REMARKS BY SENATOR JIM WEBB

GEORGE C. MARSHALL ARMY ROTC AWARD SEMINAR

VIRGINIA MILITARY INSTITUTE

 16 APRIL 2008

 

It is a real pleasure to share the rostrum today with some people who have given great leadership to our country in so many different ways.  General Myers, as some of you may know, was one of the leading figures in bringing the Army back from a period of great turmoil following the Vietnam War.  General Reese is a member of the West Point class of ‘66, which is a very famous class due to the special sacrifices it made during the Vietnam War.  Approximately 10 percent of the class of ’66 was killed during the war, the highest percentage of any of the other classes.  To all of you on the rostrum, we appreciate your hospitality today.

It is a very busy time right now in the United States Congress. I am most appreciative of the Virginia National Guard for having arranged a helicopter so that I could be with you today while Congress is in session.  I am going to have to return immediately after this event.  

I also would like to take a moment today to acknowledge the anniversary of the tragedy last year at Virginia Tech. All of us who are government officials in Virginia have asked that there be a moment of silence at some point during the day to remember that day.  There are a lot of heavy hearts here in Virginia.

              I very much appreciate being invited to come down to Lexington to speak to you today.  I would first like to convey my respect and appreciation for the choices that you are making in your young lives in order to serve our country.  I also have a very strong affinity for this part of Virginia.  One side of my father’s family was among the original settlers here in Rockbridge County.  There’s a cemetery south of here in Natural Bridge where several of my ancestors are buried, so I always have very strong emotion when I come back here.  I am also reminded of the service that my family has been honored to give our country, beginning in the American Revolution and leading up to today. 

              I grew up in the military.  I am proud to have served our country as an infantry officer in the Marine Corps.  My son left Penn State,  enlisted in the Marine Corps, and served as a Marine rifleman in Ramadi, Iraq, during some of the worst fighting there.  He is still on active duty.  I’ve been around the military every way you can be around it: growing up in it, knowing what it’s like to have a father deployed for long periods of time; knowing what it’s like to be deployed; knowing what it’s like to have a family member deployed; covering the military as a journalist; and serving as a civilian official in the Department of Defense. 

              I was in Beirut in 1983 when the Marines were attempting to help sort out a situation there which, in October of that year, resulted in more than 240 Marines dying in a single day.  It is an incident that those of us who were in or around the military at that time will never forget.  I was able to serve as a journalist in Afghanistan in ’04, where I was in nine different places with the Marine Corps and the Army, in the field with them, observing and reporting on the combat operations.  And I spent five years in the Pentagon: one as a Marine and four as a defense executive. 

There is no profession in this country that I have greater respect for, a greater admiration for, and a greater concern for in terms of making sure that those who have served still live up to our responsibilities to make sure that those who step forward and serve are properly taken care of.  It falls upon people like myself to make sure that those who now serve receive the well-deserved honor and respect that goes along with military service.

              It’s hard for me to comprehend this, but on June the 5th it will be 40 years since I stood up and raised my right hand and took the oath of office as a Marine lieutenant.  And when we’re looking at that period and comparing it to this country today, there are some parallels.  The country in 1968 was going through enormous chaos.  The Tet Offensive had occurred from the end of January through February, producing the highest casualty rate in the Vietnam War and turning a great deal of public opinion against the war.  Martin Luther King had been assassinated in April.  The night before I graduated, Robert Kennedy was shot.  In the fall of that year, the Democratic National Convention was in total chaos with anti-war demonstrators and police battling it out in the streets of Chicago.  We had frequent protests against the war, led by people in my same age group, which only increased after 1968. 

And at the same time, as most of you in this room will appreciate, those of us who were called upon to serve our country were facing a different set of issues and different responsibilities.  We had taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution.  We knew where we were going.  And so we set about our tasks.  I went to Vietnam in 1969, which was the second worst year in the war for American casualties.  It was also a time in this country when in political terms, more people started to question the war.  Some of you have seen the films or heard the terminology—this was the time of Hamburger Hill.  And I came away from that experience with some pretty strong feelings. 

              First, about the character of this unique profession and how important it is to keep it out of politics.  There was a Marine two-star general named Samuel D. Griffith who was awarded a a Navy Cross for extraordinary heroism in WWII and later became quite an intellectual, personally translating Mao Tse Tung’s book on guerrilla warfare from the Chinese.  In the early 1960s General Griffith made an observation that has always stuck in my mind.  He wrote, “In the United States, we go to considerable length to keep soldiers out of politics and even more to keep politics out of soldiers.” 

This distinction is something for all of you to think about.  No matter what happens in the endeavors in Iraq, no matter what happens with the tone and debate inside this country, we must always strive to keep what our military people do away from the political commentary.  It is wrong to use the service of our military people for political ends, because each military member has his or her own political views.  I would urge you to think about that when you go to your units as officers.  Combat was the most apolitical environment I have ever been in, and it is important in a country such as ours that we keep it that way.  People serve because they love their country, because they have military traditions, because they want to soldier.  When you’re out in that environment, people pretty much check their politics at the door--and well they should.  I make this same point again and again to my colleagues in the Senate.  Don’t take what our military people have been doing and politicize it in one way or the other.

              I want to talk to you for a few minutes today about leadership.  In the officer corps, leadership is your overarching function, your reason for existence.  Whatever else you’re doing, whatever skill you’re being taught, whatever staff assignment you have been sent on, your number one responsibility is to emanate the qualities of leadership. 

              Above all, leadership requires character.  A lot of times we teach character in the negative. For instance, when I was at the Naval Academy, the saying was: Midshipmen do not lie, cheat, or steal or tolerate among them those who do.  Of course we don’t tolerate people who lie, cheat, or steal.  But integrity involves a great deal more than that.  Integrity requires a willingness to accept responsibility, to accept accountability when things go bad.  The three most magical words in the military when things start going bad are: “I accept responsibility.” 

              Character means saying the same thing no matter who’s in the room.  Doing that also makes life a lot simpler, by the way.  Character involves courage.  We all read the stories about physical courage, and we see our people rightly rewarded for physical courage on the battlefield.  There is also such a thing as moral courage.  Moral courage can be a tough thing.  When you know something is right, when you believe strongly that something is right, and when you see it is not being viewed that way by people who may be able to write your fitness report or who may be able to take something out on you in a different way, moral courage requires standing up for what you believe in, despite the cost. 

              And there’s another kind of courage.  I’ve come to call it daily courage.  I just can’t think of a better way to phrase it.  You’re going to see that in the men and women that you lead who are sent into harm’s way.  Daily courage is getting up every morning and having to do what your duty requires you to do, no matter what the obstacles are, no matter what you feel about it, because you’ve taken an oath to do so. 

              I’ve spent a lot of time in my life with people that I served with in combat, many of whom were seriously wounded.  I had a rifle platoon in Vietnam that averaged about 40 people on any given day.  In one eight-week period we took 56 casualties.  In that platoon, I had a number of seriously wounded Marines, amputees, a double amputee, a triple amputee, spinal cord injured people, and others.  I have the privilege on the one hand of keeping up with them, and on the other, they have inspired me with their daily courage. 

              What is daily courage?  Sergeant Dale Wilson, from Troutman, North Carolina, who became a triple amputee in Vietnam, received  a Silver Star two months before he was so severely wounded. A terrific Marine.  When Sergeant Dale Wilson gets out of bed, every morning for the past 39 years he’s had to take 15 minutes to put on his prostheses in order to go face the world, and he still has what it takes to get a college degree and have a wife, to raise a family and to lead a productive, professional life—that’s daily courage.

              Leadership also involves what you might call authenticity.  And that involves what could be called your leadership style; how you articulate what your message is to your people.  And that style has to be real. 

              Years ago, after I returned from Vietnam, I was a platoon commander at the Marine Corps Officer Candidate School.   One young Marine who was in my platoon called me up five or six years later, and we went out for a beer.  I said, “How’s it going?”  He said, “Well, the first year in the Marine Corps, I was miserable because I kept trying to be Jim Webb.  Then I realized I’m not you and that I have to be myself.”  He said, “It’s been pretty simple after that.” 

              And if you look at the greats, some of the people that we’re thinking about on a day like today, you can realize how different they really were, even though they all were effective.  Marshall, Patton, MacArthur, Eisenhower, Omar Bradley – these were all incredible leaders.  They lived in the same time period, sometimes serving under one another, sometimes competing with each other. But imagine what their careers would have been like if Patton had tried to act like George Catlett Marshall, in terms of his temperament or leadership style, or if Omar Bradley had tried to be like Patton.  You have to communicate who you are in a sincere way that’s going to make you comfortable and that’s going to make the people you lead comfortable with you. 

              A key piece of leadership that I want to spend a little bit of time talking about today is loyalty.  We learn about loyalty in your textbooks, and we know there’s such a thing as loyalty up and loyalty down.  I know when I was coming through the system in the Marine Corps, we always emphasized loyalty down. Loyalty down can be a difficult concept, as opposed to loyalty up.

“Loyalty up” means, among other things, that you must never lie to your chain of command.  If your troops see you lie to your chain of command, they’re going to lie to you.  And you must never bad mouth your chain of command as a way of getting around your own accountability to your troops, because it creates the same environment. 

              Loyalty down is a little more complicated.  During the time that I was in the Marine Corps, Chesty Puller was one of our great role models. He actually spent a little time here at VMI, before he headed off for World War I.  Chesty Puller had coined a phrase that still sticks in the Marine Corps.  He said, “When it comes to taking care of your troops, first you feed the privates, then you feed the corporals, then you feed the sergeants. Then, if there’s anything left, the officers eat.” 

              It’s a very small thing when you think about it.  But it is one of the most important concepts you will ever remember.  Napoleon said it in a different way.  He said, “The general’s reward is not a bigger tent, it is command.”  If you put yourself up in front of your troops in a way that demonstrates a lack of humility, or in a way that indicates to them that you think your rank creates special preferences when it comes to the basic needs, you’re failing as a leader. 

              Take care of your troops.  The loyalty to the people that you lead carries over for the rest of your life.  This is one of the reasons that I’ve offered two amendments related to the well-being of our military since I joined the United States Senate.

              The first amendment I introduced was the “Dwell Time” amendment.  In traditional operational environments, the goal has always been that for however long you are deployed, you are supposed to have twice as much time back at your home base.  If you are deployed for six months, traditionally that would mean a year back.  If you’re deployed for a year, you need two years back.  If you’re deployed nine months, you need 18 months back. 

And that is not down time.  Dwell time gives units time to refurbish their equipment and to bring in new people.  It also gives people time to do things with their family. It then gives service members the opportunity to gear up so that they can go back and do what they need to do again.   As the situation that we are in now moves forward in Iraq and Afghanistan, we’ve reached a point where instead of a 2:1 ratio, we are down below 1:1.  A typical ground unit would find it very difficult these days to do anything but to come back and have a very brief period off and then begin the cycle of preparing to go again -- a very tough preparation cycle. 

              It is my very strong belief that we have other ways to use our manpower so that we aren’t burning out our troops. We should not be falling below 1:1.  We should not be allowing our troops to be deployed on a repetitive basis.  And we should not be allowing those decisions that drive them below 1:1.  There was a study in the New York Times, about two weeks ago, that looked at multiple tours in the United States Army and those NCOs, the career people, who have been deployed three times or more.  It found that 27 percent of them have the symptoms of post-traumatic stress, acute stress, and other long-term emotional challenges.

              The point is our military people have always done what the country asks of them in every war.  It is responsibility of the top leadership to act as their stewards to make sure that they are being used properly.  That is loyalty down.  So I introduced an amendment to mandate a minimum 1:1 dwell time for our military, and I’m going to reintroduce that amendment.  I am asking my fellow senators to put their politics aside and join me in establishing that under no conditions, other than absolute emergencies, should we be pushing our people that hard.

              The second example of loyalty down that has carried with me all the way through my life is the GI Bill that I introduced my first day in office.  In the late 1970s I became the first Vietnam veteran to serve as a full committee counsel in the Congress, and since that time I have worked on these GI Bill programs.  Today, our military men and women use the Montgomery GI Bill, designed as peace-time program, put into place in the 1980s to help recruitment.  Since 9/11, with the way that our military has been used, our people need more.  They need more in order to help transition back in civilian life.  We keep hearing people say, “This is the next greatest generation.”  So, my logic is: “Good, let’s give them the same educational opportunities that the greatest generation had.”  It’s a simple concept. 

I started off by myself, introducing this bill on my first day as a senator.  We now have 57 sponsors on this bill.  We’re going to get it done.

When people came back from World War II, they had all their tuition paid for, all their books bought, and a monthly stipend.  The Montgomery GI Bill today would cover about 14 percent of the cost if you wanted to go to one of our major schools.  I feel very strongly as a steward of the well-being of the United States military that we should be putting those sorts of benefits in place. 

The long and short of my visit with you today is this:  Those of you who are soon going to accept your commissions and then go on to serve the military in this very difficult time are at the beginning of your careers.  But you are in the middle of a very important continuum.  The examples of those who went before us are the markings of how you have shaped yourself with this responsibility.  A concern for those you leave behind, just as I still feel the concern for those I served with all those years ago, is the earmark of the United States military. 

This notion is that we are all part of a continuum.  You should learn from people such as Marshall, people such as Eisenhower, people such as your commanders in your ROTC units.  When you learn from their example, in a mentoring process, you become a part of this continuum.  It is that loop that defines the United States military as a unique institution in our society.  And I would hope that 40 years from now, those of you who are going to go out and serve -- whether it is for four years or for 40 -- will feel that same sense of responsibility.  And that you will be able to stand up in a place like this and say: “I took care of my people.” 

Thank you very much.

End