You think the admiral was on the ship with them?  Really? Dude, the commanding officer of a ship is also the highest ranking person on the ship.  I have no idea why you think an admiral was on the ship, but I'll ask sibling. On the "unsecured email" claim, I will ask.  I don't believe this is true. But even if it is, the guy sacrificed his career for the sailors.    You are certainly entitled to think what you like about it.  But if my sibling was on that ship during this fiasco, I would be happy with what Crozier did to save those sailors. Again, my opinion and you're certainly entitled to yours. And I do see your point.  I think that in 99% of circumstances your point is the correct one. But there will always exist hypothetical scenarios in which "breaking chain of command" is the right thing to do.  Take for instance the scenario where soldiers are ordered to fire on their own people.  Should they break chain of command or not? While this isn't that same scenario, it is a scenario in which a similar moral choice had to be made. Lastly, the quote my sibling gave me: "it's not the critic who counts, it's the man in the arena." That quote was about you - right now - in this situation. And again, it is possible to hold the belief that was Crozier did and what SecNav did in response - were both right choices. I tend to lean that way, which means I don't necessarily disagree with you.  It's just that I believe Crozier did the right thing in the sense of a higher calling and I don't think it's right that his name is dragged through the mud for it.