Oh boy where do I start! I guess the biggest b!!ch I have is the entire barracks issue. It screams of leadership failure, throughout the chain of command from PFC to the Commandant.
Granted, I didn’t achieve any exalted rank, I was an artillery Capt., and I only rose to command an artillery battery, but maybe because I commanded a battery with 3rd MarDiv, that I have the appreciation for barracks, that I did.
The Marines in the battery lived in 1950s squad bay barracks. The main deck were the battery offices and the second deck were the living spaces. Everyday the barracks had the heads cleaned (sinks, squad showers, commodes, urinals, and decks), passageways swept and swabbed, personal areas cleaned and squared away. The barracks were inspected every day by the NCOS, and SNCOs.
Every Thursday evening after the end of the duty day a weekly top to bottom field day. Every Friday I and the platoon commanders inspected the barracks to include the work spaces. The battery First Sgt., was responsible for submitting and managing all outstanding gripes with the barracks infrastructure. Those were also a weekly topic at our staff meetings.
Another observation I took away from my time in the Corps, the troops were the happiest doing Marine things, like being in the field. For us in field artillery it was doing field artillery things, not just firing the artillery pieces, but other artillery things, surveying, FO training, COMEXs, CPEXs, FIELDEXs, etc. They stagnated doing garrison things. I tried to keep my troops in the field at least a week or more every month.
My Marines also knew that I would go to bat for them and defend them at battalion, if I thought it warranted.
I think it worked, my battery seemed to be the proudest and the most gung-ho, in the battalion. Maybe it was because I loved being in the Corps leading Marines, and that I loved my Marines.
I guess I’ll close with the first thing I learned in the Corps at TBS, and something I never forget and tried to pass on to all my Marines, TAKE CARE OF YOUR TROOPS!
I concur with you 100%. I am a Mustang, so I’ve seen both sides of the fence and can not comprehend how Marine leadership could have changed so much since I retired in 1975. Marines taking care of Marines is a cornerstone to our brand of leadership, and must still be taught in boot camp and TBS. So what went wrong?
Don I’m also a mustang but came from the Navy side. I’ve been out since 1989 so my understanding of what’s going on in the Corps today is not completely understood.
But I agree with you that a tenant of Corps leadership, Marines taking care of Marines seems to be totally missing. I would have thought that given the amount of Marines who saw combat in the GWOT the Corps would embrace this need even more closely. Some of it has to do with the “woke” DOD policies but not all. I think one of the root causes is a zero defect mentality. And that starts at the top of the COC and filters down. There’s much more but so much that this thread can’t support it. Love to have an offline discussion with you sometime if you want.
I read the article by Irene and just shook my head. I’m not sure what the e point she was trying to make. I’m fibbing, Irene, in my opinion was paint picture that the “John’s” of today need to be treated differently. All
I could see is the Marine Corps creating safe spaces for the “John’s” who had had their butts chewed out for the minor infractions.
The point that Irene and the Marine “John”
failed to see and appreciate is this; the smallest thing that is not corrected in peace time, and yes at times corrected with a lot of volume, can cause John and his compatriots to lose their lives in combat, period! Discipline in everything is really the foundation of our Corps…no discipline, no Corps! Might as well role up the Colors and fold in with the Army.
With respect to the 360 degree evaluation, this is an insane idea! Every Marine, at every level, should be dealt with daily! Waiting for an annual evaluation to have someone regurgitate some BS or some leadership or performance failure that occurred months ago is counter productive. I do understand the need for some sort of performance evaluation for promotion sake, but even those are flawed. I would NOT serve today in a Marine Corps that will have some snotty ass fresh from boot camp Marine evaluating me as a MGySgt, nope, will not happen!
RE: "The point that Irene and the Marine “John” failed to see and appreciate is this;..." I fully concur Sir! While leadership is by example, discipline is the key to any unit and individual success. With the force of discipline comes the factor of accountability. Accountability (self and societal) is losing the battle for existence in our society. As all military services are comprised of 'reflections of society' it is no wonder that accountability and discipline have declined to a point where this barracks drama has surfaced. In 2004 I inherited a split barracks (HQ and UDP Marines and sailors) in Iwakuni. My first inspection as the new First Sergeant revealed smokers who had not a clue regarding proper disposal of butts was a problem. I tried the soft approach of walking around the barracks on field day nights and helping to pick up butts with the company of other SNCOs I had 'encouraged' to join us. Not the success I was after, so for my next plan of attack, I segregated smokers from non-smokers, relegating the smokers to policing their own butts. This worked for a few months, then waned as UDP Marines and sailors came and went. The solution borrowed from the "monkeys in a cage" parable, was a barracks wide message supported by unit Sergeants Major and my fellow SNCOs. The message was clear, a lack of discipline leading to the trashing of the grounds around the barracks was no longer tolerated and accountability would be held. DNCOs who witnessed ANYONE dropping their butt on the deck were then directed to make an appropriate log entry after identifying the violator. The next day, I would pay a visit to that Marine or sailor and they would be charged with a bounty of filling a bag with at least 100 butts, from the deck NOT the butt can. This worked very well for another three months, then as the problem began appearing again as some did not feel the stick would be used. I happened to witness a Marine throw his butt on the deck in the parking lot and the stick was out! LONG story short, the Marine filled a bag with 100 butts, then went to his Sergeant Major for additional 'discourse'.
Word spread quickly of this event. Non-smokers were overjoyed, smokers were woke (in the proper sense). At the next field day formation, I upped the ante. The next butt on the deck would result in a bounty of 200 butts in a bag and a weekend barracks duty. OUR barracks was the cleanest of all from that time on until my departure about eight months later. Interestingly, field day inspections were also much more representative of an effort built in accountability and discipline.
The problem today however, is that such a tactic even without raised voices, would never fly today as somewhere a myriad of complaints regarding hurt feelings would surface.
Just finished reading Dereliction of Duty by HR McMaster which reminded me that the real driver behind the individual replacement policy in Vietnam was that the political leadership (from the White House to State to McNamara at DOD) did NOT want it reported that this unit or that unit was going to Vietnam, reopening debate on just what we were doing there and how we were trying to do it. Moving individuals didn't attract attention. As McMaster points out, almost all the decisions made were aimed at LBJ controlling the political battlefield with little thought about the implications for the real battlefield - and the brass acquiesced.
Among several issues, one very positive note in the article stood out for me. The article ends noting that Corporal Kerns, the aircraft mechanic, was afforded the opportunity to attend the Corporal's Course. Notably, his unit rewarded him for his efforts with something other than simply 'more work'. They didn't treat him as the indispensable man and ride him into the dirt. They cared for him as a member of their team. They forced the rest of his team to develop without him and reduce the reliance upon his singular performance (giving room for the next Kern's to grow). He got better, and his section got better....a mission win and a troop welfare win. BZ to that Squadron.
Oh boy where do I start! I guess the biggest b!!ch I have is the entire barracks issue. It screams of leadership failure, throughout the chain of command from PFC to the Commandant.
Granted, I didn’t achieve any exalted rank, I was an artillery Capt., and I only rose to command an artillery battery, but maybe because I commanded a battery with 3rd MarDiv, that I have the appreciation for barracks, that I did.
The Marines in the battery lived in 1950s squad bay barracks. The main deck were the battery offices and the second deck were the living spaces. Everyday the barracks had the heads cleaned (sinks, squad showers, commodes, urinals, and decks), passageways swept and swabbed, personal areas cleaned and squared away. The barracks were inspected every day by the NCOS, and SNCOs.
Every Thursday evening after the end of the duty day a weekly top to bottom field day. Every Friday I and the platoon commanders inspected the barracks to include the work spaces. The battery First Sgt., was responsible for submitting and managing all outstanding gripes with the barracks infrastructure. Those were also a weekly topic at our staff meetings.
Another observation I took away from my time in the Corps, the troops were the happiest doing Marine things, like being in the field. For us in field artillery it was doing field artillery things, not just firing the artillery pieces, but other artillery things, surveying, FO training, COMEXs, CPEXs, FIELDEXs, etc. They stagnated doing garrison things. I tried to keep my troops in the field at least a week or more every month.
My Marines also knew that I would go to bat for them and defend them at battalion, if I thought it warranted.
I think it worked, my battery seemed to be the proudest and the most gung-ho, in the battalion. Maybe it was because I loved being in the Corps leading Marines, and that I loved my Marines.
I guess I’ll close with the first thing I learned in the Corps at TBS, and something I never forget and tried to pass on to all my Marines, TAKE CARE OF YOUR TROOPS!
I concur with you 100%. I am a Mustang, so I’ve seen both sides of the fence and can not comprehend how Marine leadership could have changed so much since I retired in 1975. Marines taking care of Marines is a cornerstone to our brand of leadership, and must still be taught in boot camp and TBS. So what went wrong?
Don I’m also a mustang but came from the Navy side. I’ve been out since 1989 so my understanding of what’s going on in the Corps today is not completely understood.
But I agree with you that a tenant of Corps leadership, Marines taking care of Marines seems to be totally missing. I would have thought that given the amount of Marines who saw combat in the GWOT the Corps would embrace this need even more closely. Some of it has to do with the “woke” DOD policies but not all. I think one of the root causes is a zero defect mentality. And that starts at the top of the COC and filters down. There’s much more but so much that this thread can’t support it. Love to have an offline discussion with you sometime if you want.
Semper Fi.
Greg Falzetta
Hi Greg, Yes, I'd enjoy an offline discussion any time you like. Where are you located?
Don, I live in Maine. How about you?
I am about as far as I can get from you...I live in Carlsbad, CA about 30 miles north of San Diego. Email at don@whisnant.org.
I read the article by Irene and just shook my head. I’m not sure what the e point she was trying to make. I’m fibbing, Irene, in my opinion was paint picture that the “John’s” of today need to be treated differently. All
I could see is the Marine Corps creating safe spaces for the “John’s” who had had their butts chewed out for the minor infractions.
The point that Irene and the Marine “John”
failed to see and appreciate is this; the smallest thing that is not corrected in peace time, and yes at times corrected with a lot of volume, can cause John and his compatriots to lose their lives in combat, period! Discipline in everything is really the foundation of our Corps…no discipline, no Corps! Might as well role up the Colors and fold in with the Army.
With respect to the 360 degree evaluation, this is an insane idea! Every Marine, at every level, should be dealt with daily! Waiting for an annual evaluation to have someone regurgitate some BS or some leadership or performance failure that occurred months ago is counter productive. I do understand the need for some sort of performance evaluation for promotion sake, but even those are flawed. I would NOT serve today in a Marine Corps that will have some snotty ass fresh from boot camp Marine evaluating me as a MGySgt, nope, will not happen!
Alfred,
RE: "The point that Irene and the Marine “John” failed to see and appreciate is this;..." I fully concur Sir! While leadership is by example, discipline is the key to any unit and individual success. With the force of discipline comes the factor of accountability. Accountability (self and societal) is losing the battle for existence in our society. As all military services are comprised of 'reflections of society' it is no wonder that accountability and discipline have declined to a point where this barracks drama has surfaced. In 2004 I inherited a split barracks (HQ and UDP Marines and sailors) in Iwakuni. My first inspection as the new First Sergeant revealed smokers who had not a clue regarding proper disposal of butts was a problem. I tried the soft approach of walking around the barracks on field day nights and helping to pick up butts with the company of other SNCOs I had 'encouraged' to join us. Not the success I was after, so for my next plan of attack, I segregated smokers from non-smokers, relegating the smokers to policing their own butts. This worked for a few months, then waned as UDP Marines and sailors came and went. The solution borrowed from the "monkeys in a cage" parable, was a barracks wide message supported by unit Sergeants Major and my fellow SNCOs. The message was clear, a lack of discipline leading to the trashing of the grounds around the barracks was no longer tolerated and accountability would be held. DNCOs who witnessed ANYONE dropping their butt on the deck were then directed to make an appropriate log entry after identifying the violator. The next day, I would pay a visit to that Marine or sailor and they would be charged with a bounty of filling a bag with at least 100 butts, from the deck NOT the butt can. This worked very well for another three months, then as the problem began appearing again as some did not feel the stick would be used. I happened to witness a Marine throw his butt on the deck in the parking lot and the stick was out! LONG story short, the Marine filled a bag with 100 butts, then went to his Sergeant Major for additional 'discourse'.
Word spread quickly of this event. Non-smokers were overjoyed, smokers were woke (in the proper sense). At the next field day formation, I upped the ante. The next butt on the deck would result in a bounty of 200 butts in a bag and a weekend barracks duty. OUR barracks was the cleanest of all from that time on until my departure about eight months later. Interestingly, field day inspections were also much more representative of an effort built in accountability and discipline.
The problem today however, is that such a tactic even without raised voices, would never fly today as somewhere a myriad of complaints regarding hurt feelings would surface.
Just finished reading Dereliction of Duty by HR McMaster which reminded me that the real driver behind the individual replacement policy in Vietnam was that the political leadership (from the White House to State to McNamara at DOD) did NOT want it reported that this unit or that unit was going to Vietnam, reopening debate on just what we were doing there and how we were trying to do it. Moving individuals didn't attract attention. As McMaster points out, almost all the decisions made were aimed at LBJ controlling the political battlefield with little thought about the implications for the real battlefield - and the brass acquiesced.
Among several issues, one very positive note in the article stood out for me. The article ends noting that Corporal Kerns, the aircraft mechanic, was afforded the opportunity to attend the Corporal's Course. Notably, his unit rewarded him for his efforts with something other than simply 'more work'. They didn't treat him as the indispensable man and ride him into the dirt. They cared for him as a member of their team. They forced the rest of his team to develop without him and reduce the reliance upon his singular performance (giving room for the next Kern's to grow). He got better, and his section got better....a mission win and a troop welfare win. BZ to that Squadron.