Tag Archives: Recruiters

My Open Letter to Commandant Berger

Okay gang, here it is, read, enjoy or not, and PLEASE give me your comments — I am not thin skinned. What a sad commentary to have to write, but I had to!

Dear Commandant Berger,

Sir, I pen this open letter to you, not as any form of disrespect, but only one of disagreement—albeit a rather loud and harsh disagreement. I have followed with keen interest much of what you have been carrying out as our 38th Commandant. I have hesitated writing to you since I know there is nothing I or any of my fellow retirees can do to change your mind. We have been watching and reading with much dismay your actions aimed in only one direction—you know, and we know where that is.

Firstly, you are surely wondering who this seemingly brash retiree is writing me? Well succinctly, I am a retired Marine just short of thirty-six years—ten enlisted and twenty-six as an officer. Having received a combat commission as a Sgt during my first tour in Vietnam, I eventually retired October 1993, so I was into my 23rd year when you were commissioned in 1981. I also note from you biography we are fellow Marylanders, you in Woodbine, me in Inverness.

In 1982 I was—as a senior Major—assigned as CO of the Corp’s then largest recruiting station—Chicago. I went in as a “fireman,” my predecessor had been fired. Chicago had ninety-two canvassing recruiters; the only station close to us was Los Angeles with seventy-eight. These two stations required a LtCol as CO because they needed an Assistant Operations Officer to help manage a pool that numbered into the thousands at any given time. If my memory serves me correctly, we annually shipped around 4,000 recruits to MCRD, San Diego.

I knew nothing about recruiting when assigned to this command. However, I was blessed to have a Deputy Director, an ADPP, and two Recruiter Instructors who were recruiting SME’s in every respect—they taught this Grunt Major how to spell recruiting.

With the help of many outstanding Marines, both canvassing recruiters and “A” billets, Chicago slowly rose from a failing station to be the top station for nineteen consecutive months. Because of the mentoring I had by so many experts, including the LtCol running MRRE at HQ, I believe by the time I was reassigned three years later, I was among the select few of the most knowledgeable 8402 officers in the Corps. It was the toughest assignment I ever had during my career—including combat. I learned much about the heritage, values, and the respect Americans had for the word Marine—and about myself as a leader.

So, why am I telling you all this? It isn’t meant to be boastful for I am certain any dedicated Marine would have been able to do the same with such expert mentoring and hardworking recruiters. No, I tell you because recruiting is in my veins. I bleed recruiting. I understand it better than most—including your general running the recruiting command. I think about it often. I have visited RS’s, spoke at poolee functions, and I started and ran a National Young Marine unit in IL for years. So your new “plan”—so cagily named “Semper Fi”—where your recruiting general has asked all veterans to be “faithful” to their Corps and assist in the recruiting effort—which I know is not doing well—really “woke” me up. Pun intended. The sheer audacity of such a request is unbelievable. Do you really think the retired community is going to take up that challenge? If you do, you sir have lost touch with your retired Marines.

I communicate regularly with 100’s of Marines, former, active, and especially retired—the entire non-active Marine force are in agreement that you are destroying “our” Corps. Sadly, I can longer speak with recruiters or poolees without lying, and I will not do that.

I say this with a heavy heart, but I have recently talked to one of our super stars from the Young Marine unit out of joining the Corps. That’s all he wanted to do when he graduated; he wanted to be like me. I even gave him some of my uniforms to wear in the unit. My conscience and respect for him would not allow him to do that—he was too good for that. So he took my advice and went on to college in hopes that by the time he graduates in four years you will not have totally destroyed our Corps. Maybe, just maybe, someone will come along and right all your wrongs.

Your actions are—as you state—”in the interest of bringing our Corps into the modern society” are contrary to everything our Corps has stood for since its birth. Your push for sexual preferences for women, unisex uniforms, women in the combat arms, allowing transgenders, relaxed female grooming standards and acceptance of despicable tattoos, fraternization at all levels, the vapid attacks on the very culture of the Corps, and its alleged racist/sexist heritage is unacceptable to those who have worn the EGA. I have not mentioned the draconian reduction or elimination of combat units and equipment, the destruction of the MAGTF, or your latest thoughts on recruiting cyber experts at elevated ranks without having to attend boot camp or OCS

Enlisting high tech people without having to go through boot camp or OCS? Having never been enlisted, you cannot “feel” the rage your Marines will experience. Those two “initiations” have always been the key ingredient that banded us together and made us a family forever i.e., earning that sacred EGA for life. I spent tours as a DI at Parris Island, and a Sgt Instructor at OCS—I know the intensity with which Marines hold that honor. I took part in instilling it.

Eighteen months of maternity leave. Sounds great—the female gender love it. May I asked which Marine, male or female, will do her job while she is home with her newborn for one and half years? Let’s be honest and ask of what value is this Woman Marine to the Corps? Joins for three years and spends one half of her enlistment on maternity leave. Considering recruit training, MCT, and then MOS training, you may have her for a year or even less. Bad move general.

Allowing a Sikh Major to wear his religious head garb and go unshaven? (Update: Doing more research after a call from a dear brother, it appears this dirt bag is a selected captain, not  a major. I can’t find where I got it that he was a selected major? I highlighted and expanded the pic of him and sure enough he is wearing 1st Lt bars. Sorry.) Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea what other Marines are thinking when they see him? No, I’m sure you don’t, and you obviously don’t care. Your changes are all directed towards pleasing every minority and the hell with everyone else. Is that what you mean about bringing the Corps into the “modern society?” General, that is your modern society, not mine or that of the retired community.

You are watering down our Corps, so we look like everyone else. We never looked like everyone else—we never wanted to look like everyone else. Remember the ad, If everyone could be a Marine, it wouldn’t be the Marines. America doesn’t need a second Army, America has always loved her Marine Corps, but that is slowly changing—some look at us as victims now. It’s amazing the questions I get from knowledgeable people when I am out and about wearing my Marine ball cap. You think America isn’t watching? Guess again general.

And what’s this about your comments concerning the Army National Guard recruiting our discharged Marines? Of course they do, why not? They are trained, disciplined, and understand honor, integrity, and commitment. Plus the ANG are not going woke like the Armed Forces. Another of my super stars in the Young Marine unit, a female, could not get into the PLC program at her college, so she went ROTC and is having the time of her life, getting rapid promotions employing the leadership principles she learned in the Young Marines. Remember them general, there are eleven of them in case you never learned them or forgot them.

Moreover, you complain about the other services recruiting our prior service Marines. Again, why not? But you say some of them are disappointed and are asking to come back into the fold. Did any of your recruiting gurus dig into what it was they were dissatisfied with the branch they chose? Probably not. My bet is they missed what the Corps had to offer such as pride, honor, being part of something great, and of course wearing the hard earned EGA. I will watch this action closely for I believe if you allow them a “streamlined” method of coming back, they will find themselves again disappointed by all the changes you have made to the Corps they remembered and loved.

Are we soon to become obsolete and folded into the Army? I mean they have artillery, so we didn’t need them. Is that your plan—we think so. Look above you general—what is the service of your bosses? I am sure they applaud your actions as it falls right in with their desires.

Finally, recruiting older Marines, not 18–20 year old’s as they haven’t achieved full maturity yet —so you say. Tell that to those of us who served in WW I or II, Korea, Vietnam, or the Sandbox. I know and I would “think” your generals would know what type of young man seeks out the Corps. The one we have always—to use the new PC term—vetted and made him a Marine for life. Now you don’t want him. You want the misanthropes, the gender confused, the lost souls, the weak minded, and those we know are poorly suited to the battlefield.

In closing, it appears your changes are destroying everything the United States Marine Corps has stood for in 246 years—the very fabric of the Corps. What happened to “We don’t promise you a rose garden,” or “The Few, The Proud, The Marines?” Now it appears it’s, “Come Join Our diverse organization, all are welcome.”

As I said at the beginning, I mean no disrespect to you general. I know I speak for the vast majority of the retired community when I disagree with all you are doing to “our” Corps. It seems you just don’t know how to say “No” to anything unless it is to diminish our traditional values. How dare you call our heritage racist and sexist. Tell that to four of the last six Sergeants Major of the Marine Corps who were black. My mantra was always, “Mission, Men, Myself.” Having read your Bio and watched intensely what you have done and are doing to our Marine Corps, I must place you in the category of a term I learned long ago as a PFC—Cocker Spaniel Marine! If you are unfamiliar with that term perhaps you need to read my book, We’ll All Die as Marines.”

Semper Fi General (if you can be),
Jim Bathurst
Col, USMC (Ret)
1958–1993

Postscript. You will probably never see this letter, but maybe, just maybe, someone will read it and find a way to get it on your desk. I hope so!

The General’s Son

I know not what years my readers served our once great Corps, but I am of the vintage of the writer of the article below. He and I have history that goes back to 1966-67 and carried forward to the late 1980’s. 

Our first tour together was in Vietnam in 2/1. I “think” he was a lieutenant, but I could be wrong. As a  lowly sergeant in Echo company I know not his assignment; I seem to recall he was a company XO? I attempted to research his assignment in several places, but his all Bio’s aren’t that specific.

The next time was in 9th Marines on Okinawa 1977-78. I was a captain serving as the regimentals Asst OPSO, and he was a major serving as the OPSO with 2/9. That was the start of my feelings concerning this officer. It’s all in the book should you desire more information.

The next time I was a colonel serving as the Training Director at LFTCLant in Norfolk. He was a frocked BG serving as the Asst CG of 2d Marine Division at CLNC. An incident during this tour solidified my opinion of him that still carries on today.

I did see him again a few years ago at a Naples MCL Birthday Ball. I approached him to simply say hello and he did not recognize me. Guess I never made much of an impression on him.  He developed the nick name of “Chuckie Cheese Krulak” by some Marines, including me!

To flush out some memory cells, the one accomplishment he enjoys boasting about was he takes credit for establishing the “crucible” in recruit training.

His daddy was Lieutenant General Victor Krulak (aka “The Brute”). In 1964 he was assigned as the Commanding General of all Marine Forces in the Pacific theater (CG FMF Pac), which of course, included the war in Vietnam. Rumor had it he was looking forward to becoming CMC, but in 1967, LBJ choose Leonard F. Chapman instead — a wise choice in my view. The next year Daddy retired.

Now if you think Daddy did not have something to do with the son becoming CMC, you live under a rock. Seriously!

The disproportionate share of insurrectionists at the US Capitol with a military background are not representative of the armed forces as a whole. Nonetheless, as the divide between the military and US civilian society grows, even more attention will need to be paid to weeding out extremists.

BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA – Revelations that the insurrection at the US Capitol included many former and current members of America’s armed forces have been met with alarm. And yet, as a 35-year veteran and retired commandant of the US Marine Corps, I saw the events of January 6 as the predictable culmination of a growing disconnect between the US military and civilian society.

Once home, many veterans joined organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion, where they were surrounded by like-minded people who had served, suffered, and sacrificed together. Jobs were plentiful, and Americans took pride in their country and their military.

Similarly, in the Korean War less than a decade later, though America was never “all in,” it nonetheless had clear strategic goals. As in WWII, US servicemen and women did a remarkable job and came home to an appreciative country.

But then came Vietnam, where most Americans never really knew what their country was fighting for. When the conflict finally came to its ignominious end in April 1975, there was no victory to celebrate (and it certainly was not fireworks that flew from the roof of the US embassy in Saigon). Unlike previous generations, those who fought in Vietnam were not honored for their service and sacrifice. Equally important, the public backlash against the war led to the end of military conscription, which fundamentally transformed the relationship between the military and the American people. The rift created by the shift to an all-volunteer military has grown wider ever since.

After Vietnam, America’s next major war was Desert Storm, in 1990. Again, clear strategic goals were met in a dramatic fashion, and US servicemen and women returned to a proud country – on the cusp of becoming the world’s only remaining superpower with the collapse of the Soviet Union the following year.

Yet by the end of the Gulf War, globalization and technological change had already begun to reshape American society. Old-line industries were being upended, and many manufacturing jobs were disappearing. Although immigration had only a minor effect on the big economic picture, it became a hot-button political issue for those who found themselves out of work. At the same time, a new wave of social-justice issues also started gaining momentum during this period. As a microcosm of America, the US military was not immune to these political dynamics.

It was against this political, social, and economic backdrop that America embarked on its “long war.” Much like Vietnam, the “War on Terror” lacks clear strategic goals and has lost public buy-in over time. Many of those who have fought it subscribe to the apocryphal refrain that while the military was at war, America was at Walmart. After serving multiple tours in Iraq or Afghanistan, servicemen and women who sacrificed years of their lives have received little recognition.

In his 1973 book, The American Way of War, the historian Russell F. Weigley quoted US General George C. Marshall as saying, “a democracy cannot fight a Seven Years’ War,” because any protracted conflict eventually will lose the support of the electorate. The longer a war runs – particularly when it becomes cross-generational – the greater the disconnect between the typical citizen and the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who serve.

he War on Terror is an abiding case in point, helping to shed light on the unrest and extremism that burst into public view at the Capitol. A small minority of alienated former and active service members have concluded that something is wrong in the America for which they fought and sacrificed. The past two presidential elections have fueled this discontent and convinced some that they have a duty to confront perceived domestic “enemies.” Political leaders, meanwhile, have exploited these sentiments for their own advantage.

The COVID-19 pandemic also contributed to a perfect storm. As the economy shed jobs – particularly at the lower end of the income distribution – face-to-face interactions were no longer possible. With deepening social atomization, it has become more difficult to experience solidarity. Angst or boredom have afflicted many, and some have found refuge in online communities espousing extremist ideologies. The 2020 presidential election brought the situation to a boiling point. A sitting commander-in-chief openly sought to overturn a free and fair election with lies and intimidation, and a small minority of his acolytes answered his call to action. Really?

But Americans should have faith. Notwithstanding a few outliers, the US military is unwavering in its support of, and dedication to, the US Constitution. Those in its ranks who harbor extremist views will be discovered and dealt with appropriately. Looking ahead, recruitment methods will be strengthened to weed out extremists. Recruiters will have to look not only at candidates’ social-media activity but also at their “body paint” (tattoos) and other potential indicators of extremist or racist sympathies. Interviews will need to be more pointed, and education for active members improved.

While the troubling trajectory of US military-civil relations has created fertile ground for some members to be radicalized, it is important to remember that the insurrectionists represent an exception. The US military has defended American democracy for centuries and will continue to do so, in keeping with our noblest traditions. Yes, I agree general, you can bet on it!

Charles C. Krulak

CHARLES C. KRULAK

Writing for PS since 2020
4 Commentaries

In sum, I categorize this fellow in the same company as Mattis, Allen, and all the other Kool Aid drinking generals viewing the military through their woke eyes and ears. Krulak says the recruiters will take care of this supposed problem. LOL What does he know about recruiting — Nothing!