Dishonorable discharges for refusing vaccine?

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

North was not a legal expert. North understands the officers concept of GIVING orders and not the idea of receiving orders that we as enlisted men had to square with what we have been taught. I'm sure that nearly any order an officer gives he (or she) feels is necessary and lawful. The person carrying out that order has to sometimes make an evaluation; is this order correct, is it right, it is necessary, is it lawful?
A small example; we were sailing in the Arctic Circle back in 1981 with the NATO fleet. We were operating parallel courses for a photo op. Each ship was about 50 yards away from each of the other ships (six ships total) which is pretty close. The officer of the deck (a lieutenant) gave the order to make a 30 degree port turn. Pretty serious turn but would look pretty cool as all the ships turned together. Problem was...the photo op called for a starboard turn. Think of the result if that happened. Collusion of two ships in the Arctic Circle where the water temp is below freezing. A second class boatswain mate caught this. That's an E5. He loudly countermanded the lieutenant's order and gave the correct order. The third class petty officer on the wheel listened to the second class and made a starboard turn avoiding a catastrophe. The captain overhead this as his at sea cabin is right behind the bridge. He came onto the bridge and assessed the situation. He relieved the OOD on the spot. Later, he called the second class petty officer into his stateroom. He thanked him for saving lives and the ship, then he chewed his ass out for countermanding a "lawful" order given by a senior officer in public. Like I wrote somewhere, you can be 100% correct but still get in a world of shit. That petty office is alive and well, living in Florida, and occasionally producing a Youtube video about navy life.

Disaster just for a photo opportunity?

From the bottom up. I understand your perspective. The Ollie North example was from the top down. You know, not my pay grade.

Still, when you know what's right, you speak up and deal with the shit storm later. Time stands still for no ant.

I can't help the humor. And I need to watch The Hunt for Red October again. Sir.

[bambino]

https://t.me/BoldSpearElmerFudd/47525

[the_real_Barleycorn]

Wouldn't be the first time that a photo op caused a near disaster. There was a senior chief on board my tin can. He used to be a bubble head (that's a submariner) but he quit. It is a volunteer service. Anyway, they wanted a photo op of a submarine breaking the surface of the ocean in an emergency surface. You've probably see other submarines do it like in Hunt for Red October. The submarine was down when the order was given for an emergency blow and surface. The sub broke the surface of the water but the angle was too great. The submarine came about halfway out of the water and crashed down. The jolt caused the reactor to scram losing all power. The sub recoiled back into the air and slipped beneath the water. It continued downward like an arrow. They had no power to pressurize the ballast tanks or to rotate the screw. According to the chief, they continued past their "test depth". They were slowing but didn't actually stop until they were outside the safe zone. When that sub pulled in to port many sailors took the actions of throwing their dolphins (that little pin on their chest) over the side and quitting the sub service. All of that over a photo op.
Want another?
In 1995, Bill Clinton was taking full advantage of the 50th anniversary of D-Day to do PR stunts. You may remember his fake walk on the beach or the Italian cemetery but what didn't get much press was the navy ship. There are a lot of old wrecks in the English Channel just off of Omaha Beach. The water is unsafe for navigation. The White House wanted a navy ship sailing in the channel behind Bill Clinton. The destroyer tasked for the job had a captain that was not happy with risking his destroyer and crew for a picture. The captain had to be given written orders to hazard his command for a picture.

Here is a link to that NATO fleet picture. https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...edindex=0&vt=0

[rexdutchman]

Does anyone remember the antrax crap , many mil guys died , got very sick from that vaccine , this is the agent orange of the day

[VerySkeptical]

D-day was in 1944. 1995 is 51 years past. And submariners quit because of a mishap? Why didn't it switch over to batteries?. Compressed air blows the ballast tanks dry navy guy. And if the tanks were blown dry for the emergency surface, why did the sub start down? The answer is it wouldn't.
You aren't even close to the truth. What person would believe your bullshit?
Chiefs and upper rank ZNCOs have always told stories to recruits. Once again you offer up a totally fabricated anecdote.
Do so research and try to stop looking like a total lying asshole.

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Wouldn't be the first time that a photo op caused a near disaster. There was a senior chief on board my tin can. He used to be a bubble head (that's a submariner) but he quit. It is a volunteer service. Anyway, they wanted a photo op of a submarine breaking the surface of the ocean in an emergency surface. You've probably see other submarines do it like in Hunt for Red October. The submarine was down when the order was given for an emergency blow and surface. The sub broke the surface of the water but the angle was too great. The submarine came about halfway out of the water and crashed down. The jolt caused the reactor to scram losing all power. The sub recoiled back into the air and slipped beneath the water. It continued downward like an arrow. They had no power to pressurize the ballast tanks or to rotate the screw. According to the chief, they continued past their "test depth". They were slowing but didn't actually stop until they were outside the safe zone. When that sub pulled in to port many sailors took the actions of throwing their dolphins (that little pin on their chest) over the side and quitting the sub service. All of that over a photo op.
Want another?
In 1995, Bill Clinton was taking full advantage of the 50th anniversary of D-Day to do PR stunts. You may remember his fake walk on the beach or the Italian cemetery but what didn't get much press was the navy ship. There are a lot of old wrecks in the English Channel just off of Omaha Beach. The water is unsafe for navigation. The White House wanted a navy ship sailing in the channel behind Bill Clinton. The destroyer tasked for the job had a captain that was not happy with risking his destroyer and crew for a picture. The captain had to be given written orders to hazard his command for a picture.

Here is a link to that NATO fleet picture. https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...edindex=0&vt=0

[VerySkeptical]

Your picture link goes to s picture from 1981. Lying loser.

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Wouldn't be the first time that a photo op caused a near disaster. There was a senior chief on board my tin can. He used to be a bubble head (that's a submariner) but he quit. It is a volunteer service. Anyway, they wanted a photo op of a submarine breaking the surface of the ocean in an emergency surface. You've probably see other submarines do it like in Hunt for Red October. The submarine was down when the order was given for an emergency blow and surface. The sub broke the surface of the water but the angle was too great. The submarine came about halfway out of the water and crashed down. The jolt caused the reactor to scram losing all power. The sub recoiled back into the air and slipped beneath the water. It continued downward like an arrow. They had no power to pressurize the ballast tanks or to rotate the screw. According to the chief, they continued past their "test depth". They were slowing but didn't actually stop until they were outside the safe zone. When that sub pulled in to port many sailors took the actions of throwing their dolphins (that little pin on their chest) over the side and quitting the sub service. All of that over a photo op.
Want another?
In 1995, Bill Clinton was taking full advantage of the 50th anniversary of D-Day to do PR stunts. You may remember his fake walk on the beach or the Italian cemetery but what didn't get much press was the navy ship. There are a lot of old wrecks in the English Channel just off of Omaha Beach. The water is unsafe for navigation. The White House wanted a navy ship sailing in the channel behind Bill Clinton. The destroyer tasked for the job had a captain that was not happy with risking his destroyer and crew for a picture. The captain had to be given written orders to hazard his command for a picture.

Here is a link to that NATO fleet picture. https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...edindex=0&vt=0

[the_real_Barleycorn]

My NATO fleet experience was 1981 dipshit. Get your rant right. Why does a submarine slide backwards into the water...physics. Half the mass of the sub unsupported by the ocean. It's pointed at a greater than a 45 degree angle. It's coming down along the longitudinal axis. The compressed air tanks are depleted from the stunt. During a reactor scram there is a time lag before the can shift and not everything is available by design. Plus, batteries cannot run the entire sub. The last US sub that could do that was the Tulibee built with World War II technology and a reactor. So the sub is literally falling backwards at a 45 degree angle. Take the cosine of 45 to figure how much of 32 feet per sec/sec is its speed. Faster in water resistant, friction, and residual pressurised air in the ballasts that wasn't lost when they broached...and you have a boat in trouble. So why don't you chase that rolling donut.

[the_real_Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by VerySkeptical

D-day was in 1944. 1995 is 51 years past. And submariners quit because of a mishap? Why didn't it switch over to batteries?. Compressed air blows the ballast tanks dry navy guy. And if the tanks were blown dry for the emergency surface, why did the sub start down? The answer is it wouldn't.
You aren't even close to the truth. What person would believe your bullshit?
Chiefs and upper rank ZNCOs have always told stories to recruits. Once again you offer up a totally fabricated anecdote.
Do so research and try to stop looking like a total lying asshole.

Figuring out that it was 1994 was too hard for you?

[VerySkeptical]

So you're saying the diving officer entered the wrong angle and no one checked his work or that he didn't correct someone else's? They don't just guess at the angle. And if it went back at the steep angle, why was there a shock that would dump the reactor? And you're saying the sub went down over test. How did they stop the dive with no compressed air to blow the tanks which were giving the sub negative buoyancy? Residual pressurized air? After a brouch? So they didn't completely blow the tank and it wasn't the propeller the stopped it according to you. And the deeper they go the less significant that residual air is.
Just admit you're full of bullshit.
Plus you said Clinton took full advantage of the 50th. In 1995, 51 years after D-day

You said the picture showed the fleet exercise from 1995. You didn't mention 1981 until your pathetic walk back attempt.
Your claim the sailors would try to quit is the biggest lie of all.
I don't have to figure out why you tell any lies you tell.
I like how you try to disparage the actions of others to make a false point. And it seems a mistake that almost sank a nuclear submarine would be noted.
But then you lied before you thought it over. Liars of your...depth, seldom do.

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

My NATO fleet experience was 1981 dipshit. Get your rant right. Why does a submarine slide backwards into the water...physics. Half the mass of the sub unsupported by the ocean. It's pointed at a greater than a 45 degree angle. It's coming down along the longitudinal axis. The compressed air tanks are depleted from the stunt. During a reactor scram there is a time lag before the can shift and not everything is available by design. Plus, batteries cannot run the entire sub. The last US sub that could do that was the Tulibee built with World War II technology and a reactor. So the sub is literally falling backwards at a 45 degree angle. Take the cosine of 45 to figure how much of 32 feet per sec/sec is its speed. Faster in water resistant, friction, and residual pressurised air in the ballasts that wasn't lost when they broached...and you have a boat in trouble. So why don't you chase that rolling donut.

[VerySkeptical]

I pointed out you said 1995. Funny how you not being able to count is my problem. If you get a basic fact wrong, why would I assume any of your claim is correct? Then you add a picture from 1981 you claim is a picture showing what you claim is improper is a joke.
Just like you changing the rank on your uniform for pictures when you were appealing the reduction. And then using the picture instead of a picture with the correct rank.


No, you got the boot because you weren't advancing.

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Figuring out that it was 1994 was too hard for you?

[the_real_Barleycorn]

So this personal. You're going to keep coming up with stupid comments. I suspect that you might be my brother...and there is a good reason we don't talk. He is a royal prick. Like or not, everything I wrote is true or as it was communicated to me.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

I agree 100%!

However a soldiers or sailors body is not theirs while active. In the gulf Marines had no choice but to take ALL the shots/vaccs the military were injecting into personnel.

I had no choice!

I wonder if the Military has stopped to think forcing a vaccine on a recruit would be a deterrent for new recruits entering the Military.

[NoirMan]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

everything I wrote is true or as it was communicated to me.

Kinda like when you write shit you read on Telegram OAN Newsmax Facebook etc. you don’t know if it’s true but you write it anyway. Maybe you should be more discerning.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Levianon17

I wonder if the Military has stopped to think forcing a vaccine on a recruit would be a deterrent for new recruits entering the Military.

I wonder if this is the game plan.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

I wonder if this is the game plan.

Maybe, after all they want to defund the Police they are using race as the reason for that. Now they are using a Virus outbreak to impose provisions on the Military. So it wouldn't be any surprise they are purposely deterring recruits by using a Vaccine requirement.