KNOXVILLE, Tenn. — Even as the United States reeled from the Japanese advance throughout the Pacific in 1942 and the military sought desperately to ramp up the American war machine, it was remarkable that James Cook Sr. was even allowed to enlist.
It took the existential threat of world war for the military to open new roles to African American men, and Cook was in the first wave of Black Marines. Cook started his military journey at Camp Montford Point, a segregated Marine training camp in Jacksonville, North Carolina, and went on to serve in the Pacific Theater.
Growing up, James “Jimmy” Cook Jr., who is now 75 and a Knoxville resident, knew nothing about his father’s storied place in history as one of the Montford Point Marines, who served in all-Black units and distinguished themselves in war.
RELATED
Now, Jimmy Cook will receive on his father’s behalf the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest honor Congress can award for distinguished achievements and contributions by individuals or institutions.
The Montford Point Marines were awarded the honor in 2012 after President Barack Obama announced the group distinction in 2011, noting the members’ personal sacrifice during World War II. But Cook Sr. had passed away at 81 in 2005, and it was only recently that Jimmy Cook learned what his father was due.
“You know when I found this out, I knew he had done some amazing things, but that just topped it for me. I’m like, ‘Oh, my God,’” he said.
Jimmy Cook, himself a retired Army veteran who served in Vietnam, will travel to a ceremony set for Aug. 25 at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, during the 57th annual Montford Point Marines Day. Other Montford Marines or their families will be presented the award as well.
It wasn’t until Jimmy Cook was in high school in the early ‘60s that he stumbled upon a trunk in the attic filled with military uniforms and awards. He asked his dad if he was in the Army.
“And he said, ‘No son, I was in the Marines.’ And that was the end of it,” Jimmy recalled.
Jimmy says his dad kept his thoughts and memories of his military service to himself. “The only thing he would say is that he was stationed in the Pacific.”
Then, in 2021, Jimmy was casually talking to a retired Marine who revealed to Jimmy about his father’s forgotten Congressional Gold Medal.
Jimmy began doing online research on Camp Montford Point and requested his father’s military records to verify he was one of the Montford Marines. Reduced staffing due to COVID-19 caused delays in securing the records, but Jimmy’s sister made her own discovery while cleaning out their mom’s garage.
“She gave me this big envelope with all of his records in it and I just about went to tears,” Jimmy recalled.
James Cook Sr. was kind and soft-spoken. But in hindsight, there were glimmers of his military background, Jimmy said, describing his father as a disciplinarian.
“I tell people, by the time I got to basic training in ‘65, I thought it was Girl Scouts compared to dealing with my daddy. But like I said, he was a very patient man,” Jimmy joked.
Living in Cleveland, Ohio, with his wife, Earline, and five kids, Cook Sr. worked as an electrician and owned a television and radio repair shop. He was using skills he had learned from the Marines, where he served as a radar operator.
But Jimmy has come to learn more of what his father carried with him after the Marine Corps.
“[The Montford Marines] caught hell because they were the first to integrate. And they stuck them in the back of Parris Island and made them build their own barracks. It was just God awful,” Jimmy said.
As Jimmy has learned more about his father’s experience, his respect for the man has grown even more.
“My chest sticks out a block away. I’m just so proud of him and to know what he endured and went through,” he said.
Jimmy wishes his dad was able to receive the medal himself, but he is honored to accept it on his behalf.
If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) visits Taiwan to show support for the island nation, she would likely fly in a U.S. military plane at a time when China is increasingly challenging U.S. aircraft and ships in the Pacific region.
The Financial Times has reported that Pelosi plans to travel to Taiwan in August, but Pelosi has not yet confirmed whether she expects to make such a trip, citing security concerns.
Lawmakers typically fly on military aircraft when they visit Taiwan, which China views as a renegade province, and the Defense Department is considering whether to also move ships and aircraft into the region to protect Pelosi’s delegation if the trip happens, according to the Washington Post.
Army Lt. Col. Martin Meiners, a Pentagon spokesman, declined to say if the U.S. military might fly Pelosi to Taiwan. “It wouldn’t be appropriate to comment on any congressional travel possibilities,” Meiners told Task & Purpose on Monday.
Subscribe to Task & Purpose Today. Get the latest military news, entertainment, and gear in your inbox daily.
The Air Force’s 89th Airlift Wing transports the president, cabinet members, senior combatant commanders, and other distinguished visitors all over the world. Based out of Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, the wing’s aircraft includes Air Force One as well as military planes based on Gulfstream and Boeing jets.
It is normal for senior members of any administration to use military aircraft during overseas trips because those planes have the communications equipment needed to keep in constant contact with Washington, D.C., and they afford privacy so that officials can work with their staff during long flights to prepare for their visits, a retired senior government official told Task & Purpose. For trips to combat zones and other high-threat areas, it is also common for U.S. government officials to fly in Air Force C-17s because those planes have defensive systems, and their crews are trained to fly in dangerous conditions.
However, President Joe Biden recently said the military has reservations about Pelosi traveling to Taiwan.
“I think that the military thinks it’s not a good idea right now, but I don’t know what the status of it is,” Biden said on July 20 in response to a question from a reporter about whether he thought it was a good idea for Pelosi to visit Taiwan this summer.
Biden did not elaborate on exactly why the military has concerns about Pelosi traveling to Taiwan.
“The administration routinely provides members of Congress with information and context for potential travel, including geopolitical and security considerations,” a spokesperson for the National Security Council told Task & Purpose on Monday. “Members of Congress will make their own decisions.”
If Pelosi arrives in Taiwan, she would be the highest-ranking member of Congress to visit the country since former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) met with Taiwan’s president in April 1997, shortly before China assumed control of Hong Kong, a former British colony.
China has become much more wealthy and powerful in the ensuing 25 years. It is now the second-largest economy in the world, and it also boasts the largest navy of any military. Retired Navy Adm. Phil Davidson, who led U.S. Indo-Pacific Command at the time, warned Congress last year that China could attempt to invade Taiwan by 2027.
The spokeswoman for China’s Foreign Ministry has recently indicated that China could retaliate if Pelosi went to Taiwan. “If the U.S. were to insist on going down the wrong path, China will take resolute and strong measures to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity,” Zhao Lijiang told reporters at a July 19 news briefing.
Zhao did not specify what types of actions the Chinese government might take under such a scenario.
Separately, Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has warned that the number of potentially dangerous encounters between Chinese and U.S. ships and aircraft has risen over the past five years.
“The message is the Chinese military, in the air and at sea, have become significantly more and noticeably more aggressive in this particular region,” Milley told reporters on Sunday.
In one such incident, a U.S. special operations C-130 aircraft had an “unsafe” and “unprofessional” encounter with a Chinese SU-30 fighter over the South China Sea in June, Politico first reported.
Washington Examiner online editor Tom Rogan argued in a recent commentary that Pelosi should fly commercially to Taiwan because it is likely that China’s President Xi Jinping would order his fighters to fly close to any U.S. and Taiwanese military aircraft used to get Pelosi safely to the island nation.
“The very threat of this possibility would make it necessary for Pelosi’s aircraft to receive either a U.S. or a Taiwanese fighter escort,” wrote Rogan, who is also the Washington Examiner’s national security writer. “That would only increase Xi’s sense of needing to make a public show of confronting the visit. The risks of escalation and miscalculation would be high.”
Pelosi’s office did not provide a statement for this story.
Respected China expert Bonnie Glaser noted that all members of Congress who visit Taiwan fly on aircraft provided by the military.
Currently, the risk of an incident between China and the United States is growing in the runup to the Aug. 1 anniversary of the People’s Liberation Army’s founding and other events later this year, such as China’s 20th Party Congress, said Glaser, director of the Asia Program at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
“The PLA [People’s Liberation Army] would certainly not simply repeat what they did in 1995-96 by firing missiles near Taiwan,” Glaser told Task & Purpose. “It is certainly possible that a PLA aircraft could ‘escort’ Pelosi’s plane and fly directly over Taiwan or at least into the territorial airspace. That would be unprecedented and dangerous. I think it is unlikely that they would shoot down the aircraft.”
UPDATE: This story was updated on July 25 with comments from Bonnie Glaser.
The latest on Task & Purpose
Want to write for Task & Purpose?Click here. Or check out the latest stories onour homepage.
Perhaps it’s easier to tell you upfront what this article won’t do rather than what it will. It won’t tell you how to feel about the war in Afghanistan. It won’t tell you how to feel about VET TV, a military and veterans-focused production company that has been strongly criticized for its content. And it won’t tell you how to feel about their documentary series, Let’s Talk About the War.
That’s mostly because I’m still figuring out how I feel about it.
Let’s Talk About the War was released in January. The longest of the six episodes is only 30 minutes, each combining in-person interviews with real combat footage and scenes from VET TV’s own series, A Grunt’s Life. The intent of the series, as director Nick Betts says at the beginning of each episode, is to give veterans a final say in the war in Afghanistan, which came to a crashing halt almost one year ago.
“After this 21-year war has ended, and seeing the fall of Kabul, it made me angry. I think it made all of us angry,” Betts, a U.S. Army sniper veteran who wrote, directed, and produced the series, says in the introduction. “But no one wanted to listen to us. No one gave a fuck about the sacrifice that we made for this country, and for the government, and the people of Afghanistan. It’s time for us now to hear from our veterans and what their thoughts are on the war.”
Subscribe to Task & Purpose Today. Get the latest military news, entertainment, and gear in your inbox daily.
From the moment the first episode starts, the series pulls you in with combat footage of cars driving down a highway only to be engulfed by smoke and debris after an explosion. Contemplative music plays in the background as a clip from inside a vehicle shows gravel exploding in front of it as it rolls over. Viewers then meet Betts, who interviews veterans of Afghanistan with a wide range of experiences.
The series features clips of conversations between Betts and different interviewees — Army and Marine Corps, enlisted and officer. The conversations range from humorous to contemplative, emotional, and serious. The first interviewee featured is Austin Mandelbaum, a veteran of the Army’s 75th Ranger Battalion, who says people with a “certain mental profile” gravitate towards special operations units.
“It’s essentially sociopaths with homicidal tendencies,” Mandelbaum says.
The entire series is like this: assessments that are so blunt you almost wonder if the interviewees knew it would be shown on camera. It covers a lot of ground, talking about the friction between enlisted troops and the officers above them, the mistrust between U.S. service members and their Afghan counterparts; civilian casualties; and the challenge of reassimilating into civilian society after going to war. And it doesn’t just hint at controversy, it relishes in it. It doesn’t push the limits; it blows right past them.
But just as you’re nearing your limit, thinking maybe this isn’t for you, it offers a raw quote or bit of analysis that stops you from exiting out of the browser just long enough to start the next episode.
Nick Betts (right) sits with Austin Mandelbaum (left) in “Let’s Talk About the War.” (Screenshot of VET TV)
Throughout episode one, for example, infantrymen are painted as “animals” who are not only comfortable with killing but eager to do it, driven by rage and hatred. In one moment, Marine Corps veteran and VET TV founder Donny O’Malley — a stage name — recalls being told downrange that a machine gunner was scared to get in trouble for shooting a child after seeing the kid pick up a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG). O’Malley said he told the Marine that if it was a matter of not wanting to shoot a child, he needed to tell someone else who “isn’t as fearful of doing that and let them fucking waste ‘em.”
“He goes, ‘Oh no, fuck that sir, I’ll fuckin’ smoke all these fucking kids, I don’t give a fuck. Fuck ‘em!’ And he just went on about wanting to gun down all these kids and I’m just like okay, chill out on that shit,” O’Malley recalled, laughing. “I’m like, chill on that, you don’t want to go doing that. But if someone’s shooting an RPG at you, doesn’t matter who they are, fucking waste ‘em.”
It’s not the clean, easily-digestible version of the military that is often sold by Hollywood. Take American Sniper for instance, in which a scene reminiscent of the one O’Malley describes plays out.
In the film, Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle (played by Bradley Cooper) watches as a kid runs toward a dead or dying insurgent who was carrying an RPG as Kyle shot him. As the boy struggles to shift the weight of the RPG onto his shoulder, Cooper looks through his scope, quietly urging the boy to drop the weapon but inching his finger towards the trigger of his sniper rifle nonetheless, appearing internally tortured by what he may have to do next. The boy finally drops the RPG and Cooper releases a shaky exhale, visibly relieved.
O’Malley’s story is a far cry from that. But taking a step back, you can’t help but ask: How did it get this way? I asked Betts about that moment and the first episode. He said he wanted to ensure he wasn’t reinforcing a narrative that veterans are “hyper-aggressive” “blood-thirsty animals” who can’t successfully rejoin civilian society after their service. But he also said the “war animal” mentality was something that was almost inevitable for some service members downrange, a survival tactic that ensured you and those next to you would make it home.
“If you look back in time, I mean the U.S. Army went from circle targets to human-shaped silhouettes,” he said. “Then they went from human-shaped silhouettes to, now let’s give the guy a mustache and an [AK-47]. So there’s this level of conditioning that the military is hyper-aware of.”
He recalled reading two books from retired Army Lt. Col. Dave Grossman — On Combat and On Killing — during his last year in Afghanistan. They made him feel validated and gave him feelings of “complete animosity” towards “anybody that stood in our way.” That’s what he wanted his series to do: validate service members’ experiences and feelings, and let them know that it’s not just them who felt that way. They weren’t the only ones who struggled with it afterward.
In a gutting moment of self-reflection near the end of the first episode of the series, Betts reads a November 2006 entry from his journal when he was 19 years old. He’d watched the enemy “take direct hits” from various firearms and weapon systems, all while having “a smile on my face.”
“Am I sick? Am I a bad person?” Betts wondered in 2006. “And with all of this said, I’m the same person receiving standing ovations in airports for a job well done. And I look at these people’s faces with such pain, confusement, and anguish. Is this what I was meant to do? Should I take pride in taking the lives of people? I never would have thought that I’d be praised for being a murderer. Am I a murderer? Or am I a soldier?”
Nick Betts reading from his journal in “Let’s Talk About the War.” (Screenshot of VET TV)
‘We don’t owe anyone shit’
That stark difference between what O’Malley recalled during his service, and the way Hollywood portrays similar situations, is exactly the point of VET TV. The brazen content they produce, which up until Let’s Talk About the War has been primarily focused on the “dark humor” found within the ranks, to reflect the real U.S. military, not the one civilians believe exists.
“Don’t expect us to represent the US military the way the commercials want us to, or the way you think we should,” read a 2016 Kickstarter campaign for the nascent streaming service. . “We made our sacrifice; we don’t owe anyone shit.”
Civilians “don’t like seeing us [veterans] the way that we really are,” according to O’Malley, who says civilians often misunderstand and take offense to the content VET TV creates. But even service members have been upset by some of the things VET TV has created over the years.
The content produced by VET TV has been criticized as racist, misogynistic, and transphobic — labels that CEO Waco Hoover, a Marine veteran, doesn’t necessarily agree with. There’s “actually a deeper story for each one of those stories,” he told Task & Purpose. He pointed specifically to one skit that featured O’Malley as a transgender Marine — there’s “actually a huge amount of celebration” in that episode, Hoover said. “We’ve gotten some incredible feedback from transgender people who serve, who talk about ‘Oh my God, that episode inspired me so much.’”
On military-related Reddit pages, the platform has been disparaged as having “a bit too much of a [bro-vet] vibe,” being “really fucking boot and cringey [sp],” “disgusting,” and “fucking weird.” Many critics take issue with the use of tired stereotypes and reliance on edgy, dark humor that is “played out.” But among those critiques are comments praising Let’s Talk About the War for standing out among VET TV’s other videos. And that’s kind of the point.
The comedy piece of VET TV is just one part of it, Hoover said. They’re looking to build a television network, and like every network, they want to have a diverse array of content for viewers to choose from. Eventually, he said, they want to serve the whole military community, including spouses and families. But they’re “very young in that journey,” Hoover said.
In an interview with L.A. Times in 2020, O’Malley expressed regret over some of his decisions, namely using brownface while “parodying terrorists,” and misogynistic content. One video mentioned by the Times advertises a “Night Terror Neck Brace” to keep women safe from their “nocturnally abusive husband,” as the video puts it.
“Your husband can squeeze as hard as he wants, and you won’t feel a thing,” the video says, showing a man choking his wife in bed.
As he was starting the business, O’Malley was focused almost exclusively on fundraising from men and never expected “a single woman to give us a dollar,” he told The Times. It was a “mistake,” he said, and he “didn’t think about a bigger picture.” He said he later realized that people watching his skit featuring brownface “didn’t just perceive it as us parodying terrorists — it was us parodying Middle Easterners,” adding that it’s not something he’d do again.
In the future, VET TV hopes to do more shows like Let’s Talk About the War, which Hoover said brought in a noticeable amount of subscribers. They’re even in talks with what Hoover described as several “mainstream Hollywood” groups who have expressed interest in working with VET TV to turn the series “into a bigger production.” That would be a significant shift: Amazon rejected carrying VET TV’s movie, A Grunt’s Life, for “being too offensive” the Times reported in 2020.
But it seems Let’s Talk About the War is different. Betts said he’s received thousands of comments from people who have watched, praising it as validating their feelings, calling it cathartic, and thanking him for the work he did. Some have told him that after showing it to their spouse, they have “a whole different understanding of one another.” Comments left on the episodes say the series is full of “hard truths” and something they “can’t turn away from.”
“The overall response made absolutely all of the tears, all the sleepless nights, well worth it,” Betts said.
Nick Betts (left) talks with Army veteran Jamie Goldstein (right) in “Let’s Talk About the War.” (Screenshot of VET TV)
‘I was really mad for a long time’
The first five episodes of the series are admittedly “mildly negative” and accusatory, Betts said. In episode four, for instance, the interviewees discuss in detail Afghan authorities’ sexual abuse of young boys that they were told to ignore. And while each episode explores difficult topics, to put it mildly, Betts said the hardest episode to work on was the last.
The sixth episode, titled “Re-assimilation,” is the longest of the series. It asks the question of how service members went “from the battlefield in the Middle East back to a world they didn’t understand anymore, and which didn’t understand them.” Betts said he wanted to showcase veterans who successfully transitioned to civilian life, despite facing no shortage of challenges.
During episode six, Betts and his interviewees discuss their lowest moments, from the minutes after catastrophic injuries to the days and weeks afterward, wrought with anger, resentment, and depression. They talk about suicide and post-traumatic stress, including a conversation with a Gold Star spouse, Jennifer Travis, whose husband Sgt. 1st Class Bryce Travis died by suicide in September 2018. He thought “nobody gave a fuck,” Jennifer says, and that he was expendable. “At the end of the day, the government proved him right.”
In one particularly emotional moment, Betts listens with tears in his eyes as Army veteran Jose Martinez recalled making a deal with God after he stepped on a 60-pound improvised explosive device (IED). He ultimately lost both legs and his right arm from the incident.
“If anything I was just more disappointed in myself,” he said, his voice breaking. “I was really mad for a long time. Not because of how it happened to me, but because I didn’t die. I was ready to die — I was ready to die before that, I was ready to die after that. I remember just talking to God when I was out there and saying, ‘If I make it out of this mess, I promise you I won’t be an asshole no more. I’m going to try to help those that need help.’”
While the episode is likely the most emotional, it also shows the hope that exists in abundance, Betts recalled his own turning point, when a friend gave him a loan and he was so set on not letting him down that it was the first small push he needed to get better. That forward momentum led him to a job, which helped him rediscover his passions and re-center on who he was. Soon, he said he started making phone calls, apologizing to those close to him for the person he’d become. Those conversations and their forgiveness gave him another push, and step by step by step, he got “a lot better.”
“The Taliban, they win if we don’t get back out there and continue on with the rest of our lives,” said Marine Corps veteran Brandon Rumbaugh, who also lost his legs after stepping on an IED in Afghanistan. “That’s what they want. They want us to be miserable, and we’re not going to let that happen.”
There’s no way you can watch this series and not feel bothered by it at the end of the day. And frankly, you should be. What these veterans experienced during America’s longest war is important and meaningful. Yet as I watched each episode I found myself wondering what I was more bothered by — what they were saying, or the situation that made it their reality.
Betts acknowledges that the experience reflected in the series isn’t everyone’s. There’s no way it could be, with veterans having deployed at different times, in different theaters, with different jobs. “I wouldn’t tell them that they were wrong, but they can’t tell me that I’m wrong either in my feelings,” he said. And really, that isn’t the point.
“I hope the military personnel that watch this feel validated in their feelings,” he said. “And feel like there’s light at the end of the tunnel, and it wasn’t all for nothing.”
The latest on Task & Purpose
Want to write for Task & Purpose?Click here. Or check out the latest stories onour homepage.
The Senate is expected to take up major military toxic exposure legislation in coming days after House lawmakers passed corrections to the measure last week.
The bill — the Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act (or PACT Act) — was expected to be sent to the White House before the July 4 holiday, but was stalled by technical problems with the measure. The House addressed those in a bipartisan vote last Wednesday. Advocates are hopeful that the Senate can move quickly on the issue this week.
The legislation would cost almost $280 billion over the next 10 years and provide new medical and disability benefits for as many as one in every five veterans living in America today. Both veterans groups and lawmakers have called it possibly the most comprehensive effort ever to address toxic exposure issues in the military.
The PACT Act won’t be the only big veterans news on Capitol Hill this week, however. Senate Veterans Affairs Committee members are expected to discuss the Department of Veterans Affairs ongoing and controversial electronic medical records modernization project during a hearing on Wednesday.
Tuesday, July 19
House Armed Services — 9:30 a.m. — 2118 Rayburn
Readiness programs
Service officials will testify on military readiness initiatives and the National Defense Strategy.
House Foreign Affairs — 10 a.m. — 2172 Rayburn
Russian-Ukraine War
Department of Commerce officials will testify on economic penalties for Russia and support for Ukraine.
Senate Homeland Security — 10 a.m. — 342 Dirksen
Weapons of mass destruction
Department of Homeland Security officials will testify on the potential threat of weapons of mass destruction to America.
The committee will consider several pending nominations and bills.
Wednesday, July 20
House Foreign Affairs — 10 a.m. — 2172 Rayburn
Russian war crimes
Outside experts will testify on evidence of war crimes committed by Russian troops in Ukraine.
Senate Foreign Relations —10 a.m. — 419 Dirksen
Global food security
State Department officials will testify on U.S. efforts to combat hunger worldwide.
House Foreign Affairs — 10 a.m. — 2172 Rayburn
UN World Food Program
Officials will testify on successes and challenges of the UN World Food Program.
House Veterans’ Affairs — 1 p.m. — Visitors Center H210
Veteran education
VA officials will testify on education improvements put in place in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
House Foreign Affairs — 10 a.m. — 2172 Rayburn
Russia in Latin America
Outside experts will testify on Russian influence in Latin America and potential problems that it brings for western nations.
Senate Veterans’ Affairs — 3 p.m. — 418 Russell
VA electronic health records
VA officials will testify on the status of the department’s election medical records modernization program.
Thursday, July 21
House Foreign Affairs — 9:30 a.m. — online hearing
Africa
Outside experts will testify on U.S. influence in Africa.
Senate Armed Services — 9:30 a.m. — G-50 Dirksen
Nominations
The committee will consider the nominations of Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton to be head of U.S. Special Operations Command and Lt, Gen. Michael Langley to be head of U.S. Africa Command.
The committee will consider the nomination of David Pekoske to be administrator of the Transportation Security Administration.
Leo covers Congress, Veterans Affairs and the White House for Military Times. He has covered Washington, D.C. since 2004, focusing on military personnel and veterans policies. His work has earned numerous honors, including a 2009 Polk award, a 2010 National Headliner Award, the IAVA Leadership in Journalism award and the VFW News Media award.
Hiring Americas Finest. A New Mission. Veterans have the special sauce, the leadership skills, the desire to achieve more and help others. Visit http://www.
We are trying our hardest to spread the word: The Lakewood (CO) Police Department values the leadership experience and service-minded culture of our Nation’s military. We have a supportive community of 160,000 people and we give them the best police officers. Part of how we do this is by recruiting military veterans. How? We offer military preference points, of course, but we do more: To honor those values and to attract selected veterans as potential-hires for our police force, the Lakewood Police Department offers startinglateral-transfer payof $87,796.80…over $20K more than non-military recruits, for veterans which fall into either one of the below categories:
Any service member or veteran, E-5 and above, with a bachelor’s degree and five years of active duty service.
OR
2. Any service member or veteran, E-5 and above, with a bachelor’s degree and eight years of reserve/guard service or six years of reserve/guard service in a law enforcement AFSC/MOS/NEC.
This benefit extends only to lateral pay. All veterans must still submit a full application package (which will honor your Veterans Preference points), meet all of Lakewood’s standards and complete the full police academy and field training.
Other benefits include a 401a Money Purchase Retirement Plan which involves an employee contribution of 11%, and a city contribution of 13% with 5-year vesting. The city contributes another 3% into your 457 Deferred Compensation Retirement Plan as well for a BASE contribution of 27%. We offer strong health, dental & vision insurance options with a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) with a city contribution of $2,000/year. For a benefit listing, please visit: https://www.joinlakewoodblue.com/Pay-Benefits.
Applications are accepted through www.JoinLakewoodBlue.com through Labor Day for January. We are accepting applications for July of 2023 as well. We offer monthly testing, and out of state applicants do most testing in one visit. For a full testing timeline, please visit our website http://joinlakewoodblue.com.
TO APPLY, VISIT**:** https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/lakewoodco?keywords=police
We are an equal opportunity employer and strongly encourage ethnic minorities and women to apply. Please visit our Police Recruiting website at http://joinlakewoodblue.com for more information about the Lakewood Police Department.
For questions, comment below or reach out to LPDRecruiting@LakewoodCO.org
Life in the military is no bed of roses, but the services are putting in place an innovative program designed to give service members new tools to handle the stress of military life.
The program aims to help service members be physically and mentally ready to handle the challenges of military service.
The company and the program are known universally as O2X, which stands for Optimize to the X, with X being the goal. The company was founded by special operations veterans, first responders and elite athletes, said Adam La Reau, a co-founder and managing partner of O2X.
“We implement human performance programs, performance optimization programs into the tactical community,” said La Reau, who was a Navy SEAL. “We tackle occupational challenges within these tactical communities, things like sleep disruption, mental health, physical aspects, injuries — essentially, the things that impact the readiness, resilience, and sometimes even the retention of these units … or DOD as a whole.”
In the Navy, the emphasis on human performance came from a study following the 2017 crashes of the USS Fitzgerald and USS John S. McCain. The crashes killed 17 sailors. The study found the crews were overtaxed, fatigued and stressed.
The service turned to O2X to look at these human factors and develop a program to address some of these specific problems within the surface warfare community. “We bring on-site specialists that come with a program and a methodology,” La Reau said in an interview. “We do skills-based training and education. The education is … pretty critical for people to be self-aware about their own individual performance.”
The company has tested the program with crews aboard the USS Manchester, a littoral combat ship based in San Diego. They’re getting ready to expand the program to work with the crews of the destroyer USS Preble (DDG-88) and the littoral combat ships USS Mobile and USS Gabby Giffords beginning this month.
The company is based in Scituate, Massachusetts, and works with DOD components and fire and police departments around the nation.
The program treats service members like elite athletes. Elite athletes receive training not just to perform a physical feat, but to have the mental toughness and resilience to perform under pressure, La Reau said. Elite athletes follow a training regimen to ensure they have the right foods, the right amount of sleep, the right exercise regimen and the determination and willingness to follow the regimen. “The question we always ask is how do we give people the skill sets in order to persevere through challenges and emerge not only successful, but stronger,” he said.
The company tailors each program to the situation. They’re quite aware that what may work for an officer at a police department would not help a sailor aboard a destroyer. La Reau said the company has hundreds of specialists to teach personnel and to serve as “reach-back” assets for those deployed.
The program requires buy-in from the commanders and a commitment to ensure there is every effort to let service members participate no matter where they are. “The program has to be portable,” LaReau said. “It has to adapt to the changing situations people find themselves in, whether they are deployed, on a ship at sea, or in a shipyard undergoing maintenance.”
The company has another contract with the Massachusetts National Guard, and that also illustrates the need for an adaptable program. Guardsmen, of course, are from all over the state and have civilian jobs in addition to their military duties. O2X tailored the program for the 5,500 members of the Guard and had the staff to “scale” the effort.
To really capitalize on the program,, it needs to be part of every training event starting at entry level training and progressing through the ranks of both enlisted and officer ranks, La Reau said.
“We need to look at human performance as a program, not as a choose your own adventure,” he said. “You have to understand performance and all the factors that can affect you. Sustainment training needs to continue for the duration of your career. Truthfully, science changes, things adapt, people find better ways, and our operating environment will continue to adapt and change.”
“But the one factor is going to be the same … is that individual,” he continued. “We need to continue to adapt our program and continue to adapt it to meet the needs of the next conflict.”
Aircraft carriers are good for a lot of things. First and foremost there’s launching fighter jets into combat. Then there’s the force projection a carrier and its escort fleet bring to geopolitics. They’re even great for triumphant handshakes between rival fighter pilots after going into combat against “the enemy.” But basketball?
Seriously, who would even think about holding a college basketball game on top of an aircraft carrier?
Apparently the Pentagon would think about holding a college basketball game on top of an aircraft carrier. The service is officially reviving the Armed Forces Classic after skipping 2020 and 2021, with Gonzaga and Michigan State’s men’s basketball teams facing off onboard the USS Abraham Lincoln for Veterans Day.
The Nov. 11 game is the first one to be held on an aircraft carrier deck in a decade. Gonzaga and Michigan State will be only the sixth ever college basketball game played on such a ship. The Armed Forces Classic only started in 2012. A similar match up, the Carrier Classic, hosted games on carriers in 2011 (the inaugural event on the USS Carl Vinson) and 2012, but ended after that year, and until 2022, so did games on carriers.
The actual game set up has a lot of challenges. A flight deck is a much different surface than a regulation basketball court. As people noted after the 2012 Carrier Classic, past games have had incidents of players slipping or being interrupted by the wind, because again, they’re playing basketball outside on an aircraft carrier. Condensation on the deck caused delays and risked player injury. Even on non-carrier games there have been issues; the 2015 Armed Forces Classic at Marine Corps Base Smedley D. Butler in Japan had to be canceled at halftime due to seriously poor weather (it did not count for either teams’ records). Gonzaga was one of the teams at the 2015 game, so this is a chance for the Bulldogs to try and make up for that unfinished match. This year’s game will have the USS Abraham Lincoln at San Diego, so weather shouldn’t be a huge concern, but surely there are other places besides an aircraft carrier to play basketball. Right?
The other question is what does this do for the sailors on the ship? Presumably some will be able to watch the game, but it’s extra set up and work for the crew. The Navy is already facing serious morale issues across the service, desertions, suicide and there’s been an ongoing firing spree of commanders. Gonzaga versus Michigan State is sure to be a good game of basketball but it won’t address sailors’ serious concerns.
Also, if someone gets a game winning slam dunk, will they try to buzz the tower on foot to celebrate?
The latest on Task & Purpose
Want to write for Task & Purpose?Click here. Or check out the latest stories onour homepage.
Rep. Anthony Brown, a retired Army colonel, and former military lawyer, has introduced legislation that would require the Defense Department to review sentences for troops convicted of marijuana offenses as a first step in reforming the military’s justice system.
“As states around the country and the House take steps to reform our approach to cannabis, we need to ensure the military justice system reflects those changes,” Brown, a Democratic Congressman for Maryland, wrote in a statement to Task & Purpose. “Today, cannabis-related offenses are treated harshly in comparison with other comparable offenses. These disparities in punishment disproportionately impact service members of color.”
Even though states such as Minnesota and Colorado have taken steps toward decriminalizing marijuana, the drug remains on the federal schedule of controlled substances. That means troops can face up to two years in prison and a dishonorable discharge if they are convicted of possessing less than 30 grams of marijuana. They can also be separated from the military through nonjudicial punishment if they test positive for using marijuana.
“The maximum sentence for distribution and or possession of marijuana above 30 grams is a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years,” said Navy Cmdr. Nicole Schwegman, a Pentagon spokeswoman. “An additional 5 years can be added to the sentence if the accused is on duty as a sentinel or lookout; on board a vessel or aircraft used by or under the control of the armed forces; in or at a missile launch facility used by or under the control of the armed forces; while receiving special pay under 37 U.S.C. § 310; in time of war; or in a confinement facility used by or under the control of the armed forces.”
Brown has offered an amendment to the House version of the Fiscal 2023 National Defense Authorization Act that would require the Military Justice Review Panel to recommend “appropriate sentencing ranges for offenses involving the use and possession of marijuana” under Title 10 of the U.S. Code — the compilation of federal statutes. The amendment does not apply to nonjudicial punishments.
Subscribe to Task & Purpose Today. Get the latest in military news, entertainment, and gear in your inbox daily.
Specifically, the Military Justice Review Panel would have to compare the Uniform Code of Military Justice punishments for marijuana use with sentences for offenses involving alcohol. The panel would also have to look at “the overall burden on the military justice system” that the Defense Department’s current approach to marijuana offenses imposes.
“My amendment doesn’t change current law, but what it does do is require our armed services to review and provide recommendations for potential reform,” Brown said. “This is an important step forward in our much broader effort of reforming our military justice system and ensuring our armed services reflect the values of our country.”
It is far from certain whether Brown’s proposal will be included in the final version of the National Defense Authorization Act, which must be passed by both the House and Senate. Typically, both bodies of Congress hash out differences between bills in a conference committee, where negotiators determine which amendments to keep and which ones to eliminate.
Brown’s amendment comes amid a broader debate between some members of Congress and other federal officials, who feel the military should treat marijuana the same way as it does beer, and members of the national security community, who believe that marijuana use leads to bigger security problems, said Daniel Meyer, the managing partner of the Tully Rinckey law firm’s office in Washington, D.C.
“Security officers, for the most part, are drawn from that tiny, tiny fraction of the American population which has not smoked marijuana,” Meyer told Task & Purpose. “The bottom line is: Illegal drug use is an indicator of who will violate rules. And if you’re a rule-breaker in taking drugs, then — the logic goes — you’re a rule-breaker when it comes to security regulations, and that’s a predictor of who’s going to be the next Ed Snowden.”
On the other side of the argument, advocates for legalizing marijuana — who are not in the military — believe the U.S. government has a double standard for marijuana and alcohol; “And that because we have a culture that kind of winks at violations of alcohol-related transgressions, that we should be winking based on marijuana,” Meyer said.
The battle about decriminalizing marijuana for troops and other federal employees does not fall along typical partisan lines, Meyer said. Members of the House of Representatives have typically been more supportive of the idea than senators, and President Joe Biden has proven to be more conservative about marijuana than Former Presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama.
Meanwhile, federal employees have become confused as some states legalize marijuana while the federal government has not, Meyer said.
“They end up taking medicinal marijuana and end up with a security problem,” Meyer said. “That’s affecting service members as well as civilians.”
Brown’s proposed review of the military justice system has earned praise from VoteVets, a liberal veterans group.
“Anthony Brown has long been a strong voice for ensuring the military justice system is fair and equitable for all service members, from this amendment to championing the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act,” Mary Kaszynski, director of government relations for VoteVets, told Task & Purpose. “We should always be looking for possible improvements to the military justice system, which this amendment does. VoteVets is proud to support his leadership.”
For Brown, the main issue is making sure that all troops are treated equally under the law.
“Our service members deserve a military justice system that is fair and provides equal justice,” Brown said. “For too long we’ve seen reforms delayed in our efforts to address racial bias, sexual assault, and other deficiencies that impacted readiness, unit cohesion and the lives of the men and women who bravely serve. This year’s National Defense Authorization Act takes an important step forward in recognizing that our military’s current approach to cannabis in the Uniform Code of Military Justice is outdated and in need of revisiting.”
The latest on Task & Purpose
Want to write for Task & Purpose?Click here. Or check out the latest stories onour homepage.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/mco/EM5C4WHCRRGNDGYSBJ44OTFWNM.jpg)
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/mco/6EWEEIYKRRA6RFJSAIKPUTMMRU.jpg)
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/mco/BQUVTAX27NEHRF2ZWHEJDBZUFA.jpg)
