The Duffel Blog, a site the provides satirical takes on the US military, has posted a life could imitate satirical art post entitled: “Troops Sour on Mattis Nomination After He Releases 6,000-Book Reading List“.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A large number of active-duty troops once enthusiastic about the choice of James Mattis for Defense Secretary have since soured on the pick after the retired general released a 6000-book reading list he plans to implement for the entire DoD after he is confirmed, Duffel Blog has learned.
Referred to by some as the “Warrior Monk,” the 66-year-old sent his reading list to the military’s entire email distribution list over the weekend. Most service members who received the 200-page email reported they were still in the process of reading it well into Monday morning.
Almost every senior commander issues a reading list. Its sort of become the in thing to do and Foreign Policy writer Tom Ricks (full disclosure: I know Tom and have written guest posts for him) collects and publishes them or links to them at his Best Defense blog. Gen. Mattis’s preferred nickname, or, at least, the one he doesn’t seem to dislike – he does not like being referred to as Mad Dog – is The Warrior Monk. The sobriquet is derived from a couple of the realities of Gen. Mattis’s life and career. The first is he is considered by many to be an outstanding warfighter. The second, that like many military senior leaders, he aspired to become what the Army refers to as a Soldier-Scholar. This means that as a Soldier’s career progresses they try to move beyond just being warfighters, increase the breadth and scope of their understanding of operational and then strategic matters through both Professional Military Education and civilian higher education, and become thoughtful, reflective, and (hopefully) strategic thinkers. The third basis for the nickname is because Gen. Mattis, unlike most career US military personnel, is not married. As in never married, hence the other root cause for the Monk.
The Duffel Blog also did a good job accurately capturing just how a lot of personnel would respond to receiving such a reading list – long or short:
Marines, however, were only assigned four coloring books.
“Four? Good Lord, that’s unfair,” said Lance Cpl. Anderson Malcolm, a Marine infantryman who proudly displays his “good enough degree” on his barracks room wall.
A number of troops expressed reservations about the nomination of Mattis to the Pentagon’s highest post after they read the email. While some expected a reading list of some sort, most did not realize just how many books they would be required to get through.
“How are we going to go out and kill the enemy if we have to sit around reading all this shit?” asked Sgt. James Fritter, an Army squad leader.
Its funny, because it could be true!!!!
PS: Last week the Duffel Blog lampooned the US Army’s insistence on having personnel forward deployed on its bases wear reflective safety belts at night (so they don’t get run over when going for chow in the dark, no I am not making this part up, yes I did have to follow this as a member of my BCT’s special staff in Iraq in 2008, and yes, I still have the thing – mine’s the orange one). They did this by picking on a former student of mine, who is the Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve Spokesman and colonel in the US Air Force. John was an excellent student, is a sharp strategic thinker, and an excellent public affairs officer. And the satire is funny, because it could be true!
Peale
Hah. Just am working through a book on the cultural depiction of homosexuality in Chinese literature an porn and there is a whole chapter on Scholar Warriors. They tended to be portrayed as having romantic bonds with friends, but to establish their heterosexual bonafides, rescued other men’s wives and lovers.
Wapiti
As an old retired Army guy I find the Duffle Blog pretty funny, especially when the right-wingers I know on Facebook forward the stuff as truth. It’s a satire site, buddy.
JPL
Adam, Please comment on this article.. Trump dismissed all the appointees at Nuclear Regulatory Security Administration.
http://gizmodo.com/trump-just-dismissed-the-people-in-charge-of-maintainin-1790908093
Gin & Tonic
@JPL: A technicality, maybe, but it’s not the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and he didn’t dismiss all the employees. The NRC is actually a different agency than the one mentioned, and is technically independent. The National Nuclear Security Agency is part of the Department of Energy – that’s the one where the head and deputy were non-renewed past inauguration.
Gin & Tonic
And, I see JPL edited while I was writing my correction. But I can’t ever edit my own posts.
Pogonip
Didn’t know about the Duffel blog, thanks!
Jarheads can read?
hovercraft
This incoming administration is beyond lampooning, the reality of it is too horrifying.
Adam a couple of people on the last thread were paging you to comment on :
ETA: Sorry JPL already beat me to it ;-(
JPL
@Gin & Tonic: Tis okay.. I know it’s only appointees, but it seems like a stupid thing to do, at the very least. What’s your interpretation?
Mnemosyne
@Gin & Tonic:
It’s still worrisome, because appointees usually aren’t told to clean out their desks and be gone by Inauguration Day.
And this will be used as an excuse by Republicans to rush through unvetted nominees — there’s no one running those offices, so we have to fill the positions ASAP! Typical Republican asshole ploy — create a crisis and then insist that the only way to resolve the crisis they created is to do what they want.
PaulW
Doctor Who = the Oncoming Storm
Donald Trump = the Oncoming Train Wreck
Peale
@hovercraft: I think this will probably be standard issue going forward. Since it is not in my mind possible that Trump will appoint anyone who after Trump is gone will be loyal to the country’s business. Also, the government is about to be filled with people who can leak information to Russia. Future Dems are going to have to ask whether it is worth the risk keeping people more loyal to fucking up Democrats than fulfilling their duties on board for any period of time.
ArchTeryx
@Pogonip: I knew one whof successfully completed a PhD in a STEM field alongside me. Jarhead George was a real mensch, and a REALLY soldier-scholar.
hovercraft
A Dairy Queen owner unleashed a racist tirade against a customer. He no longer has a business.
Deianeira Ford’s attorney plans to meet with other people who claim they experienced discrimination at the DQ in Zion, Ill.
By Cleve R. Wootson Jr. •
Miss Bianca
OK, why the hell this made me laugh so hard, I don’t know. It just did.
Mnemosyne
@hovercraft:
I grew up in that area. Racist assholes in Zion are not a shock. It was a (pleasant) shock to see that their Republican House rep got tossed out on his ear this November and a Democrat was elected in his stead.
Calouste
The US has about 500 Generals. How many of those do we think will Mattis have purged by the end of the year?
hovercraft
@Peale:
It’s one thing to replace the political appointees, but this is dangerous, the number of people qualified to do jobs like this and many other technical ones, are limited, and just removing them because you are an insecure buffoon who wants to flex your muscles is dangerous. I think anyone appointed to any position by this man will be suspect, he does not respect competence and experience, he values loyalty and willingness to sell us out for a quick buck, so yes they should all be turfed.
jeffreyw
test test booger
catclub
@Mnemosyne:
Under the ‘only one President’ method, Trump has no power to order anything, yet.
jeffreyw
I’m thinking Trump has only a vague idea of what is going on around him. His handlers are counting on that continuing. This sounds more Bannon than Trump.
JPL
@Calouste: I’m concerned that Mattis won’t last.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@hovercraft: thing is, what are the odds Trump knew these positions existed or what they do? This is probably coming from Flynn, no?
japa21
I really am beginning to think that 1/20/17 will become known as a greater tragedy for the US than 9/11.
Adam L Silverman
@JPL: @Gin & Tonic: @hovercraft: I’ve read the reporting on Gizmodo. I think there are a couple of different things going on here:
1) There appears to be either a dedicated attempt to remove all current political appointees whether their replacements are named or not or the fact that the people running the transitions for the agencies/departments where this is happening don’t understand that even when an incoming administration seeks major policy changes, basic continuity of government functions requires a left seat/right seat transition between the outgoing and incoming political appointees. This type of hand off, usually lasting several weeks once the new appointees come on board, is intended to ensure that the new folks a) understand how everything works in terms of the basics of running things and b) that they understand what has been done, transmitted directly from the people that have been doing those things, so they understand better what they are going to need to do to either maintain or change policies.
2) The major impact, as was noted in the Gizmodo article, is the potential budgetary consequences. Though, my guess is, that there is a member of the Senior Executive Service that will be tapped to do this in lieu of the political appointees. If there isn’t, then, at best, the NRSA will likely get the same budget they have right now.
3) Given the complete breakdown in the House’s budgetary process over the past 8 years, leading to a cascade failure in the appropriations process, and the fact that we’re on continuing resolutions as far as the eye can see, I don’t think this is going make much budgetary difference this year. This budgetary/appropriations issue is a topic for a much longer, stand alone post. One day. Eventually.
4) The day to day functioning of the agency will be in the hands of the career civil servants. The members of the Senior Executive Service and the supervisors among the GS 15s and 14s and 13s will just run things until the new leadership arrives.
Mnemosyne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
The guy who works for Russia Today? Yeah, that makes me feel better.
Remember, Benedict Arnold turned traitor because he felt unappreciated by the new American government.
Mike in NC
I signed up for a night course at the Naval War College when I lived in Newport but dropped out when I realized there were so many books to read that I’d have to give up having a social life.
Roger Moore
@JPL:
I assume this, and his similar move with all ambassadors, is a “Disaster Capitalism”-type power play. By dismissing all of Obama’s appointees, he creates a crisis of positions that need to be filled ASAP. He can then use that crisis as an excuse for why the Senate can’t bother to thoroughly vet his appointments; there’s an implicit threat of blame for unnecessary stalling if anything happens while the positions are unfilled.
JPL
@Adam L Silverman: Thanks. Since Perry will be in charge of the replacements, it might be better to leave those positions empty. So to recap, it’s just stupid.
FlipYrWhig
@Adam L Silverman: Am I being alarmist or does it sound just like Erdogan purging the civil service?
Mike in DC
Time to read 6000 300 page books: roughly 1 lifetime (well, 60,000 hours or so).
Adam L Silverman
@Calouste: Unlikely he’ll purge anyone. My understanding is that Gen. Mattis is willing to undertake this job in order to screen fire between the President-elect and the general officers/flag officers, and senior civilians (Senior Executive Service) at the DOD and the Services.
Adam L Silverman
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: It is most likely coming from whoever is the Transition Team Lead for this agency.
shortribs
Vomit. Lets drop the nicknames and just call him General Mattis or whatever the proper term is, there’s already enough fantasy/reality to deal with in this administration, keeping up with alt-right dreamy nicknames and perpetuating them doesn’t help.
Adam L Silverman
@Mike in NC: Its only a lot of reading if you do it!
Mike in DC
I do wonder if the dismissals will have an impact on counterterrorism efforts. If there’s a big domestic attack in the first term, it will be because of stuff like this. Well, this and ignoring briefings.
Major Major Major Major
@FlipYrWhig: @Adam L Silverman: He’s made it unambiguously clear that they plan to possess the power to politicize the civil service, though. This is not exactly good news:
Spanky
@Adam L Silverman: #1 will be “both”. However, because #4 I expect this to be not as big a deal as McConnell’s flying monkeys will allege. And I’ll go further (or maybe clear back to) saying that NOT having Trump’s appointees in there will be better for the country than any schmoe the Trumpsition Team is likely to come up with.
Adam L Silverman
@FlipYrWhig: Right now, I think you’re being alarmist. The two people identified in the article are not career civil servants. They’re the current political appointees running that specific agency. Below them are a lower grade of political appointees – deputy assistant secretaries, directors, deputy directors, special assistants for, etc – and then you get the career civil servants including both the Senior Executives and the GS folks. The latter are the real continuity of government.
You should start to worry if an attempt were to be made that destroys the current civil service system and its protections to produce an apolitical, professional workforce. I’m not talking about necessary/needed reforms – those can be debated on their merits, and some reasonable reforms are needed. Rather, should any attempt be made to get rid of the current civil service laws that govern how we staff the civil service and how civil servants function and work, then you have to be worried about an attempt to reinstitute the political patronage system that existed prior to the 1890s and resulted in an almost wholesale change in the Federal workforce with almost every administration.
Adam L Silverman
@shortribs: The Warrior Monk nickname came from within the US Marine Corps. He sometimes is also referred to by the call sign he used during his last operational deployment.
Adam L Silverman
@Major Major Major Major: No, Speaker Gingrich has made it clear that should happen. How much or how little Gingrich is speaking on behalf of anyone who actually is making decisions and knows what is going on is anyone’s guess. He’s been beating on this drum for decades.
Pogonip
@ArchTeryx: Hoo ah!
Major Major Major Major
@Adam L Silverman:
I know why this is bad but have a tricky time articulating it succinctly. Conservatives tend to wrap everything, including the bad stuff, up in the “reforms are needed!” packaging. Could you perchance articulate the distinction for me in a handy way?
ETA: @Adam L Silverman: Didn’t Trump talk about purges during the campaign?
pluky
@Mike in NC: It’s a grad school. you’re not expected to have a social life.
Adam L Silverman
@Spanky: It depends. If Gen. Mattis is given the opportunity to build his team, then he’ll have a good team. I would expect the same of the Secretary of the Army designate as well (my former boss was a classmate of his at the Point and thinks highly of him). It depends on just how centrally driven this stuff is and who is, actually and ultimately, vetting the personnel suggestions/recommendations. If the WaPo story from last week is correct and LTG Flynn and some of those around him are trying to have their hands in all the pies, then things will get messy. Not because Flynn can’t necessarily recognize quality personnel, but because there will be 1) too many people involved with too many different understandings of how things should be done (and the folks around LTG Flynn, from the names I’ve seen, have never worked personnel issues at DOD or at an Intel agency other than LTG Flynn) and 2) it will piss off the top line folks tapped to run these departments/agencies who will, for obvious reasons, want to be in control of building their teams.
boatboy_srq
@JPL: It’s the sequel to the Sondheim musical: Anyone Can Govern. There’s a presumption among tRumpets that Obama selected officeholders for gender and ethnicity, and that credentials don’t matter. It’s the Tyranny of Ignorance. Between the paybacks, blatant nepotism, and conviction that anything a woman or POC can do a white man can do better, it will be amazing if the US can function in a couple years.
Mike J
@hovercraft: That hed certainly sounds like it’s trying to generate sympathy for the racist asshat.
Miss Bianca
@Adam L Silverman: Is that the textbook definition of “falling on one’s sword”?
Roger Moore
@Adam L Silverman:
The problem is that the spoils system is unworkable for a government as large as ours. Part of the reason for the move to the Civil Service System was that it was already unwieldy to appoint all the officials needed for a functioning government back in the 1880s. The Trump transition team seems to be having trouble finding people to fill the ~3000 jobs currently subject to Presidential appointment (with or without approval).
Given that difficulty, it would be crazy but believable that they would want to extend political appointments a bit further down the ladder so they would have more control over what are now senior Civil Service positions. But it would be nonsensical to think they could appoint all of the roughly 2.7 million civilian employees of the federal government. I think it’s far more likely they want to break Civil Service protections for all federal employees so they can fire at will people who are working on things they disapprove of. Their questions about which employees have been working on politically sensitive issues like climate change, and their move to be allowed to stop paying employees by Congressional fiat, suggest that’s the way they’re moving.
ETA: And, FWIW, the Civil Service was set up in the 1880s during the Arthur administration, not the 1890s. Civil Service reform became a crisis issue after a “disappointed office seeker” assassinated President Garfield. Also, FWIW, that “disappointed office seeker” was clearly delusional and believed he was owed an office because he had been vital to Garfield’s election; his delusions had more to do with the assassination than anything else.
Adam L Silverman
@Major Major Major Major: Last first: my understanding is his surrogates, specifically Gingrich did, because its one of his pet “big” ideas for going on 30 years.
There are a number of inflexibilities that are designed into the civil service, including hiring. One of those is the inability to take advantage of all the flexibilities that do exist because the labor lawyers, regardless of civilian agency or DOD agency, to fully understand them and be willing to use them because they’re not what is done every day. Another major problem is that because of how positions are coded it can be hard to get the best and brightest. I have several tales of woe I can share. We also have a problem being able to leverage the civil service when we need to. By this, I simply refer to the never materialized, never realized “civilian surge” of civil servants from across the US government that would have brought needed bodies and expertise to assist in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because of how jobs are coded, unless the coding includes: “you may be deployed/seconded/detailed to another assignment for up to X amount of time”, you can’t make folks go where they’re needed most. And we have limited ability to incentivize voluntary participation to cover down.
So from my perspective it is hiring flexibilities as well as temporary redeployment of parts of the civil service when absolutely necessary.
Adam L Silverman
@Miss Bianca: Only if one has to make that ultimate professional/career sacrifice to effectively do so.
Adam L Silverman
@Roger Moore: Thanks on the decade catch. I can never remember if its mid 1880s or early 1890s.
And no argument on anything you’ve written.
Calouste
@Adam L Silverman: Wasn’t Flynn well-regarded for most of his career and then turned into a complete nutter in the last 4-5 years or so?
One of the reasons I am concerned about Mattis is that he is on the board of Theranos, which is pretty much a complete fraud, and the interests of which he tried to advance while he was still in the military.
Miss Bianca
@Adam L Silverman: If the gentleman is a man of professional integrity and personal honor, can you doubt of a tragedy in the offing? I find it all too depressingly easy to imagine.
Bobby D
If Air War College is anywhere near the joke that ACSC is, these “solider-scholars” are about as scholarly as associate degree holders from EBCC (East Bumfuk Community College).
I may have been spoiled by going to a top ranked engineering school, because everything afterwards…grad school, ACSC…felt like going back to high school. Just way, way below the level of academics I experienced in undergrad (a state school, btw). So I always get a chuckle out of the self-styled “soldier-scholars”.
JPL
@Adam L Silverman: Last week the Washington Post had an article stating that Mattis was having difficulties appointing people who were never trumpers. I wondered if this was a way for Mattis to bring the situation to light, so he could gain more power. It was reported that Michelle Flournoy declined though.
Adam L Silverman
@Calouste: Yes, LTG Flynn was considered very successful until he got to DIA. As I’ve stated before I think the simple answer is that he was the wrong person for that assignment and that assignment was the wrong one for him as a professional intelligence officer and a general officer/senior commander.
Adam L Silverman
@Bobby D: The Senior Leader Colleges (each services War College, National War College, and the Eisenhower School which used to be the Industrial College of the Armed Forces) are very different creatures from the Command and General Staff schools of the different Services.
Adam L Silverman
@JPL: I’ve seen the WaPo story. I have no way to verify just how accurate or inaccurate it is. My understanding is that the NeverTrumpers among the GOP and Conservative foreign, defense, intelligence, and national security experts are not welcome. Michelle Flournoy should not, to my understanding, be a NeverTrumper as I think she was supporting Secretary Clinton and is a Democrat.
retiredeng
As a veteran of the US Navy (enlisted 1965-1968) I can assure you that: “There’s the right way, the wrong way and the Navy way.”
When I was aboard the flag ship of the 7th Fleet during 1965-1967 (Vietnam war) the mess deck was two decks down from the main deck. The rule is that you wear a hat topside and uncover below deck. The line to the mess deck used to go up through passageways and the two ladders and out on to topside. There was a Chief Bosun’s Mate at the door where the line emerged.
Now, consider the cotton white hat that sailors wear. It’s bulky and must be kept neat at all times. If you went to mess, you best take a hat in case you had to start in the line topside. Because the Bosun’s Mate would ask: “Got a hat?” if you didn’t have one. You went back for the hat if you got caught. But the hat came off just inside the topside door and then you had a problem. How to keep the friggin’ hat neat while you stood in line and had to eat with the hat always in danger of getting messed up in a number of possible ways.
That folks is what’s called “chicken shit” in the Navy. There are numerous others but that one has stuck in my mind as one of the silliest.
Chris
@Roger Moore:
This. They’ll want to keep the machinery in place so they don’t have to do any of the work, but want to reserve the right to fire anyone when “the work” doesn’t quite line up with their fantasies.
Kay
Oh, yay! Another arrogant, asshole Trump running things. Five for the price of one! What powerful job do the talentless and otherwise unemployable sons get?
Here’s a shocker- Kushner is “petty and vindictive” according to those who know him best. Just like Daddy!
? Martin
@Roger Moore: As someone in those ranks, the desire to appoint lower-level positions begs the question as to why. These are not policy making positions. They are individuals whose job it is to faithfully and competently carry out the existing policies set by Congress and by political appointees. If that is the job, then it doesn’t matter one degree who appointed them. You may disagree with the policies (as I often do) but you enforce and enact them to the best of your ability. You can provide input on why you think those policies are misguided, and perhaps influence those up the chain, but you don’t get to change them.
There are only two reasons to want to appoint low-level positions:
1) You want them to bring a policy perspective to the position, and presumably undermine the role of Congress.
2) You want to offer them up as prizes in exchange for money or other influence. With millions of such positions, you’re asking for wholesale bribery and providing a negative incentive to keeping the size of government in check. If you can hand out government positions as prizes, why not create more positions to award more prizes?
Neither of those are good reasons.
Roger Moore
@? Martin:
I assume that this is part of their long-term goal of destroying effective government. If they can appoint everyone, they can staff branches of the government they don’t like with incompetents and political supporters to guarantee they don’t do their jobs without actually having to do the politically unpopular step of formally doing away with the (often popular) programs those agencies are supposed to be managing.
It’s also possible that one goal is privatization. If it’s impossible to staff government agencies because there’s no way to appoint every person working there, the only way to keep government going is to outsource those functions. That creates the possibility of concentrated graft and puts a lot of government policy into private, rich, and presumably Republican-leaning hands.
rikyrah
@hovercraft:
Absolutely
? Martin
@Roger Moore: Probably both. I think the GOP knows that they are in a weak policy position long-term, but they’ve seen how effective obstruction can be in refusing to carry out gay marriage laws and the like even among low-level employees. And privatization is always a goal with them.
p.a.
@Roger Moore: Afeared we’re about to find out how far the most advanced economy in history can be pushed into latifundia territory. Not that the foundations haven’t been set by cons and neolibs already.
glory b
@shortribs: Right. I heard someone (wish I could remember who) saying that Mattis isn’t really in line with Trump, and thought Trump hired him because his nickname is “mad dog,” and that was about it. He just liked the idea of introducing him as mad dog, and did it repeatedly.
Iowa Old Lady
@hovercraft: That’s how you get horse show judges as the head of FEMA
catclub
@glory b: Sounds all too likely.
Mnemosyne
@Roger Moore:
That was my thought, too — appointees in the top jobs, contract and temp positions for everyone else that used to be a federal employee. It will be a cost savings, because all outsourcing and contract hiring is always a cost savings by definition! //
liberal
@Calouste: he also thinks that ISIS and Tehran are not enemies.
IOW, he’s a fucking idiot.
J R in WV
@Mike in NC:
Can civilians take classes at the Military Service War Colleges? Amazing!
I could go back to Carlisle, PA, at the other College!
Adam L Silverman
@J R in WV: No they can’t. There are a Federal civil servants in each year’s student body. And each of the Senior Leader Colleges offers various community outreach educational programs including lectures and workshops and seminars and film series. But attendance is solely limited to serving lieutenant colonels and colonels, or the Navy equivalent commanders and captains, and selected GS 14s and 15s. Additionally, each school is part of the International Military Education and Training (IMET) Program, which brings students from our allies and partners from dozens and dozens of countries to be part of the student body. These officers range in rank from lieutenant colonels to major generals.
J R in WV
@Adam L Silverman:
Yeah, I knew that. It was a joke. Like the government will be soon!
I worked closely with EPA, both civil servant and contractors. Everyone seemed to be doing their job well, and we were all (50 states and some cities and Indian Nations AND the federal government) making good progress on complex data sharing issues, using the most modern technology to share data more effectively.
Then another corporation got the bid to supply EPA with IT services, and everyone who knew what we were trying to do, and how, and why went away. Because EPA couldn’t afford to actually hire people. So suddenly they paid contractors $150/hr (=$300,000/year) for mediocre IT guys who didn’t know a DAMM thing about environmental data. It isn’t the same thing as sales data, or inventory, or orders and receipts. It’s SCIENCE!!!
Low Bid Wins, SUCKERS!!!
ETA: Forgive me, I had to rant because it was a terrible blow to our work. And now I’m about to see it happen to the staff who are supposed to provide continuity when Contractors come and go. We are so screwed! This isn’t like selling real estate, it’s much harder and more important, no matter what real estate guys thing.