Religious Bigotry at West Point (?)

Good. This guy was a dirtbag as a cadet and knew what he was signing up for when he signed his committment. He chose to 1. drop out early and 2. run to the media with baseless accusations. I have an incredibly hard time believing that he could not have made it another five months after "surviving" for more than three years here.

Sorry bud, you knowingly violated your contract. It's as simple as that.
 
Something is as clear as mud in this case. Truly, confused.

If this cadet could not commission because of a medical issue, yet, had he stayed (which, obviously, he didn't) and graduated, his degree essentially would have been "free" anyways. I'm confused on why the Army is going to possibly recoup. Wouldn't it just make sense to cut the losses?

While the DoA or USMA might want to make a point by conducting this investigation, I can't imagine this is good publicity -- why not just let this guy and the issue drop?
 
Something is as clear as mud in this case. Truly, confused.

If this cadet could not commission because of a medical issue, yet, had he stayed (which, obviously, he didn't) and graduated, his degree essentially would have been "free" anyways. I'm confused on why the Army is going to possibly recoup. Wouldn't it just make sense to cut the losses?

While the DoA or USMA might want to make a point by conducting this investigation, I can't imagine this is good publicity -- why not just let this guy and the issue drop?

Why did Eisenhower and the US military decide to execute the deserter Eddie Slovik during the Battle of the Bulge when death sentences hadn't been used since the Civil War? It was simply to make a point in trying to reduce the number of desertions at that critical point during the war. In this situation the former cadet went public with grievous accusations against the SA and the military wants to make an example. I don't really see this as bad publicity, just a opportunity for the SA to reaffirm the severity and repercussions after signing a contract. This guy had quite a bit of time to drop and he decides to do it within the last 5 months as a cadet. I mean really?
 
While the DoA or USMA might want to make a point by conducting this investigation, I can't imagine this is good publicity -- why not just let this guy and the issue drop?

I think defending the academy from baseless accusations makes for better publicity than giving the accuser a free pass
 
I don't think this was big media event for West Point (please correct me if I am wrong) and a simple PAO press release could have defended USMA (which was done) and then let the issue just drop and not give this guy any more attention. By now requiring him to possibly pay back, he gets more attention, the pot is stirred again, a lawsuit is being threatened, DoD/DoA is going to have to defend their case (man-hours/cost), all over money that might have never even been asked to be re-coup'd due to his medical disqualification. I get the defense on principals, but I would just think this isn't one fighting for, especially when it really didn't shine a bad spotlight on West Point. It really doesn't make a point, because the number of medically disqualified cadets in a similar position is very small. I think those that ARE medically qualified and have reached their 2/C year know the ramifications pretty well.
 
Back
Top