Why Did A Sailor Burn Down The USS Bonhomme Richard?

Read Time:3 Minute, 9 Second

The dramatic fire that destroyed the USS Bonhomme Richard was, according to the Navy, allegedly started by a sailor. While the sailor’s idenity has not been revealed, and formal court martial has yet to be announced, it appears this was an act of sabotage. Moreover, their is evidenced of 3 different fires on theee different vessels in San Diego over a 15 month period prior to this major fire.

“The sailor was a member of Bonhomme Richard’s crew at the time and is accused of starting the fire,” Cmdr. Sean Robertson, a U.S. 3rd Fleet spokesperson in San Diego, said in a statement.

The charges “were brought forth against a Navy sailor in response to evidence found during the criminal investigation into the fire started on USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) on July 12, 2020.” The charges against the seaman apprentice are aggravated arson under Article 126 of the Unifrom Code of Military Justice and hazarding a vessel under Article 110.

“Evidence collected during the investigation is sufficient to direct a preliminary hearing in accordance with due process under the military justice system,” Robertson said.

“Vice Adm. Steve Koehler, who commands 3rd Fleet, is considering court-martial charges and has directed a preliminary hearing at which an impartial hearing officer will make determinations and recommendations required by the UCMJ prior to any further trial proceedings – including whether or not there is probable cause to believe an offense has been committed and to offer a recommendation as to the disposition of the case.”

The sailor, a Seaman Apprentice, had been held in custody at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, Calif., before being released in November. At this time they are not in custody.

Pictured above- Federal firefighters assess damage in the hangar bay aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) on July 15, 2020. US Navy Photo

What could some of the motives be? Some possibilities include a sailor disgruntled by the stress of being 2 years in dry dock and facing a deployment, a stressful scenario for many sailors. It could also be more ideological, ranging from right to leftwing radicalism, or even anger over the Navy’s constant and distracting “diversity training” which is clearly ideological brainwashing rather than useful instruction.

One possibility is that the Navy has a simmering problem with morale. We have already seen reports that morale is low, largely effected by the obsession of the command with convincing sailord to “bow to the rainbow” rather than focusing on combat readiness. The ability of sailors today to fight their ships is decidedly decreased over what it was 20 years ago.

This could either cause an angry reaction that, well not at all justified, is somewhat predictable. In that case, if indeed the sailor was disgruntled about the rainbow fascist indoctrination, the likely results could range from cover-up to conceal the problem to exploitation of the crime to double-down on the rainbow fascist indoctrination.

In the event the crime was motivated by leftwing or Islamist ideology, the true nature will be concealed with a focus on the sailor’s mental health.

The outstanding question is whether the Navy, in part through its obsession with ideological indoctrination, is brewing a massive morale problem that could lead to such acts of sabotage. This could either be a result of sailors’ trained to essentially hate their own country may be radicalized or because angry sailors rejecting ideological indoctrination lash out by committing crimes like this.

The opacity of the process by which this has been investigated and the fact the identity of the sailor is concealed and formal charges (as in a court martial) not brought, leads one to believe the actual circumstances and motive surrounding this incident are not useful to the Navy brass’s narrative.