Am I Really an Idiot?

A "female torpedoman warrior" didn't like my last post, which originally appeared on Smartpunters.com last May. Well, I didn't expect everyone to like it, especially female torpedomen warriors.I will post the majority of her comments, eliminating those portions that are not suitable for ladies and children. She starts off with:


I came across your May 23, 2007 posting while searching for information about the first ever "women torpedoman" aka "skirts". I also read another posting concerning women and torpedoes - I am sure you're familiar with the HSN term? "Men... women are like torpedoes, treat them with loving care and they will run hot, straight and ...." - I can almost picture you laughing as you read this and finishing the quote - but you know, I am not laughing. I am really rather sad about the 2 top search engine results for keywords "torpedoman - women" would produce such degrading material - as if your view or the views of other male Torpedomen really matter. Enough said in that respect.

First, for those not familiar with "HSN," the ellipsis refers to "normal." It is what every tube captain wants to report when a torpedo is fired.

But to answer our female torpedoman respondent: I think you have thin skin and a chip on your shoulder. Do you really think that your opinion is superior to mine? Do you really believe that centuries — no, millennia — of thinking the military is properly a male bastion should be overturned by a less-than-forty year change of thinking? Do you really consider your opinion to be wiser than the millions upon millions of men (and their women) who thought otherwise in ages past?

What I wrote is not degrading. In fact, it is you who have degraded yourself. No self-respecting woman would utilize the crude reference to male genitalia that I excised from your post.

Your statement that women are not warriors is just your own true admission of ignorance. Ask your mother if she was a warrior when she gave birth to you, ask your grandmother if she was a warrior as she gave birth to your father, - I triple dog dare you to do that and post the results of your questions on your blog. I am calling you out on that one - [removed by editor].

Who is ignorant here? Giving birth makes you a warrior? Come on, let's be real. Childbirth may exact effort and pain that no warrior has ever felt, and I shall not diminish what women go through to bring us into the world. That, however, does not make them a warrior. My mother and both my grandmothers have gone to the great beyond and are presently unavailable for interrogation. However, I knew them well enough to know they would take umbrage with being called a warrior. They were ladies, not warriors. Warriors are trained to kill, not to give life.

I am a torpedoman, a woman, a warrior, a daughter of a 2 time Vietnam Veteran with 2 Purple Hearts, and I earned awards for my service as well - not to compare "racks" -

What does being the daughter of a Viet Nam vet have to do with anything?

but I earned my career every painstaking way from being taped to a chair and having sponges filled with piss water thrown at me - to humping 100 lb lead weights from ship to sub - to carrying a weapon and being a sharpshooter with that weapon - to driving a ship YES A SHIP to walking up 7 decks in 30 minutes with a weapon pack and doing so for 4 long painstaking hours - to being in cramped little spaces inside of a submarine and performing PMS on specialty equipment that was simply too difficult for the knuckle dragging, size 2 hat wearing, ignorant Torpedomen that didn't know the difference between EXCELLENCE in the Navy and are not aware of the CORE VALUES...

That you should have been so ill-treated is inexcusable and should never have happened. I have seen worse than that inflicted on male sailors.

I see, however, that you are not even convinced in your own mind that your being a torpedoman has validity. Your use of ad hominem attacks proves you have no valid argument. Ad hominem means "against the man." When you have no logical argument, attack the man (or the woman). If good reasoning can't defeat him, insults might. Well, I confess to being a size 2 hat-wearing torpedoman, but I am far from ignorant.


I suggest you - revisit those memories, do you remember the CORE VALUES you said you would uphold?

Core Values? We didn't have them when I was in. Our core values were: work hard, fight hard, party hard.

I love free speech and the time I served and the sacrifices I made to have the right to free speech..... I just hate it when idiots as yourself use that right in an attempt to cloud the sacrifice made.... mine... or yours....

I'd almost believe you, except if you really loved free speech you wouldn't have had such a hissy over mine. I don't consider my Naval service to have been a sacrifice. It was a privilege. I enjoyed it, for the most part. I don't believe I denigrated your perceived sacrifices. I said nothing to demean you (unless you really believe that my thinking women should not be torpedomen is demeaning).

Here again, you resort to an ad hominem attack. Idiots have a mentality of less than a three-year old. This supposed idiot was, at one time, the engineer responsible for designing all physical and radiological entry controls, accesses, and security control points for refueling naval nuclear reactors and was the cognizant engineer responsible for writing and maintaining one section of the nuclear power manual. Stupid? — possibly. Ignorant? — never. Idiot? — not even close.

And you don't even know the whole story....

I wasn't aware there was a story.

Shame on you.

Back to you, sweet pea!

What Is The Navy Coming To?

The commanding officer of the USS Arleigh Burke (DDG 51), E. J. McClure, was recently relieved of command for "loss of confidence in her ability to command." That's right — her. What's the matter with the Navy. Aren't there enough real men to command these ships?

It was a sad day, IMHO, when women were allowed on combatant ships. I am glad I didn't have to serve alongside them. I have no problem with women serving in our armed forces. Just keep them off the ship I'm on.

Yeah, I'm not being PC. I hate being PC. Why do we have to suppress our opinions to please a bunch of lily-livered men who haven't got enough manhood to tell the women when enough is enough? Women do not belong in combat. Period! Women do not belong on combat ships. Period! Women are not warriors. Oh, I forgot about the Amazons. Well, let them be warriors if they are willing to give up a breast like the Amazons did.

I have nothing against E. J. McClure. From what I have read she is an outstanding officer. There's no doubt in my mind that she is not fully capable of commanding a line ship. My issue is that she shouldn't be.

So I'm a relic. Ask me if I care. I was a knuckle-dragging size 2 hat Torpedoman's Mate and proud of it. That was until I found out they now have skirts as torpedomen.

I don't go along with the women's lib thing. There are things men should be doing and there are things that women should be doing. And there are things that both can be doing.

I can remember the first time I went into a barbershop and saw a woman barber. I waited until the male barber finished his customer. No way was I going to allow a woman to cut my hair. Well, as it turns out, women are just as good as (if not a whole lot better than) male barbers. Since that initial shocked reaction I have had my hair cut many times by women. So, you see, I am not blindly anti-woman and I can change my mind.

I once had a female hard-working marine machinist partner that was just as good as any man marine machinist that I have met. She could do everything I could do and probably a bit more. She owned her own D-7 Caterpillar tractor and repaired and maintained it herself. But she paid a price for working in a man's world — she lost her femininity.

The pro-women element can argue all they want. They will never convince me that it is right and proper for a woman to command a warship. They will never convince me that it is right and proper for women to be in combat.

A woman soldier was recently laid to rest and the media pundits made such a big deal over this young woman's tragic death. It is tragic and I feel for the family. The tragedy is that it did not have and should not have had to happen. However, she chose to put herself in harm's way, to take on a role that men have been more-than-willing to fill for eons. She did what was not necessary nor expedient. Unfortunately we cannot have it both ways. You cannot have women exposed to combat and not expect them to be killed.

Some think the Navy brass relieving Captain McClure for grounding her ship was harsh. It was. She may not have been the one that made the mistake, but she was in command and it is the captain's responsibility to stay afloat. Captain McClure has just joined the ranks of many others who have had the misfortune to lose their commands for running their ships aground. Welcome to a man's world!

"Loss of Confidence" in the Navy

What is going on in the United States Navy? There seems to be an epidemic of commanding officers being relieved for "loss of confidence in ... ability to command."

A quick search of the Internet revealed these incidents:

September 2002 CO, USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) relieved for loss of confidence. This man was a Captain

February 2003 CO, Kitty Hawk Battle Group, relieved for loss of confidence because of an inappropriate relationship with a female officer. This man, a Rear Admiral, also received a punitive letter of reprimand.

April 2004 CO, USS Firebolt (PC 10), relieved for loss of confidence after his ship collided with a navigational aid off the coast of Iraq.

February 2005 CO, USS San Francisco (SSN 711) relieved for loss of confidence and issued a letter of reprimand after his submerged submarine collided with a sea mount.

May 2005 CO, USS Patriot (MCM 7), a mine countermeasures ship relieved for loss of confidence after running aground in the Republic of Korea. He also received a punitive letter of reprimand.

January 2006 CO, USS Donald Cook (DDG 75) relieved for loss of confidence.

June 2006 CO, USS Columbus (SSN 762) relieved for loss of confidence after allegations of harassment disclosed.

November 2006 Commander, Submarine Squadron 17 relieved for loss of confidence in his ability to command. The charges against this Captain, who was addressed as Commodore, have not been specified.

January 2007 CO, USS Minneapolis - St. Paul (SSN 708), relieved for loss of confidence after 2 sailors died after they were washed overboard.

April 2007 CO, Electronic Attack Squadron 140, relieved for loss of confidence only 9 days after assuming command.

May 2007 CO, USS Higgins (DDG 76), relieved for loss of confidence while en route to the Persian Gulf.

May 2007 CO, USS Helena (SSN 725), relieved for loss of confidence.

May 2007 CO, USS Constitution, relieved for loss of confidence.

There may be more, who knows?

Some of these have been removed for obvious reasons, others for undisclosed causes. Primary causes for removal from command are unsafe actions, misuse of funds, sexual indiscretion, and other inappropriate conduct. I suspect that nowadays some are removed for not being PC. The number of captains being relieved for loss of confidence is alarming. They did not get their by mischance. These are men that have years of schooling and experience. They have been to PCO (Prospective Commanding Officer) School or its equivalent. Those of senior rank have attended the Naval War College. If the caliber of our officers is so degraded that our best are bad, what does that say for the junior ranks? Something is amiss. The Navy has lost its moorings in more ways than one.

Crash Dive

I thought I had seen every submarine movie there is, but the other day, as I was in the library, I came across an oldie that I not only had not seen but I had not even heard of it. That was 1943's “Crash Dive,” starring Tyrone Power, Anne Baxter, and Dana Andrews. It has been reissued in DVD format, which is what I saw. The back cover of the box presented a blurb that piqued my interest, so I checked it out.

The movie was made with the cooperation of the US Navy and the Submarine Base in New London, CT. Cdr. M. K. Kirkpatrick, USN, was assigned to the movie as the technical advisor. Seeing that splashed on the screen during the opening moments of the film gave me the assurance that the movie would be good and true-to life. That assurance, however, was short-lived.

The first disappointment came in the opening scene of the movie in which Tyrone Power's character is the skipper of a PT boat, with the rank of Lieutenant. For those not familiar with Naval rank, that is the equivalent to a captain in the other services. In all the services it is the officer rank third from the bottom. A squadron of PT boats is somewhere when they discover a lifeboat filled with people. Lt. Ward Stewart (Power) peels off and as he begins boarding the survivors, a periscope is spotted off the starboard bow. The PT boat crew loads everybody back into the lifeboat and takes out after the submarine, which by now is diving. When they get to the approximate location of the dived submarine they drop some ashcans (depth charges) and Lt. Power returns to the lifeboat with a stupid grin on his face. There is no substantiating evidence to support the sub's sinking and in real life this just would not have happened. The movie then breaks to a newspaper headline proclaiming: “Torpedo Boat Sinks Enemy Sub!!” At least they didn't give any chest candy for that.

A few minutes later the movie moves to the Submarine Base in New London. There, one sees a company of recruits in formation, complete with guidon and two CPO drill instructors, marching along at right shoulder arms. As far as I know, New London never trained recruits.

Lt. Ward has received orders to report to New London and there finds his uncle, Rear Admiral Stewart. The Admiral congratulates Ward on the swell job of sinking the sub, to which Ward replies, “That U-boat never had a chance.” The upshot of all this is that the uncle has ordered Ward to submarine duty. Ward remonstrates that he doesn't like subs and much prefers PT boat duty. “They're the best,” he says. Uncle Admiral reminded him that's what he said about battleships, cruisers, and destroyers, all of which the young Lieutenant has served on. With that much experience in such a short career, he must have really been a loser — I mean, it's hard to pack a career into such a short life.

Lt. Ward's submarine, running submerged under wartime conditions, comes to periscope depth for a look-see at the surface ocean. The captain, played by Dana Andrews, brings the periscope up just enough to break the surface. Battle procedure would be to take a quick 360-degree sweep to ensure no enemy ships are nearby. Our illustrious skipper makes a 10-degree scan and raises the scope all the way. Then, paying half-attention, Captain Dewey Connors takes a leisurely rotation and 33 seconds later spots a ship. In the meantime, his periscope is cutting a wake large enough to surf on. He then looks, somewhat stunned, for another 12 seconds. It's another 30 seconds before the scope is lowered. Had the ship been a man-of-war (it was a Q-boat) the sub would have been under attack and fighting for its life.

The movie only gets worse as the sub, in another scene, sends two boat-loads of sailors to make a commando raid on a Nazi base. That's a real laugh. Sub sailors are good at sailing submarines, but most of them, especially of diesel boat days, wouldn't know how to spell commando let alone be one. Worse yet, there was no planning and no maps of the base or charts of the harbor. It would have been a suicide mission in real life, but in this flick only one man is killed — and he was going to die of a heart attack anyway. After the commandos are back on board, the sub attempts to escape the harbor. In making its exit, the sub is fired on by a shore battery, but only once. One has to wonder why.

The final infamy of this movie is the blatant propaganda typical of World War II government influence. The final litany given by Ward Stewart is a paean to the Navy, brilliant and truthful, but propaganda nonetheless.

If you are looking for an evening's amusement (which means “no thinking) this movie fits the bill. Submarine buffs will relish it only for the fact that it is a submarine movie. If you can, borrow a copy or check it out from the library: it certainly isn't worth spending a dollar on.