Why allow him to retire with an honorable and bennies when he's clearly not honorable? That's the problem, there's no real consequences for one's actions anymore.
Because his opinion is different then he's not honorable? No…that can't be what you're saying. Perhaps you're saying that because he did something stupid (penned an article in a moment of hot headedness) that he's not honorable? Come on man…are you telling me you've never done anything your boss wouldn't like? He did something stupid, but that doesn't erase his honor. Honor does not imply perfection. Accountability doesn't mean administering the most extreme punishment possible for every offense.
Take away all his honorable service over writing an article with his opinion? You can't be serious. The only thing he did wrong was use his rank in the article. If he wrote an article that was pro 2A in the same exact capacity you would never suggest he wasnt an honorable man and didn't deserve his military benefits.
Accountability...It has to start somewhere and it's been missing for far too long.
Exactly which violates both regs and his oath as SMS indicated better than I. Yep. I'd can him in a heartbeat, not for having a different opinion, for promoting it inappropriately when he knew better.
I don't even know where to start with this one. First of all, you don't start at the finish. Your logic would give someone the death penalty for speeding or jay walking. Secondly, there's plenty of accountability in the military. I've personally witnessed officers (Lt Cols as it so happens) get shwacked by losing their commands and getting punished by the UCMJ while still being allowed to retire. This "there's no accountability anymore" is absolute malarkey.
I guess you've never done something against the rules. You get to throw the first stone.
Since when does an LTC amount to anything in today's military?? 
Like I said your logic provides no consequence for his actions. He gets a sheet in his file. Big whoop. Your logic sends a message throughout the military officer corps that honor doesn't matter. Why is it that the enlisted ranks are the ones who seem to take honor more seriously than those aspiring to go as high in D.C. as possible? I say bust him, he still probably gets a 6 to 7 figure job with a lobbyist or some such in D.C., but at least the taxpayer isn't subsidizing this miscreant anymore. Consider that stone thrown. Later....
An article 15 is a career ender for an officer. There is no more rising through the ranks after that, you're simply done. Telling someone that has rendered the service necessary to make O5 that "you can go no farther because of what you've done" is NOT by any stretch of the imagination letting them off with no penalty or sending any type of message that honor doesn't matter. The guys that make it that high typically have a lot of pride, and that message is HUGELY humbling not only to those who punish, but also to those who see it happen. Please…for every officer I've seen get their pee pee shwacked for less than perfect conduct, I've seen at least 2-3 enlisted guys get busted for the same. It probably has to do with the fact that they enter at a younger age and just haven't gained maturity yet. Usually it's some E1-E-3 that's somewhere around the age of 20. I hope your walls aren't made of glass. I've heard it's going to be a cold winter.
Similar threads
