>surely, treating subordinates and comrades like shit won't have any far reaching consequences. >surely, this will not impact our ability to retain men. >surely, this will boost moral
I swear to God 99% of the frickers who keep making this thread are either bots or /neverdeployed/.
The followup speech by Cruise honestly says a lot >You trashed the law! But hey, we understand, you’re permitted. You have a greater responsibility than we can possibly fathom. You provide us with a blanket of freedom. We live in a world that has walls and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns, and nothing is going to stand in your way of doing it. Not Willie Santiago, not Dawson and Downey, not Markinson, not 1,000 armies, not the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and not the Constitution of the United States! That’s the truth isn’t it Colonel? I can handle it.
I think it's more accurate to say that the people who agree with him have never seen the movie.
>giant egotist with an unwarranted sense of importance >strict martinet who treats everyone around him with contempt >goes through proper procedures for dealing with someone who failed to adapt to the Marines then follows up by ordering a severe beating because of his aforementioned ego >engages in a criminal conspiracy to cover up the murder that resulted
Honestly the most unrealistic thing is him having the social and political acumen to reach that high a rank.
He had just poor performance and character, so Nicholson's character gave the order for a "code red": illegally beating him as punishment. But it got out of hand and the marine died. Then they tried to cover it up.
It's also just short of confirmed that the struggling marine had an undiagnosed heart condition that was aggravated by the code red whereas if he'd followed procedure it may have been uncovered and then everyone could part on good terms.
huh, having never seen the movie I assumed it was a case of "for the greater good", covering up some shady deal like Iran-Contra, not a spergout about the chain of command and tattletales
In that context "you can't handle the truth" just makes him seem moronic
Yeah, he's a complete asswipe in the context of the film. He's the marine commander at Guantanamo Bay, essentially King of Security Guards, but acts like he's the only thing standing between civilization and chaos. He's had a cushy post in Cuba for years and is set to land an even cushier job in Washington.
Honestly makes sense, he probably joined in hopes he'll fight soviets in massive history defining war, but cold war stayed cold and soviets fell off bicycle on their own. So all he could do to feel important while being commander in pre torture camp Guantanamo was sperging on lower ranks
The two most telling scenes about the character is the one where he's talking to Tom Cruise over breakfast in Cuba and his behavior when tries to talk down to the judge.
No, he wasn't. There's a proper way to deal with useless recruits in peacetime and murdering them is not it. He fricked up and then tried to hide behind false patriotic bullshit.
No, had things been done by the book, the problem marine would have been discharged for medical reasons, and his condition would serve as a more than adequate explanation for his poor performance.
The problem would be identified and resolved in a way that didn't result in one man dead, 2 dishonorably discharged, and one to be imprisoned.
The fact that he tried to first hide his involvement and throw his own men under the bus, then hide behind "doing what needed to be done" in a sudden outburst in court when he was caught demonstrated an undeniable lack of integrity.
It was never a decision he made for the good of the regiment, nor for the good of the country, but for the sake of his own pride and ego after being tarnished by an under-performing grunt.
And all of this during FRICKING PEACETIME, when you actually have the time to figure these problems out without worrying about everyone getting killed.
>TL;DR,
Had he genuinely cared about his men, he wouldn't have opted to beat the man into performing better, and instead would have discerned why there was a problem with performance prior to taking disciplinary action.
You're Goddamn right he was!
>surely, treating subordinates and comrades like shit won't have any far reaching consequences.
>surely, this will not impact our ability to retain men.
>surely, this will boost moral
I swear to God 99% of the frickers who keep making this thread are either bots or /neverdeployed/.
Don't you have someone to snitch on because they said something you didn't like?
No, I got a cute Demi More in a uniform and short skirt to give a. few Code Whites to.
The followup speech by Cruise honestly says a lot
>You trashed the law! But hey, we understand, you’re permitted. You have a greater responsibility than we can possibly fathom. You provide us with a blanket of freedom. We live in a world that has walls and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns, and nothing is going to stand in your way of doing it. Not Willie Santiago, not Dawson and Downey, not Markinson, not 1,000 armies, not the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and not the Constitution of the United States! That’s the truth isn’t it Colonel? I can handle it.
I think it's more accurate to say that the people who agree with him have never seen the movie.
While yes, i am going to personally order de murder of every moronic private under my command
Only if you're a fricking idiot who has never actually been in the military
>giant egotist with an unwarranted sense of importance
>strict martinet who treats everyone around him with contempt
>goes through proper procedures for dealing with someone who failed to adapt to the Marines then follows up by ordering a severe beating because of his aforementioned ego
>engages in a criminal conspiracy to cover up the murder that resulted
Honestly the most unrealistic thing is him having the social and political acumen to reach that high a rank.
I don't remember the movie well enough, why did he even kill the Marine? Did it actually save lives by killing him?
He had just poor performance and character, so Nicholson's character gave the order for a "code red": illegally beating him as punishment. But it got out of hand and the marine died. Then they tried to cover it up.
It's also just short of confirmed that the struggling marine had an undiagnosed heart condition that was aggravated by the code red whereas if he'd followed procedure it may have been uncovered and then everyone could part on good terms.
He’d be an accessory
huh, having never seen the movie I assumed it was a case of "for the greater good", covering up some shady deal like Iran-Contra, not a spergout about the chain of command and tattletales
In that context "you can't handle the truth" just makes him seem moronic
Yeah, he's a complete asswipe in the context of the film. He's the marine commander at Guantanamo Bay, essentially King of Security Guards, but acts like he's the only thing standing between civilization and chaos. He's had a cushy post in Cuba for years and is set to land an even cushier job in Washington.
Honestly makes sense, he probably joined in hopes he'll fight soviets in massive history defining war, but cold war stayed cold and soviets fell off bicycle on their own. So all he could do to feel important while being commander in pre torture camp Guantanamo was sperging on lower ranks
This. You want a real life example of a CO being an absolutely assblasted moron? Google #BringBackBolt
The two most telling scenes about the character is the one where he's talking to Tom Cruise over breakfast in Cuba and his behavior when tries to talk down to the judge.
Yes. It was the truth. And Tom Cruise couldn't handle it.
No, he wasn't. There's a proper way to deal with useless recruits in peacetime and murdering them is not it. He fricked up and then tried to hide behind false patriotic bullshit.
>But he was right, wasn't he?
He'd be right at home in the Russian Army.
You want answers?
Only if you're Russian or Chinese and think being physically beaten by your comrades is normal
No, had things been done by the book, the problem marine would have been discharged for medical reasons, and his condition would serve as a more than adequate explanation for his poor performance.
The problem would be identified and resolved in a way that didn't result in one man dead, 2 dishonorably discharged, and one to be imprisoned.
The fact that he tried to first hide his involvement and throw his own men under the bus, then hide behind "doing what needed to be done" in a sudden outburst in court when he was caught demonstrated an undeniable lack of integrity.
It was never a decision he made for the good of the regiment, nor for the good of the country, but for the sake of his own pride and ego after being tarnished by an under-performing grunt.
And all of this during FRICKING PEACETIME, when you actually have the time to figure these problems out without worrying about everyone getting killed.
>TL;DR,
Had he genuinely cared about his men, he wouldn't have opted to beat the man into performing better, and instead would have discerned why there was a problem with performance prior to taking disciplinary action.
His argument was that the military should be able to kill its own servicemen without consequence if it serves a greater good, so no.