Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin treated for prostate cancer, developed severe infection, Pentagon reveals (www.cnbc.com)

submitted 5 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] SheeEttin@programming.dev 15 points 5 months ago

Pentagon officials also failed for two days last week to notify Austin’s second-in-command that he had transferred authority to her while he was in the ICU, and while she was in Puerto Rico.

That's the real goof. I don't really see a problem with the secdef being hospitalized and not immediately notifying the President. They need DoD stuff, they call on him, and if he's not available, for any reason, it should immediately fall to the deputy. The White House staff, and especially the deputy, should have been told.

Ultimately this just seems to have been a breakdown in communication, but even if war were declared, I don't think it would have been a significant issue. This is media hype bs to distract from real issues.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 4 points 5 months ago

Yeah, but this is a breakdown in communication that he should have initiated.

He shouldn't be fired for having cancer, but he should be fired for not managing the situation correctly.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 5 months ago

Yeah, this was an unprofessional fuckup from a position that should have zero fuckups, but it's not multi-day national news. I'm surprised he's not being fired, but if the president thinks this was a one time thing that won't happen again, that's fine.

[-] SheeEttin@programming.dev 3 points 5 months ago

I don't blame him, I blame his staff. A routine procedure, meh. But he goes into the ICU, his staff should be notifying the White House and the deputy, and probably the joint chiefs, among others.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 5 months ago

Another reason we shouldn't be having an entire government run by old farts.

His fucking cancer is literally a national security issue.

Sorry but if your health is going to compromise your position when you are Defense Secretary (or any other senior position): you shouldn't be in it.

The "senior" in "senior position" doesn't mean you need to be over 55 to apply.

[-] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

While I agree with the sentiment no his cancer is not a "national security issue". He has a deputy, he has staff. It's not like the defense department slams to a halt because he went to the hospital.

Also, as stated by others. Anyone can get cancer. Anyone can develop a sudden infection from surgery. Shit happens

[-] mean_bean279@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

I find it kind of frustrating that people want Austin held responsible when if he was undergoing surgery and then in ICU he might not have been awake or coherent to get someone else setup. Now, there should be a policy in place that says the minute he went in to ICU second in command should have taken over. I’m also not going to be mad the pentagon didn’t tell the public. That’s a national security issue that our adversaries could try to take advantage of.

[-] Buelldozer 1 points 5 months ago

Now, there should be a policy in place that says the minute he went in to ICU second in command should have taken over.

That policy DOES exist, the reason people are upset is because it wasn't followed so for at least 48 hours the Chain of Command was broken.

The job of SecDef is way way to fucking important for an amateur hour move like this.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 months ago

Also, as stated by others. Anyone can get cancer.

It might shock you how familiar I am with this. I'm not stupid, I'm just a guy on the internet with an opinion based on the fact that this knowledge of his complication didn't seem to be being passed on to, you know, important people who might need to know this information before he croaks suddenly.

I'm sorry that I've literally seen Senators die in office recently because these chucklefucks refuse to let go of their grip on power. It's literally an actual issue with our government.

[-] GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

I mean, you can get cancer at any age though. Sure, it's more likely when you're old, but excluding people with cancer from public positions seems weird.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 5 months ago

I guess, to be more clear, is that his cancer combined with the comorbidity of his age means he is way more likely to experience these kind of complications when it comes to surgery.

So yes, younger people with cancer wouldn't be disqualified from the same position.

[-] alilbee@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

But where do you draw the line in a way that wouldn't be heavily abused for political purposes? I'm not very interested in the idea of evaluating people's morbidity as a qualification for office. There are succession procedures and chains of authority to handle these things. It's one thing to argue about age's impact on current mental or physical faculties if those are inhibiting performance, but I do not want hypothetical deaths factoring in.

this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024

65 points (97.1% liked)

News

21721 readers

4944 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

Blackbeard@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world