone who does, but my advice to him is get rid of his civilian attorney as quickly as possible. As I read Navy Times’ story about him, I immediately imagined Herman Wouk’s “The Caine Mutiny” court-martial, in which Capt Queeg’s lawyer blames the troubles on an inept bunch of “immature and lazy sailors,” and claims that Graves was only trying to run a “tight ship with an undisciplined crew.”

I don’t pretend to know what went on aboard that ship, but blaming it on the sailors is not the way to go. If a sailor doesn’t do his job well, it is because he doesn’t know how. He needs to be trained. He wants to be trained. Sailors are the things I miss most about the Navy, and it’s a sin for some civilian lawyer to insult them, or for Graves to let him. I, for one, will not forgive it. If this is the course Graves chose, he’s headed onto the rocks, but he shouldn’t take the sailors with him.

Porn policies

I have never responded to any newspaper in my life, but let me respond to the powers that be with respect to the military’s pornography rules [“Anti-porn groups decry exchanges’ sale policy,” Sept. 17]. It really sends a double message to our Navy and Marine families when I see the support of pornography in our exchanges. We call this “freedom of speech”? As a chaplain, let me call this what it is: pornography. What message are we sending to our spouses here in the rear while their sailors and Marines are at war overseas?

With all the counseling I do in the military, I know firsthand the destructive power this material has on our men and marriages. I am ashamed at our policymakers for such an immoral decision. I would hope the 40 groups appealing this decision will have success. If military members access this sort of literature on a government computer, they can be discharged and ruin their careers, but we promote this in our exchanges where families shop and children will potentially see this filth? I am so disappointed.

If someone wants to access this, there are so many other places to do so. The exchange does not need to advocate such disrespectful material about such a wonderful gift from God: women. This is the sort of literature that can destroy a command climate. Bottom line: This will destroy families, marriages and our servicemen and women.

Playgirl is back on sale at the exchanges? Ah, no — there goes all my fun! It’s such a hoot to watch the salespeople shift uncomfortably in their sneakers as I rant and rave for 10 whole minutes about the sexist nature of a shelf full of girly magazines. And I get such glee from startling them back to attention with the phrase, “In conclusion, it’s only right that the exchange also carry magazines that cater to the women of our armed services.”

I spent four long years walking past barracks room after barracks room plastered in Lady Marmalade, and I feel that it is high time that the boys were given a piece of their own medicine. Hey, turnabout is fair play.

While the sale of one magazine for women may seem to tip the balance toward equality, when placed on a shelf overflowing with magazines for men, it is a prom date that does not deliver. Indeed, as any woman who has ever picked up a copy of Playgirl can attest, the issue here is not just one of quantity, but also of quality. While men can claim to buy their magazines for the articles, women can only boast about reading the short, short paragraphs.

Different views welcome

While I agree with the readers who condemned the Sept. 17 R.J. Matson “Different Views” cartoon as disgusting and disrespectful to President Bush and Gen. David Petraeus, I do not believe it should have been expunged from the paper [“Disrespectful cartoon,” Letters, Oct. 1].

It is important that we continue to expose those who actually believe this rubbish for the loons they are. It is vital we know what some people actually believe so that we can give them the real story. If all they get are opinions from the lunatic fringe, should we be surprised that they continue to believe as they do?

As far as Navy Times’ culpability and political slant on this affair, I cannot believe the paper is part and parcel of this nonsense. Most definitely there are times when I question its points of view on certain matters. At the same time, I sincerely believe that, by and large, it is supportive of its readership. What incensed readers need to notice is the title of the “Different Views” section: “How others see the military.”

Keep the creed

All of this talk about Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy Joe Campa’s position on chiefs’ initiations misses a major point, at least for me, and it’s giving me a severe case of heartburn [“The view from outside,” Letters, Oct. 1]. When I was selected, I could have easily been an E-7. I chose to become a chief.

Whatever I may have personally felt about the process, what stuck with me about it and helped me throughout my career were the words of the chiefs’ creed. Those words were simple, and yet profound. Whenever I questioned what I should do, I could always find the answer in the creed. In my post-Navy life in the real world, those guiding principles have held me in good stead. Having said all that, I would offer my humble suggestion to the MCPON — keep the creed.

The sound of freedom

Some 15 years after the end of World War II, the mayor of Atsugi, Japan, wrote a letter to the commander of 7th Fleet complaining of the noise emanating from the U.S. Naval Air Station at Atsugi [“A costly commotion,” Frontlines, Sept. 17]. The 7th Fleet commander, Vice Adm. Charles D. Griffin, paid a call on the mayor, acknowledging the letter but reminding him that the noise was “the sound of freedom.”

For some years thereafter, the Navy did not hear from the mayor on the issue. Move the clock forward, and the issue again is being addressed by Navy leadership. Those who now bring the issue of noise in Atsugi need to be reminded that our naval forces, in coordination with the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force, are protecting the land they prosper and live in, as well as the airspace above it. The price of that noise some 62 years later is still the price of freedom.

No navy obligation

I would like to address a few comments made about Danielle Litrell’s Navy scholarship “ordeal” [“Old mistakes,” Letters, Sept. 24]. I spoke to several Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps candidates in my recruiting tour. During the personal interview conducted with every applicant, applicants are told they must be mentally, morally and physically qualified to serve our country and receive the scholarship. This is also addressed in a letter sent to them when accepted for the scholarship. The timing in Litrell’s instance was unfortunate. The fact that she was found not to meet service medical standards was not.

Less than 30 percent of today’s youth are qualified to serve in our military. Every month, I turn away dozens of applicants for failing to meet medical standards. Janyce Silva, a self-described anti-war hippie, made ridiculous comments. My Navy is made up of an elite group of young people, not “ordinary citizens.” We are not looking for the support of the average citizen; we are looking for the dedication of America’s best and brightest. Those who do not meet standards do not leave my recruiting office and head to the nearest anti-war demonstration. They walk away with an understanding that our all-volunteer force does not accept just anyone who wants to serve.

What’s more, the Navy has taken steps to address ROTC scholarship issues. Recently, Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, outlined new procedures for processing NROTC applicants, including not announcing selection for scholarships until medical approval. In Litrell’s case, the Navy even re-offered her the scholarship with the accompanying service commitment. She refused. Now she expects something from the Navy? I’ve learned over the course of my service that we are not a charitable organization. Our mission is to train for and fight wars. We secure the liberties and rights that Americans like Silva take for granted, and to accomplish that, we must select only the best. We do not pay for students to go to college because of the bad timing of a medical board. The Navy owes nothing to this young woman.

Hundreds of thousands of servicemen and woman who qualified for service risk their lives for our country. If anyone should receive a scholarship for $180,000, it’s them.

Grateful for coveralls

I’m glad that we’re still going to be able to wear coveralls on ships. I’m still not crazy about the new working uniform. I see no reason why sailors should change their look to look like Marines. If we had to wear battle dress uniforms, why not a solid dark color, like Coast Guardsmen? I will miss the summer working whites, and again, I see no practical reason to wear black pants in the middle of summer. There were logical reasons for wearing white in the summer and blues in the winter, and I had no problems maintaining my uniforms. I just hope they let us continue to wear the dixie cup so that we can keep our sailor identity.