|
|
||
Is there double standard in military punishment? Date published: 5/30/2004
Consider: Tailhook 1993--In the military, "chain of command" means that those at the top are responsible for everything that goes on below them in their commands, right down to the lowest-rated sailor or soldier. There were many admirals and generals present at the Tailhook Convention who could and should have called a halt to the out-of-hand "partying," including the chief of naval operations, as well as the Navy's secretary. The fallout was blunt and to the point. Paula Coughlin's boss was relieved of duty for ignoring his subordinate's complaints, and that put an end to his career. Three admirals were censured for failing to prevent or stop the misbehavior of the junior officers at the convention. Thirty other admirals received letters of caution to be placed in their permanent records. Abu Ghraib 2004--Lt. Gen. James Helmly, who heads the Army Reserve, will review Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski's conduct as commander of the MP brigade, said Al Schilf, a spokesman for the National Army Reserve. Karpinski has not been formally relieved of command nor charged in connection with a prisoner-abuse scandal that has tarnished the military's image in Iraq and hindered the U.S.-led occupation. Why is there a double standard, one for men, and then one for women in the armed forces? Why hasn't she been relieved of her command? Why is she not censured? Is it not politically correct to hold women to the same standards of conduct as men? Are people afraid of what the feminists may say or do? Punishment must be consistent, for women and for men. Greg Fischer Stafford
1. Be respectful. No personal attacks.
|
|
|||||||||||||
