Posted on 07/05/2013 7:53:48 AM PDT by markomalley
As I recall we had to police up our brass at the firing range. I didn't even know they had a golf course. The only grass I saw was at the parade grounds and the only places with air conditioning? I don't remember any and I was there in Aug.
Agreed, what he spoke of as “conservationism” is what we teach in the Boy Scouts. Yet, he’s being called all sorts of names. So are we doing it “wrong” in Scouting by teaching conservationism? There’s a difference between environmentalism and conservationism.
What many don’t realize, is that like the USAF, there are the infrastructure (BASE) commanders and the combat (WING) commanders assigned to the same installation.
Their responsibilities are quite different. The base commander needs to operate as efficiently as possible and maintain the infrastructure required for the wing commander to be able to perform their job.
Yeah, his point about saving energy on a FOB to reduce logistics convoys is a good one. Those were always very soft targets for terrorist raids, so they required a lot of security, which pulled combat troops (sometimes) off patrols.
I only said something, because a military commander could easily be an O-6 or even a field grade officer, but the distinction being a flag officer had to be confirmed. So there is a world of difference between an O-6 and an O-8.
Thousands of brass casings were left on firing ranges.
Every range I’ve ever gone to, we were not allowed to leave until the brass was policed up. And when we turned it in they weighed it and we were only allowed a small percentage of loss. If we were over that we had to go back to the range and find more.
Notice how the article avoids mentioning how much the general’s wet dreams cost to implement? Just a typical feel good article that focuses on “benefits” alone. How much did the solar equipment cost to install? To maintain/repair? How “sustainable” is solar power at night? How much labor was required to process the recycled crap?
There’s no free lunch - except in politics and media.
So, at first blush, this guy really doesn't endear himself to any thoughtful people with this sort of hyperbole. Criminality simply CANNOT be ascribed to the years-ago connection of landscape watering systems to the potable water supply. MOST places -- to this very day -- DO NOT HAVE ANY non-potable water supply to tap into for landscape water. Yet, this guy is tossing "criminal" about like a beach ball in application to decisions that were made before he was even a twinkle in his Daddy's eye; decisions made with then-current technology and resources in mind.
One cannot go back and criminalize past decisions using present-day metrics, or perhaps the Major General has no grasp of the meaning of "ex post facto"? His language is akin to suggesting that George Washington was incompetent in his military leadership because he failed to take advantage of fully automatic weapons. There's a mental gap, here, and it's large enough to fly Air Force One through it.
NOW...
...RECOGNIZING that bit of insanity as such, there IS something worthwhile being promoted, here: the concept of upgrading existing systems with present-day technology so as to cut waste, and enable better stewardship of available resources is of solid value. It should be obvious that doing so in the context of military base operations MUST NOT have ANY negative impact upon our fighting capabilities, upon force readiness, upon morale, nor any other aspect affecting battlefield performance, but that doesn't mean that there are no resource conservation measures that can be implemented; it only means that there are elevated considerations necessary to doing so in that particular context.
At about $300 a gallon, right? Sure, less fossil fuel is used but at what cost?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.