What HD said. You do look at nearly everything in a negative light. The fact that you're compelled to rebutt anything positive anyone says about the service with your own bad experiences speaks volumes.
That's one way to put it.
Another way to put it is that I don't necessarily toe the party line; in other words, I sometimes submit positions that others (to include chains of command throughout my career) either didn't think of, or don't always want to hear. Regardless, I offer them as a "cost" - i.e., "You can do X, but it's going to cost the unit Y." I am not a CO - my job is to provide options and advice.
Once decisions are made (by anyone in my chain that I'm supporting), I take those decision on as my own and carry on.
And no, not everything has to do with my "own bad experiences." Many times they're based on the experiences of others. I try not to let myself (or others) repeat mistakes that have already been made.
It certainly didn't need a rebuttal and it's getting a little tiresome.
You are free to ignore my posts.
However, if you post something on an internet forum, there's always a chance that someone is going to comment on it.
If your studs argued with you and told you they shouldn't bother trying to be good because some people are able to squeek by by doing the minimum, I imagine that might not sit well with you or your peers.
You're right...but when did I say that someone shouldn't bother trying to be good? Where this discussion went downhill is when I suggested that not every command is of the caliber that we read about in our leadership texts. Many are stellar commands, but more than are not...as evidenced by the number of COs/XOs/CMCs/Chiefs of the Boat/etc. that are relieved every year.
