Navy relieves commander of carrier

Moose

Administrator
Staff member
Contributor
I don't have military experience either but based on the democraps have their panties in a wad its probably pretty good move. I hope they find who leaked the letter they should be brought up on charges.
 

woodmoose

Administrator
Staff member
Contributor
correct - he didn't get relieved for the alarm - he got relieved for not following protocols - as a ship Commander he knew better, but likely let fear or politics get in his way

It's not like he informed his chain of command, got no response, and then broadsided it,,,he went straight to a broadside
 

buckshooter

Old Mossy Horns
correct - he didn't get relieved for the alarm - he got relieved for not following protocols - as a ship Commander he knew better, but likely let fear or politics get in his way

It's not like he informed his chain of command, got no response, and then broadsided it,,,he went straight to a broadside
This ^^^^^^^^
 

Bailey Boat

Twelve Pointer
correct - he didn't get relieved for the alarm - he got relieved for not following protocols - as a ship Commander he knew better, but likely let fear or politics get in his way

It's not like he informed his chain of command, got no response, and then broadsided it,,,he went straight to a broadside

^^^^^^^ This again......

He did the right thing, but in the wrong manner....
 

oldest school

Old Mossy Horns
My initial reaction was GOOD....he needs to go for making such a blunder. But then I remembered I have zero military experience. So I figured I would ask those who do, what they think.

well you have as much knowledge as biden and I see he weighed in so there is that. :)
 

DBCooper

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor

hunter

Eight Pointer
Contributor
With the rear admiral on the same ship I suspect that there is more to the story than we likely know or may ever know for that matter. I do know when you have long chains of command it only takes one idiot anywhere in it to really screw things up. Particularly when you get to the political ranks! Whatever the outcome I suspect anyone that was in the Navy and rose to command an aircraft carrier likely knew the outcome of doing something like this and, if it was indeed about getting care for his sailors, I respect it even if it might have been done inappropriately.
 

m75rlg

Spike
One of the first things I was taught by MCPO Levine when I was placed in his unit as a PO (that is an NCO for you non-sailors) is that you take care of your crew, even if you end up getting the fid (a tapered wooden tool used by boatswain mates when working with line) for doing so!

I passed his test that day, and he always stood up for me after that, one time chasing a Commander who was the Group XO, off our dock cursing him after he gigged my area during an inspection after the Chief has checked it. (I'd testified against the Commander a couple years earlier at a Captain's Mast held at a different command. )

All that being said, I would say the newscasts tonight of the crew of the carrier crowding the rails and cheering their Captain as he departed the ship says much about the type of Captain he was.

We may never know exactly how he tried to follow the chain of command and how or why the information leaked, but at least action to protect and treat the crew is being taken now.
 

aya28ga

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I served 20 years in the US Navy, so I feel qualified to speak on this:

Thank you Capt Crozier, for being a true leader and putting the well-being of the sailors under your command first, at the cost of your career.

Of course, we're working from incomplete facts & knowledge, but I'm certain of one thing: You don't become the skipper of a capital ship like an aircraft carrier w/o knowing how the "chain of command" works. My guess is that he had previously sent other messages through the chain of command describing the condition of the ship's crew which fell on deaf ears, which lead to his decision to sent a message "in the clear" so to speak, knowing that he was sacrificing his career in doing so.

This video clip shows how his crew felt about his actions. I'll take THAT as proof-positive that he had the highest motives.......

 

SomeHuntingGuy

Eight Pointer
I have military experience...

There is not enough info to know what happened. I feel he hit up his chain of command and they told him to pound sand. He said F that, and went to the media.

I suspect that he was taking care of his troops, first and foremost.

Mission #1 = Mission success
Mission #2 = Troop welfare

...you don't get #1 without #2. The exception to this is the Normandy type of events. This is not Normandy.

Again, we do not have all the facts, but F#$@ Washington DC. I'm sure they're in the wrong. Besides, the guy who fired him was ultimately responsible for those sailers welfare -oh, and he's bucking for his next job....

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

NCST8GUY

Frozen H20 Guy
Agreed. I will not form an opinion. I will let those whom have military experience form their own, and I will abide by theirs. They'res just for Tipmoose.

Seriously, there is NO WAY any talking head on CNN, much less fools on this forum, should be discussing what should happen here. It's way below all of their pay grades
 

Tipmoose

Administrator
Staff member
Contributor
Agreed. I will not form an opinion. I will let those whom have military experience form their own, and I will abide by theirs. They'res just for Tipmoose.

Seriously, there is NO WAY any talking head on CNN, much less fools on this forum, should be discussing what should happen here. It's way below all of their pay grades

I think you meant way ABOVE their pay grades?
 

Firedog

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I served 20 years in the US Navy, so I feel qualified to speak on this:

Thank you Capt Crozier, for being a true leader and putting the well-being of the sailors under your command first, at the cost of your career.

Of course, we're working from incomplete facts & knowledge, but I'm certain of one thing: You don't become the skipper of a capital ship like an aircraft carrier w/o knowing how the "chain of command" works. My guess is that he had previously sent other messages through the chain of command describing the condition of the ship's crew which fell on deaf ears, which lead to his decision to sent a message "in the clear" so to speak, knowing that he was sacrificing his career in doing so.

This video clip shows how his crew felt about his actions. I'll take THAT as proof-positive that he had the highest motives.......

Read something very similar to this earlier with the conclusion being both the Captain and the Navy did the right thing. Captain just had to pay a higher price, which he did willingly and likely with full knowledge of the outcome for him.
 

mekanizm

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Interesting article but very interesting reading in the comments section where a lot of naval officers put in there two cents.

Here is one,

As you know, info regarding the operational status of an aircraft carrier (or a submarine, or a surface combatant for that matter) is classified Secret. If a CVN goes offline for any reason, it’s classified and is escalated to the highest levels of government, to include the President. So to shotgun that kind of information in a letter that’s attached to an unclassified email is a security violation of the highest order, which I would have considered “Offense #1.”

 

Scrub

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
When you have a bunch of BS “appointees” making decisions over respected military people it reeks of BS just another appointee with his head up Trumps ass IMHO. My cousin was a Navy Captain with a Bronze Star and he would’ve said the same thing if he were living.
 
Last edited:

gremcat

Twelve Pointer
I thought from the initial reports he had tried to go through normal channels a few times but didn’t get traction.


Others with experience more than my 0 also thought it was a deliberate leak by someone above playing the politics game but he should never have put it in writing. They also highlighted the leak sent a signal to all enemies our largest which carried nukes was incapacitated.

I personally agree with others here that he knew the outcome and did what was best regardless. Of course, I always prefer the altruistic narrative and am the only one in the house that digs romantic comedies so I’m admittedly biased. His crew showing support said a lot.
 

aya28ga

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Interesting article but very interesting reading in the comments section where a lot of naval officers put in there two cents.

Here is one,




A very interesting article, indeed.

I find it to be a historical irony that the carrier's namesake Theodore Roosevelt, as a young officer in the Rough Riders also challenged the chain of command when he felt his men were in jeopardy and suffering from medical maladies during the Spanish-American war, namely malaria and yellow fever.

And since you're cherry-picking comments from naval officers putting in their "two cents" opinions, here's one of the replies to the one you selected:


"The assumption is that we have all the facts, an assumption that quite easily could be false. How do we know that the Captain didn’t walk down the passage and talk to the Admiral? There is much that we do not know.
What I do know is this: relieving the Captain of his command is a PR nightmare, especially during this pandemic and more so after SECNAV lauded him publicly. Do I doubt that he needed to be relieved of command? I think he screwed up badly. Do I think the Navy could have done this differently? Oh, yes, they could."
 

mekanizm

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Another one...

None of us knows exactly what methods the TR CO exhausted prior to dropping a tactical nuc on the situation. However, I do know how fast the virus can spread on a CVN and 24-48 hours could have made a HUGE difference on the outcome. This wasn't like a festering problem with catapult systems or spurious spikes in reactor controls instrumentation. It seems like time really was of the essence.
 
Top