5 ms·

> Second chances here are what result in subpar military officers. How did you come to this conclusion? I believe in consequences, but I am neither a professi

> Second chances here are what result in subpar military officers. How did you come to this conclusion? I believe in consequences, but I am neither a professional educator nor a veteran of any armed forces. I would defer to the head of this institution to arrive at an appropriate decision.

535188B17C93743 6y ago
I'd prefer to not give second chances to the servicepeople being afforded a $400k education on our dime to cheat and lie only to control the most advanced weapon systems on the planet. But that's just me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- abtom 6y ago
  Well the standard for controlling the most powerful country aren't too high so this shouldn't be a problem either.
  - chokeartist 6y ago
    You're referring to the civilian aspect of control - which are elected officials. DOD executes orders from the National Command Authority (NCA), which is in effect the civilian-to-military control interface for military orders. You are free to debate the quality of the civilian control aspect (President), but I personally draw the line at the military domain. You want no variance in that part of the system. Otherwise the entire concept of recursive control ultimately residing in the hands of a civilian is questionable.
smileysteve 6y ago
The easy reasoning, is that on the field of battle, there are no do-overs * You don't know the math and people die * You cheat and you create an international incident. You either go to jail or people die because of the decisions you make.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> > Second chances here are what result in subpar military officers. [...] > I would defer to the head of this institution to arrive at an appropriate decision. Blind faith in institutions here (and anywhere) is what enables mass institutional failure. Whether it's producing subpart military officers and the all the negative consequences that has, or the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, or a slide toward tyranny in representative political institutions.
ericmay 6y ago
I'm a veteran. In my opinion this should probably result in dismissal (depending on exact circumstance which I'm not privy to). The main issue here is demonstration of a lack of character. You give in to temptation to take the easy way out. That might be not doing the proper maintenance on a vehicle, or maybe not going exactly through the checklist before you take off for a flight, or maybe you take a shortcut and think "you got it" before that recon mission, or maybe you don't quite make sure someone's gear is up to standard and it fails on them and kills them. Once you start taking shortcuts, you tend to keep taking them until it results in a colossal screw-up. When I got out of the army it actually took me a few years to get away from the "triple-checking" anxiety. Do I have my car keys? Ok. Wait do I have my keys? Ok good. "walking to my car" Do I have my keys? Ok hand is on the keys and I can feel them. Etc. Cheating means you'll eventually screw that up and forget your keys. Then you or someone else dies.
- tyingq 6y ago
  I'm also a veteran. I'd be more inclined to give them a second chance. There are likely more factors involved than lack of character here. I would at least try and see what the bigger picture was. If 70 were caught out in a very obvious way, there's probably a much bigger number cheating. And perhaps something about the environment that encourages the behavior. For example, watching yourself slip down the class ranking while knowing those ahead of you are cheating can be discouraging. Especially if you think it's being ignored. A few months of that might test your character pretty hard.
  - adamc 6y ago
    This. When so many are caught cheating, "character" is not a sufficient explanation; there is something systemic going on.
    - OminousWeapons 6y ago
      Just because there are positive incentives to participate in bad behavior, doesn't mean the people engaging in that behavior are absolved of responsibility for their actions. Just because you suffer personal costs if you do not engage in bad actions, doesn't mean you get a free pass to do them. The fact that the cheating isn't literally universal does suggest that specific people are knowingly making bad choices while others decide to rise above temptation and make the right choices. That is on them, and they should accept the consequences. Full stop.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

535188B17C93743 6y ago

I'd prefer to not give second chances to the servicepeople being afforded a $400k education on our dime to cheat and lie only to control the most advanced weapon systems on the planet. But that's just me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

abtom 6y ago
Well the standard for controlling the most powerful country aren't too high so this shouldn't be a problem either.
- chokeartist 6y ago
  You're referring to the civilian aspect of control - which are elected officials. DOD executes orders from the National Command Authority (NCA), which is in effect the civilian-to-military control interface for military orders. You are free to debate the quality of the civilian control aspect (President), but I personally draw the line at the military domain. You want no variance in that part of the system. Otherwise the entire concept of recursive control ultimately residing in the hands of a civilian is questionable.

smileysteve 6y ago

The easy reasoning, is that on the field of battle, there are no do-overs * You don't know the math and people die * You cheat and you create an international incident. You either go to jail or people die because of the decisions you make.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> > Second chances here are what result in subpar military officers. [...] > I would defer to the head of this institution to arrive at an appropriate decision. Blind faith in institutions here (and anywhere) is what enables mass institutional failure. Whether it's producing subpart military officers and the all the negative consequences that has, or the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, or a slide toward tyranny in representative political institutions.

ericmay 6y ago

I'm a veteran. In my opinion this should probably result in dismissal (depending on exact circumstance which I'm not privy to). The main issue here is demonstration of a lack of character. You give in to temptation to take the easy way out. That might be not doing the proper maintenance on a vehicle, or maybe not going exactly through the checklist before you take off for a flight, or maybe you take a shortcut and think "you got it" before that recon mission, or maybe you don't quite make sure someone's gear is up to standard and it fails on them and kills them. Once you start taking shortcuts, you tend to keep taking them until it results in a colossal screw-up. When I got out of the army it actually took me a few years to get away from the "triple-checking" anxiety. Do I have my car keys? Ok. Wait do I have my keys? Ok good. "walking to my car" Do I have my keys? Ok hand is on the keys and I can feel them. Etc. Cheating means you'll eventually screw that up and forget your keys. Then you or someone else dies.

tyingq 6y ago
I'm also a veteran. I'd be more inclined to give them a second chance. There are likely more factors involved than lack of character here. I would at least try and see what the bigger picture was. If 70 were caught out in a very obvious way, there's probably a much bigger number cheating. And perhaps something about the environment that encourages the behavior. For example, watching yourself slip down the class ranking while knowing those ahead of you are cheating can be discouraging. Especially if you think it's being ignored. A few months of that might test your character pretty hard.
- adamc 6y ago
  This. When so many are caught cheating, "character" is not a sufficient explanation; there is something systemic going on.
  - OminousWeapons 6y ago
    Just because there are positive incentives to participate in bad behavior, doesn't mean the people engaging in that behavior are absolved of responsibility for their actions. Just because you suffer personal costs if you do not engage in bad actions, doesn't mean you get a free pass to do them. The fact that the cheating isn't literally universal does suggest that specific people are knowingly making bad choices while others decide to rise above temptation and make the right choices. That is on them, and they should accept the consequences. Full stop.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]