The Empire Strikes Back: US Ranger Corps, Etc.

[wingnut]

well

I guess we have poor taste and bad judgement, BUT I flew 40 missions, 200 flight hours for CAP, The USAF, and other agencies. I first joined CAP in 1971, USAF Veteran, US Army reserve, 40% disabled veteran.

I am ashamed at the embarrassments laid on us by our leadership, I like many experienced members have "STOPPED recruiting new members until this "THING" we are going through stops or improves.

besides, to blog seems to be the only place we can get our beefs out, going up the chain "DOES NOT WORK!  Why?? because there is a DISCONNECT from the people on the ground and doing the SAR. Is this a leadership issue??

[SDF_Specialist]

I don't think the Pineda deal was a leadership issue. It was more of a not using your common sense issue. I've made my comments about TP, and the USRC. But hands down, I don't see where he was a bad National Commander other than tampering with the uniforms constantly, and having someone else do something that was unethical. I think maybe the stars did go to his head. I remember my cadet days (which weren't that long ago) when BG Bowling was the National Commander. I personally wrote this man a letter to tell him that I was thrilled to be a member of CAP. He hand wrote a letter back to me to thank me for my service, and offer a few encouraging words. It's not a leadership issue. It's a self-esteem issue. That's my just my opinion.

[Eagle400]

I don't think the Pineda deal was a leadership issue.

Sure it was.  How did Pineda make FLWG/CC, SER/CC and CAP/CC?  The leaders above him did not do their jobs and when they saw the warning signs, they turned the other cheek. 

It was more of a not using your common sense issue. I've made my comments about TP, and the USRC. But hands down, I don't see where he was a bad National Commander other than tampering with the uniforms constantly, and having someone else do something that was unethical.

I believe it was a matter of poor common sense and poor leadership, both of which were equally prominent.

If you believe TP was a bad (if not downright terrible) leader only because of his constant tampering with uniforms and direct involvement in the "testingate" scandal, you have not seen the whole story.  TP is a classic example of an autocratic, arrogant, selfish and malevolent leader who is absolutely corrupted with power and obsessed with having control over others.  Hmmm... what other leaders in history have we seen who were the same way?  I can think of a few right off the top of my head.   

I think maybe the stars did go to his head.

Oh, you think?

I remember my cadet days (which weren't that long ago) when BG Bowling was the National Commander. I personally wrote this man a letter to tell him that I was thrilled to be a member of CAP. He hand wrote a letter back to me to thank me for my service, and offer a few encouraging words.

I remember my cadet days (which also weren't that long ago) when I saw Brig Gen Bowling at COS, in person.  I personally did everything I could to stay away from him and have him be out of my sight.  If you want to know why, please PM me.

It's not a leadership issue. It's a self-esteem issue. That's my just my opinion.

I'm sure that's what many lawyers defending criminal masterminds say, too.

[0]

TP is a classic example of an autocratic, arrogant, selfish and malevolent leader who is absolutely corrupted with power and obsessed with having control over others. 

Power corrupts all and absolute power currupts absolutely

[SJFedor]

I don't think the Pineda deal was a leadership issue. It was more of a not using your common sense issue. I've made my comments about TP, and the USRC. But hands down, I don't see where he was a bad National Commander other than tampering with the uniforms constantly, and having someone else do something that was unethical. I think maybe the stars did go to his head. I remember my cadet days (which weren't that long ago) when BG Bowling was the National Commander. I personally wrote this man a letter to tell him that I was thrilled to be a member of CAP. He hand wrote a letter back to me to thank me for my service, and offer a few encouraging words. It's not a leadership issue. It's a self-esteem issue. That's my just my opinion.

I agree with your comments Re: Maj Gen Bowling. I met him about two years ago here in Nashville for...something, got to talk with him for a few minutes, real nice down to earth guy.

[SDF_Specialist]

I don't think the Pineda deal was a leadership issue.

Sure it was.  How did Pineda make FLWG/CC, SER/CC and CAP/CC?  The leaders above him did not do their jobs and when they saw the warning signs, they turned the other cheek. 

It was more of a not using your common sense issue. I've made my comments about TP, and the USRC. But hands down, I don't see where he was a bad National Commander other than tampering with the uniforms constantly, and having someone else do something that was unethical.

I believe it was a matter of poor common sense and poor leadership, both of which were equally prominent.

If you believe TP was a bad (if not downright terrible) leader only because of his constant tampering with uniforms and direct involvement in the "testingate" scandal, you have not seen the whole story.  TP is a classic example of an autocratic, arrogant, selfish and malevolent leader who is absolutely corrupted with power and obsessed with having control over others.  Hmmm... what other leaders in history have we seen who were the same way?  I can think of a few right off the top of my head.   

I think maybe the stars did go to his head.

Oh, you think?

I remember my cadet days (which weren't that long ago) when BG Bowling was the National Commander. I personally wrote this man a letter to tell him that I was thrilled to be a member of CAP. He hand wrote a letter back to me to thank me for my service, and offer a few encouraging words.

I remember my cadet days (which also weren't that long ago) when I saw Brig Gen Bowling at COS, in person.  I personally did everything I could to stay away from him and have him be out of my sight.  If you want to know why, please PM me.

It's not a leadership issue. It's a self-esteem issue. That's my just my opinion.

I'm sure that's what many lawyers defending criminal masterminds say, too.

PM sent.

[Chappie]

All I can say is that this is going to make for one interesting "case study" either for "Flight Time" (Values for Living) or NSC in the years to come. 

[Eagle400]

Well that is what happens with renegade militias.  Because they have no one to answer to, their leaders do as they please.  And because TP is a power-hungry sycophant, he will continue to do as he pleases until he is backed into a corner for which there is no escape.

Perhaps this example of extreme arrogance and autocratic style of leadership should become part of the Moral Leadership curricula...

All I can say is that this is going to make for one interesting "case study" either for "Flight Time" (Values for Living) or NSC in the years to come. 

I sincerely hope so.

[SDF_Specialist]

All I can say is that this is going to make for one interesting "case study" either for "Flight Time" (Values for Living) or NSC in the years to come. 

Well what I'm not understanding is why weren't federal charges brought against him? I mean he did cheat on a test that is offered by the USAF. I would think that if you opt to take a test offered by the AF, you have to abide by their rules while you are enrolled in that course. I'm glad the situation is over, and hope that CAP can rebound in a positive way from what has been done. I strongly think that BG Courter will turn the organization around for the better. You know what they say; don't knock it until you've tried it. 

[Chappie]

All I can say is that this is going to make for one interesting "case study" either for "Flight Time" (Values for Living) or NSC in the years to come. 

Well what I'm not understanding is why weren't federal charges brought against him? I mean he did cheat on a test that is offered by the USAF. I would think that if you opt to take a test offered by the AF, you have to abide by their rules while you are enrolled in that course. I'm glad the situation is over, and hope that CAP can rebound in a positive way from what has been done. I strongly think that BG Courter will turn the organization around for the better. You know what they say; don't knock it until you've tried it. 

I am looking at seeing something along the lines of the "Bud Holland - B52 Crash @ Fairchild AFB" where the culture is examined that allowed for the tragedy to occur.   The case study should not be a "finger pointing" - investigation as to who did what and when (Did the BOG overstep their bonds?  Why were no charges filed? Etc.)...but along the lines of how does an individual or organization get themselves into such a mess to begin with.  It is my personal opinion that the end result of this sad incident in our organization began at the lower level (i.e. squadron and manifested itself at group/wing/region) before it affected national.  Something like this does not occur overnight.  Certain behaviors/attitudes had to be overlooked.

[isuhawkeye]

^^^ That would require the organization to actually critique itself....  something I have never sean

[RRLE]

I am looking at seeing something along the lines of the "Bud Holland - B52 Crash @ Fairchild AFB"

Darker Shades of Blue: A Case Study of Failed Leadership By Major Tony Kern

[Tubacap]

^I just read that for a class!

[The Voice of Reason]

One of the issues that touches all other issues, whether it is the quality of members recruited, operational capabilities, organizational prestige, etc., is that the leadership has to take stock of what it is.

To review, CAP started out as a way for concerned citizens to contribute to the war effort.  Membership peaked at around 150K at a time when standards were at their highest, and the missions were most vital.  After the war they took away the munitions and the funding, and it began to settle down to the mid 50K range where it has hovered since that time.

Well intentioned leaders have attempted to increase the membership numbers but every gain would be lost the following year when it came time to renew.  Rather than keep the standards high and keep the organization on the leading edge, standards were relaxed, age requirements were reduced, and the organization kept reaching down.

The fact seems to be that except in the case of a terrorist attack or a new war, the numbers are going to remain right about where they are, but when you reach down the best people leave.  There are a LOT of people in my neck of the woods who won't even think about joining because CAP has taken on a pedophile edge with all the pictures of very young children on the magazine.

I don't want to mediate a fight over which power ranger is the best.  I am proud to belong to the organization that the Air Force calls FIRST when a plane goes down.  I'm not here to play with the kids.

When the members are too young, you can't treat them like young adults, you're forced to treat them like children.  You're forced to accomodate childish things, and you'll scare off a great many adults.

There was a time when, after a particularly messy mission, you might be able to say "Hey, butch up!" and it was fine.  Now we've got these sissy teams (CISM) running around patting everyone on the bum and saying there there, it's okay to cry.

Baloney!

IF someone is legitimately screwed up because of what they've experienced, get them the assistance they need, but don't promote that kind of weakness.

[FARRIER]

There are a LOT of people in my neck of the woods who won't even think about joining because CAP has taken on a pedophile edge with all the pictures of very young children on the magazine.

Only someone with a sick mind would make such a statement. If the people "in your neck of the woods" are thinking this, then maybe don't belong in the organization in the first place.

[Johnny Yuma]

The fact seems to be that except in the case of a terrorist attack or a new war, the numbers are going to remain right about where they are, but when you reach down the best people leave.  There are a LOT of people in my neck of the woods who won't even think about joining because CAP has taken on a pedophile edge with all the pictures of very young children on the magazine.

I don't want to mediate a fight over which power ranger is the best.  I am proud to belong to the organization that the Air Force calls FIRST when a plane goes down.  I'm not here to play with the kids.

When the members are too young, you can't treat them like young adults, you're forced to treat them like children.  You're forced to accomodate childish things, and you'll scare off a great many adults.

There was a time when, after a particularly messy mission, you might be able to say "Hey, butch up!" and it was fine.  Now we've got these sissy teams (CISM) running around patting everyone on the bum and saying there there, it's okay to cry.

Baloney!

IF someone is legitimately screwed up because of what they've experienced, get them the assistance they need, but don't promote that kind of weakness.

Voice,

I'm throwing the BS flag.

LOTS of people have never read the CAP volunteer or even seen the cover. There have been perhaps 2 issues IIRC where small children have been on the cover of the Volunteer, kids in the elementary school pilot programs. Anyone who sees pedophilia in this organization by simply seeing a kid on the cover of a magazine is nuts.

Based on the animosity you appear to have for young people in CAP I would venture to say that there aren't LOTS of people you know with these opinions, just you making an inference.

That and your comments on ES and CISM leave me to question your maturity and ES experience. The cadet program is 1/3 of CAP's mission. Another 1/3 is ES. Yes, both ES and Cadet programs work together. Either learn to deal with it or leave. Taking it all into consideration, feel free to choose the latter.

[Chaplaindon]

One of the issues that touches all other issues, whether it is the quality of members recruited, operational capabilities, organizational prestige, etc., is that the leadership has to take stock of what it is ...

... I am proud to belong to the organization that the Air Force calls FIRST when a plane goes down.  I'm not here to play with the kids.

... There was a time when, after a particularly messy mission, you might be able to say "Hey, butch up!" and it was fine.  Now we've got these sissy teams (CISM) running around patting everyone on the bum and saying there there, it's okay to cry.

Baloney!

IF someone is legitimately screwed up because of what they've experienced, get them the assistance they need, but don't promote that kind of weakness.

Another sadly uninformed rant against membership care through CISM.

Although there are some legitimate academic debates about what sort of crisis support should normatively be provided our membership (and the rest of the civilian emergency services community and the post-combat military), e.g. the Mitchell Model, NOVA, etc., there's little doubt that such programs do improve personnel retention and morale; at least from the line-personnel's perspective. They tell us (CISM team members) that the interventions helped them. That's significant in my book.

Before finally retiring my Paramedic license a year ago, I spent almost 30 years in EMS and the fire service. I have worked as a volunteer medic in a rural area, I have worked as a flight paramedic for a Trauma Center-based helicopter EMS service, and for a paid-professional municipal EMS. I speak from experience. Until my retirement in January of this year, I was also a CAP Incident Commander, GTL, GTM-1, former Squadron Commander, etc.. Again, I speak from (nearly 23 years of CAP) experience.

I recall in the pre-CISM era (late 1970's and through most of the 1980's ... I was in EMS then) that the buzzword in such ES circles was "burnout." This was another word for cumulative stress and its degrading effects on a person's outlook and quality of life. We are talking courageous and seasoned firefighters and paramedics (not crybabies and sissy's) as the the self-proclaimed "Voice of Reason" opined.

During that era, the Emergency Services (EMS, Fire Svc, Law Enforcement) lost a lot of folks to burnout and related issues (e.g. addictions and stress-related/exacerbated health problems) before we learned that the "Hey, butch up!" threat/challenge/ridicule rarely made anything/anyone really "fine." It simply taught them to hide, bury, cover-up NORMAL human biophysicological-indocrinological reactions to EXTRAORDINARY events (which are the everyday world of ES professionals) until these reactions (combined) began to destroy the person from within (e.g. "burn-out").

Then we would lose a valuable, experienced lifesaver because we refused to support he/she in lieu of ridicule and enforced stoicism.

CISM (and the related stress-management programs, and there are a number of them) are nothing less than preventive maintenance for CAP's (and the civilian emergency services) most valuable asset, it's members. It's analogous to an A&P mechanic stop-drilling a stress-crack on an aircraft after a turbulent flight. It's maintaining operational assets.

This has nothing to do with crying or not being "butch" enough (whatever that means ... sounds a bit homophobic, to me). Strong and weak people cry. Stress affects everyone, just in a variety of ways. Being affected by pain, tragedy, or stress is not a matter of gender, testosterone, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, or military bearing ... it is nothing less than a matter of being human.

CISM and operational stress management are OPERATIONAL concerns (not feel-good touches). Hopefully no one would deny a hot cadet or officer adequate hydration while she/he worked a flightline in blazing sun and suffocating summer heat. Likewise we shouldn't deny or ridicule CAP's offering of requisite emotional support and stress relief to our personnel as well.

To this end, it is an ill-conceived and tragic mistake that CAP's "Interim National Commander" has seen fit to further blur and mitigate the operational import/focus of CISM by removing it from the operations hierarchy at NHQ and relegating it to the "Twilight Zone" of health services.

Her ignorance has likely doomed a valuable program and fed more wrong stereotypes (e.g. "The Voice of Reason") and hurt CAP's membership henceforth. But what's so new about a Nat'l CC hurting the membership or the organization through his/her actions or inactions? But I digress ...

One general's foolishness aside, --MR./Ms Voice of Reason-- CISM is NOT a program in and for "sissy's" (whatever that actually means??), it's not in/for cry-babies (again, is it wrong for a CAP member to cry?) ... it exists to support vital emergency services personnel doing critical, painful, emotionally draining, and courageous work for people (even critics like you) in some of the most difficult and dangerous circumstances imaginable. I think they, and their CAP counterparts, deserve your praise and admiration, not your vitriolic ridicule.

[JayT]

One of the issues that touches all other issues, whether it is the quality of members recruited, operational capabilities, organizational prestige, etc., is that the leadership has to take stock of what it is.

To review, CAP started out as a way for concerned citizens to contribute to the war effort.  Membership peaked at around 150K at a time when standards were at their highest, and the missions were most vital.  After the war they took away the munitions and the funding, and it began to settle down to the mid 50K range where it has hovered since that time.

Well intentioned leaders have attempted to increase the membership numbers but every gain would be lost the following year when it came time to renew.  Rather than keep the standards high and keep the organization on the leading edge, standards were relaxed, age requirements were reduced, and the organization kept reaching down.

The fact seems to be that except in the case of a terrorist attack or a new war, the numbers are going to remain right about where they are, but when you reach down the best people leave.  There are a LOT of people in my neck of the woods who won't even think about joining because CAP has taken on a pedophile edge with all the pictures of very young children on the magazine.

I don't want to mediate a fight over which power ranger is the best.  I am proud to belong to the organization that the Air Force calls FIRST when a plane goes down.  I'm not here to play with the kids.

When the members are too young, you can't treat them like young adults, you're forced to treat them like children.  You're forced to accomodate childish things, and you'll scare off a great many adults.

There was a time when, after a particularly messy mission, you might be able to say "Hey, butch up!" and it was fine.  Now we've got these sissy teams (CISM) running around patting everyone on the bum and saying there there, it's okay to cry.

Baloney!

IF someone is legitimately screwed up because of what they've experienced, get them the assistance they need, but don't promote that kind of weakness.

Right.

Because CAP is the only organization in the world who developed a CISM program. Every major police, EMS, fire, SAR, and military organization in the world must be wrong, and a bunch of sissys.

Grow up.

[Flying Pig]

CISM is hardly a "sissy team patting everyone on the bum."   My question is, how old are you and what is your experience with CISM in the real world.  Have you ever been part of a CISM debrief?  Have you ever been part of a traumatic event that involved many people from varying experienced backgrounds where people are standing around with blank looks on their faces because of what just happened? 
Your description of it clearly illustrates that you have no idea what it is about.  Referring to it as "promoting weakness" is an irresponsible comment.  I would invite you to meet some of the people I work with and tell them they are "sissy's".  Telling people who deal with trauma as a profession "Hey, butch up" (whatever that means)  is what causes those same professionals to bring their problems home.  It starts affecting their families, their personal lives.
I had a trainee who began tearing up on a call.  I told him, "Now isn't the time.  Pull yourself together." Much different then telling someone to suck it up.
Later, he was able to talk to a counselor and took the rest of the day off.  A dad had accidentally backed over his 3 year old son in the driveway and killed him. That was probably 5 years ago and he is now a training officer and a SWAT member, and went on to get his EMT license.  Weak?

I have known seasoned EMS/Police who have retired medically because of traumatic events they were involved in.  Soldiers coming back from war suffering from PTSD, are they promoting weakness when they ask for help because they cant sleep?  An EMS person who can't talk to his own kids without tearing up because of a work related incident involving a child of the same age.  Weakness?

So again, what is your experience that allows you to call stress management "promoting weakness"?

[The Voice of Reason]

If we were in Iraq with roadside bombs ready to go off without warning or snipers lurking in the shadows waiting to take a shot, CISM would have a more solid foundation in this organization.

To me it just looks like someone with an outside specialty wanted to make a name for themselves in the organization.

I did acknowledge that there may be cases where it is called for, but having it all the time everywhere is like putting on surgical gloves every time you want to shake hands.

I also noticed a strange but common phenomenon in this message thread;

I do not like the way this organization is being turned into a kids club, I oppose the aspects of it that make a CPPT necessary (not the cadet program, but the way they keep tailoring the program to children -- No "Children" in this organization, only Seniors and Cadets).  Now because I voice my opinion some of you are as much as making accusations that could get you removed from the program and open you up to SEVERE civil liability.

This is especially bizarre since I am the one suggesting the organization take steps to maintain its integrity, avoid the appearance of impropriety and maintain high standards so people have something to "shoot" for when they get older and YOU (the people making the accusations) are in favor of cozying up to the "K-5" crowd.

Is this what psychiatrists call "Reaction formation"?

By the way, I was at ground zero NYC while the dust was still settling.

Many (but not all) of the people suffering from "burnout" have just found a way to retire early.

If they couldn't handle the job, they should've found a desk somewhere.

The kind of people who "burn out" are usually the "look at me" crowd anyway.  It's just another way for them to illustrate how great their contribution has been -- "I gave everything I had and look how much they took!" and so forth.

I'm guessing there are lots of Ltc's and Headquarters types in here...