When reviewing the difficult decision with my Company Officer, he discussed the pressures of passing command inspections, maintaining a professional relationship with your Chief, and preserving personal integrity. Firstly, he noted that ultimate goal of command inspections is to prove the operational readiness of the ship. The inspection will expose any failing parts of the ship and improve operational efficiency once they are fixed. Failing the inspection itself will have negative consequences, but those pale in comparison to punishments for being caught falsely signing the records, or “gundecking”. This point about falsifying the maintenance records also relates to the professional relationship with your chief. My Company Officer said that …show more content…
The Constitutional Paradigm denotes a list of priorities that sailors are obligated to follow; the order from highest to lowest priority goes “Constitution, Mission, Service, Ship or Command, Shipmate, Self” (59). Therefore, Constitutional ethics say that I have a higher loyalty to my ship and its mission than I do to my shipmate and self. While my Chief may be angry and I may be punished for failing the inspection, I cannot allow him to sign off on the records and endanger the safety of the ship and our mission. In short, most moral theories clearly defend my decision, and some even require me to follow this course of …show more content…
In my relationship with my chief, I need to understand that there is a difference between leadership and “likership”. Although a positive rapport with my Chief is helpful, there is no reason that he must like my personality. I cannot be swayed by my Chief’s personal opinion of me when making the decision. Therefore, my duty to report the ship’s problems is prioritized over having a friendly relationship with my chief. Another issue that could arise with the argument I made earlier is in my application of utilitarianism to my decision. While the chance of the inspectors checking the jobs is low, that is still a possibility. Furthermore, the consequences would be enormous if our falsified records were noticed and exposed. I and my Chief could be sent to Captain’s mast, and our entire division would face severe punishments as well. When I compare this punishment to the lesser consequences of maintaining my integrity and failing the inspection, the choice is clear to not allow the records to be changed. Overall, there are certainly reasons to allow my Chief to mark off the jobs, but ethical reasoning can raise objections to most, if not all of
An officer in the military will listen to the officers ranking higher than him more readily than someone of a lower rank. It does not matter whether the rank is by a title such as in a military situation or in the way someone is perceived to be, like in Zimbardo and Milgram’s experiments. In the film A Few Good Men there is one puzzling statement near the end of the movie said by Private Louden Downey. After the sentencing Downey loudly questions Lieutenant Commanders Galloway and Kaffee as to why Dawson and Downey were still found guilty of “conduct unbecoming of United States marines”. He said “what did we do wrong? We did nothing wrong!” Private Downey was referring to the fact that he is a marine, he gets an order and he follows it, with no questions asked. The puzzling idea that those following orders because it was an order given by someone of a higher rank means that Dawson and Downey are not responsible for their actions. Is anyone responsible for their actions and the consequences of those actions if they were “just following orders?” The ability to tell someone what to do and to have them listen to your command is determined by your status relative to theirs.
The Army currently has an ethical code ebodied in the Army Values, which provides guidance to the individual and the organization. These values are universal across the Army regardless of an individual’s personal background or religious morals. Professional Military Education schools teach the Army Ethic and evaluation reports for leaders affirm this ethic. The Army punishes individuals, especially leaders, who violate this code. The Army administratively punishes Soldiers who do not adhere to this code, and the severity of punishment increases with rank. One recent and highly visible example of this is former General Petraeus’s adultery and the subsequent professional sanctions he experienced. The Army gr...
This bastion of ethical conduct Mr. Couch advocates, has listed the names of these current and active duty SEALs, their units, and where they are located in a public document with no regard for operational security, the security of the warriors named, their wives, their kids, extended families, nor for the irrevocable damage done to their character. Duane Dieter has plastered their names all over a public document open for all to see, including those wishing to do them harm. In the current state of threat and public view that SEALs unfortunately find themselves, this is nothing short of unethical. Mr. Couch is not only a poor judge of character, but the way he denigrates entire units and an entire generation of warfighters, despite his insistence to the contrary, is both insulting and unfounded in fact.
By doing what he feels is morally right and his duty, the CO is trying to save lives on the oil rig. There are many repercussions in taking this action including putting the crew and ship in danger, and starting an international incident with China. The Chinese could take this as aggressive actions and call in air support or declare an act of war against the US. The CO didn’t get authorization to conduct the rescue from his command. The ship could be damaged, the crew killed, and the CO could be relieved from duty and court martialed. This choice of action has very serious negative fallout; from losing the ship, death of sailors, and an international incident that could negatively impact the relationship between the US and
In this excerpt from Democracy in America Alexis Tocqueville expresses his sentiments about the United States democratic government. Tocqueville believes the government's nature exists in the absolute supremacy of the majority, meaning that those citizens of the United States who are of legal age control legislation passed by the government. However, the power of the majority can exceed its limits. Tocqueville believed that the United States was a land of equality, liberty, and political wisdom. He considered it be a land where the government only served as the voice of the its citizens. He compares the government of the US to that of European systems. To him, European governments were still constricted by aristocratic privilege, the people had no hand in the formation of their government, let alone, there every day lives. He held up the American system as a successful model of what aristocratic European systems would inevitably become, systems of democracy and social equality. Although he held the American democratic system in high regards, he did have his concerns about the systems shortcomings. Tocqueville feared that the virtues he honored, such as creativity, freedom, civic participation, and taste, would be endangered by "the tyranny of the majority." In the United States the majority rules, but whose their to rule the majority. Tocqueville believed that the majority, with its unlimited power, would unavoidably turn into a tyranny. He felt that the moral beliefs of the majority would interfere with the quality of the elected legislators. The idea was that in a great number of men there was more intelligence, than in one individual, thus lacking quality in legislation. Another disadvantage of the majority was that the interests of the majority always were preferred to that of the minority. Therefore, giving the minority no chance to voice concerns.
The Articles of Confederation was the first government of the United States. The Articles had created a very weak national government. At the time the Articles were approved, they had served the will of the people. Americans had just fought a war to get freedom from a great national authority--King George III (Patterson 34). But after this government was put to use, it was evident that it was not going to keep peace between the states. The conflicts got so frequent and malicious that George Washington wondered if the “United” States should be called a Union (Patterson 35). Shays’ Rebellion finally made it evident to the public that the government needed a change.
Commanders are given their positions because they have demonstrated their ability to execute sound judgment. Judgment is the key factor when committing to actions that could be either favorable or disastrous, or anything in between. Moral decision making, however, takes more than sound judgment when complex problems with undiscernible outcomes arise. When developing leaders to understand decision making in high-stress or combat situations, a thorough understanding of moral judgment is warranted. Case studies provide leaders with valuable tools to stimulate thinking and challenge subordinates. When evaluating the decision the commander of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) has to make, understanding the difference between moral dilemmas and
Upon the opening words of the Constitution, "We the People do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," one must ask, who are these people? While the American Constitution provided its citizens with individual rights, many members were excluded. Elite framers manipulated the idea of a constitution in order to protect their economic interests and the interests of their fellow white land and slave owning men' by restricting the voices of women, slaves, indentured servants and others. Therefore, the Constitution cannot truly be considered a "democratic document." However, because it is a live document, malleable and controllably changeable according to the interest of congress, it has enabled us to make reforms overtime. Such reforms that have greatly impacted America, making us the free, independent nation that we are today.
To give conventions justiciable entitlement would be taking away from the highly advantageous flexibility that the UK Constitution has attained from remaining uncodified. Further, the large volume of conventions may provide a difficulty in enforcing them within the courts. In contrast, it could be argued that codifying select conventions may bring certainty to many unclear areas, such as defining the Ministerial Code partly did, thus providing an easier structure for conventions to be enforced legally. However, conventions are merely seen as a moral and political obligations, and should not upon breach have legally enforceable consequences. The argument against whether the court should enforce conventions will be supported and discussed in this essay.
The Articles of Confederation, adopted in 1781 represented the former colonist’s first attempt to establish a new government after the Revolutionary War. These Articles provided a weak political document that was meant to keep the states united temporarily. The states had all the power, so any changes made to the Article of Confederation would take every state to approve it or amend it. In February 1787, Congress decided that a convention should be convened to revise the Article of Confederation (Constitutional Rights Foundation, 2009). Congress felt the Article of Confederation was not enough to effectively deal with the young nations issues. Congress knew it was time for the country to move forward, and to do that, there would be some big changes ahead, and that was the end of the Articles of Confederation, and the beginning of the created US Constitution.
It is always Imperative to follow all orders given to you by people appointed over you, in other words, follow the chain of command. Orders is what maintains organization in the military. Following orders ensures
The scenes in creation being intellectual, the put together of constitutional democracy was very empirical. The Constitutional Convention was convened to formulate the constitution. What had to be clear was that the only way to assure a functioning constitutional democracy was the public's discussion. In philadelphia the delegates compromised. The outcome was to integrate states with large populations and states with small populations with a bicameral legislative branch. Also compromises that guaranteed say from both slave owning states and non-slave states could be listened to. The Bill of Rights
There are many things that have impacted my life in a positive way as a result of my military service. For starters, joining the Navy was huge. It got me organized and opened my eyes to an entirely new world, and not just the military service world. The variety of experiences that I’ve had in the service interacting with people from all over the world has helped me grow as a person. However, from the day I entered service, one item or one rank in the structure of the Navy struck me as critical to the operation of the Navy. That item or rank was the position of the Chief Petty Officer. As I entered service I quickly discovered that the Chief was the go to guy and the old saying “ask a chief” had a profound meaning. The Chief was a leader, mentor, and an expert in just about everything, all qualities that I lacked at the time. Then, twelve or so years later, the life changing event for me of being selected as a Chief Petty Officer in the US Navy came to fruition.
The Constitution is one of the most significant file and certificate in the United States, the constitution of United States of America was created by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in the state of Philadelphia and in the year of 1787. The Constitution changed the life of people; furthermore, when the constitution was created, it provided different types of freedom for different people. The constitution of United States includes about twenty seven amendments, which the ten first amendments are most important, because they relate to basic freedom and equality of people. According to http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/preamble; The preamble of constitution of United States says that “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America” The constitution task is to try to defend and protect the people of United States; furthermore, it concludes different ages of people not a particular type of people. Actually, people of United States are free people intrusive Federal government doesn’t interfere in their life. The persons who wrote the constitution, tried to make a nation that a particular person doesn’t control all the affairs of the country; in addition, the European countries were absolutely monarchy which cause the people not decide and control everything. The United States doesn’t have queens or kings and no one is above the law. The United Stat...
General Quarters with my Sailors! As Sailor in a leadership position I have to be able to let our sailors know what is expected of them; to question, clarify, or inform them of what is expected of them. My first goal is to continue to grow as a listener. Communication requires two individuals in order to be successful, and at bare minimum I am communicating, as well as, listening to at least fifteen Sailor’s a day. Because listening is so crucial to effective communication, I need to and want to learn more about it. We have a saying in the Navy “A bitching sailor is a happy sailor” and for the most part, it is a pretty accurate statement. One thing that I can say is that sailors like to be heard. Dianne Schilling in an article for Forbes Magazine (2012) wrote, “At work, ...