Category Archives: ethics

Time to Fire Flag Officers and Dismiss them from the Army

Posted on by
Reply

The management of the US Military Academy—West Point—has decided the Academy’s mission no longer includes inculcating concepts patriotism, sacrifice, obligation, and honor in our future Army officers.

The US Military Academy at West Point removed the “Duty, Honor, Country” motto from its mission statement.

It’s bad enough that the managers at the top of the Department of Defense think proper pronouns, and equal outcomes regardless of merit, and skin color—wokeness—are more important than training our military men and women how to defend our nation, how to kill our enemies if they attack us. Now the managers of what used to be a premier military academy don’t even think officers satisfying their obligations, displaying and acting on precepts of honor, and putting our nation’s needs ahead of their personal convenience (or pronoun preference) needs to be trained at all.

Of course, those worthies do intend to maintain the phrase as a motto. Whoopty damn do.

And this from West Point spokesman Colonel Terence Kelly:

Duty Honor Country is West Point’s motto and the foundation of our culture as it has been since 1898. As we have done nine times in the past century, we have updated our mission statement to now include the Army Values, loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage.

Weasel words. “Duty, Honor, Country” are those values. If the academy [sic] managers truly meant those words, they’d keep the overarching phrase.

Four flags that come to mind as being ripe for relief and dismissal are US Military Academy Superintendent Lieutenant General Steven W Gilland, Dean Brigadier General Shane R Reeves, Commandant of Cadets Major General Lori L Robinson, and US Army Chief of Staff General Randy A George—the latter for allowing this to go through.

This Time I Disagree with Bjorn Lomborg

Posted on by
Reply

But only a little bit. Lomborg (among other things, Copenhagen Consensus President), in his Tuesday Wall Street Journal op-ed, writes absolutely correctly about the need for climatistas (my term, as is “doomsayers” below) to consider much more than their simple claim of climate change and the imminent destruction from their claimed change. Lomborg, though, concentrated on the economic destruction the doomsayers’ policies would inflict even as those worthies ignore technological advances that would mitigate their claims’ outcome, even were their claims in any way accurate.

Where I disagree is in the lack of discussion of the larger, and more important, context within which today’s alleged climate disaster is supposedly developing.

From the subheadline of Lomborg’s piece:

Climate policy needs to take into account the costs of draconian measures….

The doomsayers need to do more than that. They need to reconcile their claims of impending disaster with some facts that provide longer range context. Facts like Earth, 11k years after the last Ice Age, still is cooler than our planet’s geologic warming trend line (noisy as the data around the trend line are). Facts like there have been a number of epochs in our past where Earth was much warmer than it is now, and life was lush; there have been a number of epochs in our past where atmospheric CO2 was much higher than it is now, and life was lush; and those sets of epochs do not correlate with each other.

Some other facts: our climate changes do correlate, roughly, with orbital changes (small) and rotation axis precession (relatively dramatic). Beyond that, we’re about halfway through the current axial tilt from one direction to the opposite, and we tilt—our northern hemisphere, where most of the oceans are—toward the sun in winter and away from the sun in summer. How do the doomsayers plan to deal with the situation in a few thousand years (roughly equivalent to half the time that has passed since that last Ice Age, and a bit shorter than the time since we started our first civilizations) when our northern hemisphere tilts toward the sun in summer, away from the sun in winter, and the seasons get dramatically more extreme as a result?

Boeing Production Problems and Unions

Posted on by
Reply

Yes, the two are related. This is from a Wall Street Journal article on Boeing’s production sloppiness (my term) in its airline assembly operations. “Traveled work” is work done on the production line at a later station on the line than it should have been done, and generally by the personnel at that later step rather than by those who should have done it moving to the next station to complete it. For instance,

…the plane [whose door had blown out on an Alaska Airlines flight] spent nearly three weeks shuffling down an assembly line with faulty rivets in need of repair.
Workers had spotted the bad parts almost immediately after the plane’s fuselage arrived at the factory. But they didn’t make the fix right away, and the 737 continued on to the next workstation. When crews completed the repair 19 days later….

Boeing’s fix [emphasis added]?

Boeing told staff it was changing how it determines pay for tens of thousands of nonunion employees—from mechanics in South Carolina to its top brass. Quality measures, such as reducing traveled work, will now determine 60% of the annual bonuses for those working on its commercial aircraft.

Boeing’s union employees apparently get to continue to skate. The move appears to single out Boeing’s right-to-work state employees for punishment while not addressing the problem itself.

Education and Needs

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of Letter writers in The Wall Street Journal‘s Sunday Letters section expressed concern for a high school student who was suspended for violating his school’s hair length rule.

The state shouldn’t prohibit haircuts of one type or another and suspend students from school for violating the policy unless it can really show this is needed.

And

Schools need to focus on teaching kids and not worrying about [clothing and grooming standards].

Among the needs and teaching focuses in high schools, and in lower schools, is personal discipline. Clothing and hair grooming rules are badly needed milieus for teaching that badly needed skill.

There’s plenty of time for students to dress as they wish and to grow and groom their hair as they wish after they’ve graduated and are looking for work.

When is Reducing Employee Hours not a Layoff?

Posted on by
Reply

When it’s being done to reallocate city funds to support illegal aliens. That’s Denver’s Newspeak Dictionary version of what the city managers are choosing to do to the city’s Parks and Recreations system “on call” employees, folks like lifeguards, front desk workers, and coaches. The parks and recs’ $4.3 million budget is better used taking care of those illegal aliens.

Oh, and never mind what those layoffs, to use an American English dictionary definition of Denver’s action, will do to the city’s residents, especially the children, who will no longer have any place to swim or to play the sports that used to be coached.

One more thing: in view of the city managers’ demonstrated priorities—show of hands—who believes this won’t be extended to the whole of Denver’s parks and recs employees when the flow of illegal aliens continues unabated?

The city has offered this sop to those employees who are out of a job, even though they’re not “laid off:” they can apply for unemployment insurance. See ya, Suckers.