Did this actually happen to you, and if so did you submit a statement?
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Road to 350: What Does the US Navy Do Anyway?
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
How much of that is on us? I.e. what are the percentages like if you zero in on college graduates of military age.
If your ability to defend your argument that there is some connection between diversity training and warfighting readiness and training relies on telling me to go look up the answers for you- I'm a hard pass. The rest of your statement is a bunch of non-factually supported suppositions without any basis in reality or any quantifiable impact in the Fleet. Parroting salamander lines is no way to go through life.
So what. Fifty six percent of college graduates are Asian-Americans when they are just 5.4% of the population. Whites are 61% of the population and just 35% are college grads. Meanwhile 76% of all nail salons in the US is owned by an Asian-American. All meaningless stats without far more analysis.
I don't think those are totally meaningless, nor were his. His point to the fact that relative to the US population, white males are overrepresented in Naval Aviation. You could say the same about nail salons and college graduates with Asians if your stats are also true. Is there more to the story? Yeah, but it's a good place to start asking "Why is that?"
Nonetheless, let's not start this conversation in a thread about a bigger fleet.
My point. Unless you know why that is, those stats are in and of themselves meaningless. Unactionable.
Back to bigger fleet. Yes please.
As a retired naval officer, I want a bigger fleet.
As a taxpayer, I look at how the Navy spent my tax dollars. $35 billion for 40 marginally capable LCS’s. Another $35 billion - enough to buy 2 Nimitz carriers. their air wings, and the escort vessels - and the Navy instead purchased 3 Zumwalt cruisers. Speaking of carriers, the Navy decides go with a new carrier that is plagued by cost overruns and delays.
The Navy was given funding but the results were less than optimal.
Yes, and no, as I was told that was standard Navy policy and couldn't be helped. As an Ensign, how was I supposed to know better? I wasn't in a position nor did I have the desire to buck the trend and fight the CO who I was trying to convince to give me a SWO pin.
Were you specifically told it was standard Navy policy to give white males a 3.0? Or, were you told that it was standard policy to give a 3.0 in that category, at your rank/time aboard so that they could mark you higher in other categories, such as 'Tactical Performance' while managing RSCA?
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
If something sounds retarded and wrong, it is. This principle knows no rank. If someone was able to convince you that the Navy as an organization would rate you lower because you are white, you have some self-introspection to do.
I accept your terms.
So, to be clear, you've taken an alleged statement from your CO that you know was hyperbole at best, but ultimately complete BS - surely you've figured that part out by now - yet you've clumsily deployed it as an example of a "hopelessly WOKE Navy" that is really just part of an imagined reality that doesn't actually exist. Please, tell us more about your opinions on other matters!
Was the Navy 'woke' that far back?
Seriously, that block along with one or two others was almost always 3.0 for everyone IIRC.BTW, I looked up the whole 500 ship Navy proposal and the numbers aren't anywhere near as impressive as they would seem at first blush as they only plus up 'regular' ship numbers a little bit but add 150 unmanned ships to the total. No detail on those unmanned 'ships', like size or capabilities.