Admiral Steve Abbot U.S. Navy, Retired

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Admiral Steve Abbot U.S. Navy, Retired Admiral Abbot is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society, a private, non-profit aid society dedicated to assisting Sailors, Marines and their families. Until June, 2003, he served as the Acting Homeland Security Advisor to the President, having served as the Deputy Homeland Security Advisor under Governor Tom Ridge. Admiral Abbot’s last military assignment was Deputy Commander in Chief, U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany. He oversaw the daily activities of a Unified Command with an area of responsibility encompassing 89 countries and more than 13 million square miles. Born in Pensacola, Florida, Admiral Abbot graduated from the United States Naval Academy in June 1966. His graduate studies include Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar and the Program for Senior Officials in National Security at Harvard University. Admiral Abbot also completed U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School and Naval Nuclear Power training. Admiral Abbot enjoyed many assignments in his 34 year Navy career, including Commanding Officer of USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71) from February 1990 until August 1992, a period that included Operation DESERT STORM. Admiral Abbot then served as the THEODORE ROOSEVELT Battle Group Commander while assigned as Commander, Carrier Group EIGHT, and as Commander, Joint Task Force 120. Admiral Abbot also served as Commander, U.S. SIXTH Fleet and Commander, NAVAL Striking and Support Forces, Southern Europe. During this period he was Joint Task Force Commander of Operation SILVER WAKE, the non-combatant evacuation of Albania. Admiral Abbot and his wife, Marjorie, live in Arlington, VA. They have three sons, LCDR Spencer Abbot on duty with VFA-37 in Oceana, VA, Sebastian Abbot with the Associated Press in Cairo, Egypt, and LT Matt Abbot on duty with VT-22 in Kingsville, TX. October, 2008 .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

AUGUST 2021 May 2019: Admiral Sir Timothy P. Fraser
ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 May 2019: Admiral Sir Timothy P. Fraser: Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, May 2019 June 2019: Admiral Sir Antony D. Radakin: First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, June 2019 (11/1965; 55) VICE-ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 February 2016: Vice-Admiral Sir Benjamin J. Key: Chief of Joint Operations, April 2019 (11/1965; 55) July 2018: Vice-Admiral Paul M. Bennett: to retire (8/1964; 57) March 2019: Vice-Admiral Jeremy P. Kyd: Fleet Commander, March 2019 (1967; 53) April 2019: Vice-Admiral Nicholas W. Hine: Second Sea Lord and Deputy Chief of the Naval Staff, April 2019 (2/1966; 55) Vice-Admiral Christopher R.S. Gardner: Chief of Materiel (Ships), April 2019 (1962; 58) May 2019: Vice-Admiral Keith E. Blount: Commander, Maritime Command, N.A.T.O., May 2019 (6/1966; 55) September 2020: Vice-Admiral Richard C. Thompson: Director-General, Air, Defence Equipment and Support, September 2020 July 2021: Vice-Admiral Guy A. Robinson: Chief of Staff, Supreme Allied Command, Transformation, July 2021 REAR ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 July 2016: (Eng.)Rear-Admiral Timothy C. Hodgson: Director, Nuclear Technology, July 2021 (55) October 2017: Rear-Admiral Paul V. Halton: Director, Submarine Readiness, Submarine Delivery Agency, January 2020 (53) April 2018: Rear-Admiral James D. Morley: Deputy Commander, Naval Striking and Support Forces, NATO, April 2021 (1969; 51) July 2018: (Eng.) Rear-Admiral Keith A. Beckett: Director, Submarines Support and Chief, Strategic Systems Executive, Submarine Delivery Agency, 2018 (Eng.) Rear-Admiral Malcolm J. Toy: Director of Operations and Assurance and Chief Operating Officer, Defence Safety Authority, and Director (Technical), Military Aviation Authority, July 2018 (12/1964; 56) November 2018: (Logs.) Rear-Admiral Andrew M.
[Show full text]
B-177516 Enlisted Aide Program of the Military Services
I1111 lllllIIIlllll lllll lllll lllllIll11 Ill1 Ill1 LM096396 B-177576 Department of Defense BY THE C OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 200548 B-177516 To the President of the Senate and the c Speaker of the House of Representatives This is our report on the enlisted aide program of the \ military services, Department of Defense. C‘ / We made our review pursuant to the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 53), and the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 67). We are sending copies of this report to the Director, Office of Management and Budget; the Secretary of Defense; the Secretar- ies of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; and the Commandant of the Marine Corps. Comptroller General of the United States Contents Page DIGEST 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 5 2 HISTORICAL AND LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND OF THE ENLISTED AIDE PROGRAM 8 Army and Air Force 8 Navy and Marine Corps 9 Legal aspects of using enlisted aides as servants 10 Summary 10 3 RECRUITMENT, ASSIGNMENT, AND TRAINING OF ENLISTED AIDES 12 Recruitment and assignment 12 Army training 13 Marine Corps training 15 Navy and Air Force training 15 4 MILITARY SERVICES' POSITIONS ON THE NEED FOR ENLISTED AIDES 16 Statements of the services regarding need for enlisted aides 16 Required hosting of official functions 18 Enlisted aides assigned by officer's rank 19 5 DUTIES AND TASKS OF ENLISTED AIDES 20 \ Major duties and tasks 20 Duties connected with entertaining 22 Feelings of enlisted aides about the the tasks assigned them 23 6 ENLISTED AIDES'
[Show full text]
William D. Sullivan, Navy Vice Admiral Bill Sullivan Graduated from Florida
William D. Sullivan, Navy Vice Admiral Bill Sullivan graduated from Florida State University in June 1972. He received his Navy commission in September 1972 following graduation from Officer Candidate School in Newport, Rhode Island. During his 37 years of active duty, Vice Admiral Sullivan served in a variety of sea-going assignments including cruiser, destroyer and frigate class surface ships and aircraft carrier strike group staffs. He commanded the guided missile destroyer USS SAMPSON (DDG 10)during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, deploying to the Red Sea while enforcing United Nations sanctions on Iraq. From 1997 to 1999 he commanded the Aegis guided missile cruiser USS COWPENS (CG 63), deploying to the Persian Gulf and executing Tomahawk strike operations against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Vice Admiral Sullivan has served in a variety of staff positions. Joint assignments include Director for Pacific Operations on the Joint Staff (J-3), Director for Strategic Plans and Policy (J- 5) at U.S. Pacific Command and Vice Director, Strategic Plans and Policy (J-5) on the Joint Staff. From 1999 to 2001 he served as Commander, U.S. Naval Forces, Korea. Prior to his retirement from active duty, Vice Admiral Sullivan served as the U.S. Representative to the NATO Military Committee, NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium. Vice Admiral Sullivan earned a Masters Degree in National Security Studies at Georgetown University in 1990 and a Masters Degree in National Security Affairs at the National War College in 1994. Vice Admiral Sullivan is a member of the Veterans Advisory Board for the Florida State University Veterans Legacy Complex which will house student-veteran programs, the Army and Air Force ROTC offices, and the archives and offices of the Institute on World War II and the Human Experience.
[Show full text]
Developing Senior Navy Leaders: Requirements for Flag Officer
THE ARTS This PDF document was made available CHILD POLICY from www.rand.org as a public service of CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION the RAND Corporation. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit NATIONAL SECURITY research organization providing POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges SUBSTANCE ABUSE facing the public and private sectors TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY around the world. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND National Defense Research Institute View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Developing Senior Navy Leaders Requirements for Flag Officer Expertise Today and in the Future Lawrence M.
[Show full text]
Rank in the Navy
RANK IN THE NAYY. SPEECH OF HON. AARON F. STEVENS, OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, January 23, 1871. WASHINGTON, D. C. : JUDD & DETWEILER, PRINTERS AND PUBLISHERS 1871, SPEECH The House having under consideration the bill (H. R. No. 1832) toregulaterank in the Navy of the United States, and for other purposes— Mr. STEVENS said: Mr. Speaker : As the gentleman from Pennsylvania does not in- dicate the amount of time which he wishes to occupy, I will proceed to state generally the provisions of the bill, and to some extent its history, after which I will cheerfully yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I am quite sure that the gentlemen of this House, whose attention I shall have the honor-to secure, will not confess themselves strangers to the question raised by the provisions of this bill. Nor will they, I think, treat it as a trivial or unimportant question, connected as it is with one of the principal branches of the public service. I do not seek to disguise the fact that within the past two years the regu- lation of rank in the Navy has become a question of more public importance than has ever been conceded to it in former times outside of those immediately interested in its settlement. It is but truth to say that no question of military organization and detail has ever, except in time of war, excited so much interest as that to which I now desire to call the attention of the House, and which this bill seeks to regulate and fix upon a just and permanent basis.
[Show full text]
Historical Perspective on Meade's Actions Following the Battle Of
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON MEADE'S ACTIONS FOLLOWING THE BATTLE OF GETTYSBURG Terrence L. Salada and John D. Wedo Pursuit and destruction of a defeated army is an often unfulfilled wish of both generals and history. Accounts of battles sometimes offer a postscript similar to this: "But General (or Admiral) So-and-So did not pursue and destroy the enemy thereby losing an opportunity to end the war then and there." In many cases, the battles are tremendous victories, such as Borodino in the Napoleonic wars, Shiloh in the American Civil War (referred to hereafter as simply the Civil War), and Midway and El Alamein in World War II (WW2). This is particularly true for the Battle of Gettysburg in the Civil War and the Union commander, Major General George Meade. For almost no other battle is the criticism of no quick pursuit and destruction more injurious to the reputation of the victorious commander. This paper first presents a summary of the arguments pro and con for a pursuit after Gettysburg. It then presents the core of the paper, a meta-analysis of five decisive victories without pursuit and the conditions leading to those decisions. These battles span roughly 130 years, occur on land and sea, and include three wars. The objective is to present Meade's decision in a historical context both in situ (discussing only that battle) and in comparison with other such decisions. The goal is to ascertain whether historiography has been more critical of Meade than others. The hope is that examination 1 of the actions of other commanders of great victories will open the door for a different interpretation of Meade's actions.
[Show full text]
Michigan Department of State Police Post Commander / Assistant Post Commander List
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE POST COMMANDER / ASSISTANT POST COMMANDER LIST POST ASST. POST POST ADDRESS CITY / ZIP PHONE FAX COMMANDER COMMANDER Capt. Steve O'Neil 1st DHQ - Lansing 7119 N. Canal Rd. Lansing 48913 517-322-1912 517-322-0675 Insp. Lisa Rish Lansing #11 7119 N. Canal Rd. Lansing 48913 517-322-1907 517-322-0483 F/Lt. Dietrich Speights Lt. Aric Dowling Brighton #12 4337 Buno Rd. Brighton 48114 810-227-1051 810-229-6770 F/Lt. Joel Allen Lt. Michael Sura Jackson #13 3401 Cooper St. Jackson 49201 517-780-4580 517-782-0120 F/Lt. Kevin Rod Lt. Andy Stoner Monroe #14 300 Jones Ave. Monroe 48161 734-242-3500 734-242-8928 Vacant Lt. Steve Borello Capt. Phil Menna 3050 W. Grand Blvd. 2nd DHQ - Detroit Detroit 48202 313-456-0020 313-456-0022 Insp. Greg Morenko Suite 1-700 Insp. Robert Weimer Lt. Sarah Krebs Metro North #21 14350 W. Ten Mile Rd. Oak Park 48237 248-584-5740 248-584-5783 F/Lt. Keyonn Whitfield Lt. Daniel Drake Lt. Brett Beardslee Lt. Fahad Qureshi Metro South #22 12111 Telegraph Rd. Taylor 48180 734-287-5000 734-287-5027 F/Lt. Vacant Lt. Lamarr Johnson Lt. Lance Couturier Capt. Ryan Pennell 3rd DHQ - Flint G-4495 Corunna Rd. Flint 48532 810-733-9380 810-733-9399 Insp. Steve Sipes Insp. Todd Mapes Lt. James Lang Tri-City Post #31 2402 Salzburg Rd. Freeland 48623 989-495-5555 989-495-5565 F/Lt. Todd Parsons Lt. Jasen Sack West Branch #32 2021 Fox Run West Branch 48661 989-345-0956 989-345-2216 F/Lt.
[Show full text]
US Military Ranks and Units
US Military Ranks and Units Modern US Military Ranks The table shows current ranks in the US military service branches, but they can serve as a fair guide throughout the twentieth century. Ranks in foreign military services may vary significantly, even when the same names are used. Many European countries use the rank Field Marshal, for example, which is not used in the United States. Pay Army Air Force Marines Navy and Coast Guard Scale Commissioned Officers General of the ** General of the Air Force Fleet Admiral Army Chief of Naval Operations Army Chief of Commandant of the Air Force Chief of Staff Staff Marine Corps O-10 Commandant of the Coast General Guard General General Admiral O-9 Lieutenant General Lieutenant General Lieutenant General Vice Admiral Rear Admiral O-8 Major General Major General Major General (Upper Half) Rear Admiral O-7 Brigadier General Brigadier General Brigadier General (Commodore) O-6 Colonel Colonel Colonel Captain O-5 Lieutenant Colonel Lieutenant Colonel Lieutenant Colonel Commander O-4 Major Major Major Lieutenant Commander O-3 Captain Captain Captain Lieutenant O-2 1st Lieutenant 1st Lieutenant 1st Lieutenant Lieutenant, Junior Grade O-1 2nd Lieutenant 2nd Lieutenant 2nd Lieutenant Ensign Warrant Officers Master Warrant W-5 Chief Warrant Officer 5 Master Warrant Officer Officer 5 W-4 Warrant Officer 4 Chief Warrant Officer 4 Warrant Officer 4 W-3 Warrant Officer 3 Chief Warrant Officer 3 Warrant Officer 3 W-2 Warrant Officer 2 Chief Warrant Officer 2 Warrant Officer 2 W-1 Warrant Officer 1 Warrant Officer Warrant Officer 1 Blank indicates there is no rank at that pay grade.
[Show full text]
Equivalent Ranks of the British Services and U.S. Air Force
EQUIVALENT RANKS OF THE BRITISH SERVICES AND U.S. AIR FORCE RoyalT Air RoyalT NavyT ArmyT T UST Air ForceT ForceT Commissioned Ranks Marshal of the Admiral of the Fleet Field Marshal Royal Air Force Command General of the Air Force Admiral Air Chief Marshal General General Vice Admiral Air Marshal Lieutenant General Lieutenant General Rear Admiral Air Vice Marshal Major General Major General Commodore Brigadier Air Commodore Brigadier General Colonel Captain Colonel Group Captain Commander Lieutenant Colonel Wing Commander Lieutenant Colonel Lieutenant Squadron Leader Commander Major Major Lieutenant Captain Flight Lieutenant Captain EQUIVALENT RANKS OF THE BRITISH SERVICES AND U.S. AIR FORCE RoyalT Air RoyalT NavyT ArmyT T UST Air ForceT ForceT First Lieutenant Sub Lieutenant Lieutenant Flying Officer Second Lieutenant Midshipman Second Lieutenant Pilot Officer Notes: 1. Five-Star Ranks have been phased out in the British Services. The Five-Star ranks in the U.S. Services are reserved for wartime only. 2. The rank of Midshipman in the Royal Navy is junior to the equivalent Army and RAF ranks. EQUIVALENT RANKS OF THE BRITISH SERVICES AND U.S. AIR FORCE RoyalT Air RoyalT NavyT ArmyT T UST Air ForceT ForceT Non-commissioned Ranks Warrant Officer Warrant Officer Warrant Officer Class 1 (RSM) Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Warrant Officer Class 2b (RQSM) Chief Command Master Sergeant Warrant Officer Class 2a Chief Master Sergeant Chief Petty Officer Staff Sergeant Flight Sergeant First Senior Master Sergeant Chief Technician Senior Master Sergeant Petty Officer Sergeant Sergeant First Master Sergeant EQUIVALENT RANKS OF THE BRITISH SERVICES AND U.S.
[Show full text]
UC Riverside UC Riverside Previously Published Works
UC Riverside UC Riverside Previously Published Works Title A Tale of Two Missions: Mexican Military Police Patrols Versus High- Value Targeted Operations Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6345t7xv Journal ARMED FORCES & SOCIETY, 43(1) ISSN 0095-327X Author Pion-Berlin, David Publication Date 2017 DOI 10.1177/0095327X16631084 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Article Armed Forces & Society 2017, Vol. 43(1) 53-71 ª The Author(s) 2016 A Tale of Two Missions: Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0095327X16631084 Mexican Military Police journals.sagepub.com/home/afs Patrols Versus High-Value Targeted Operations David Pion-Berlin1 Abstract Latin American scholars often maintain that militaries should be kept out of internal security operations. Soldiers, they claim, are ill suited for these assignments, inevi- tably placing innocent civilians in harm’s way. This study instead argues that not all counternarcotic missions are the same. When a specific operation coincides with a military’s capabilities and proclivities, it can be conducted effectively and humanely. When there is a disconnect between the operation and the institution, there is a greater chance for mission failure and civilian casualties. Those differences are revealed in a comparative case study of the Mexican military’s crime patrols versus its targeted operations against cartel kingpins. It finds that while there are justifiable doubts about transforming soldiers into cops, it is also the case that soldiers can conduct themselves professionally and with restraint when they are tasked with assignments that conform more closely to their skills sets.
[Show full text]
Albert J. Baciocco, Jr. Vice Admiral, US Navy (Retired)
Albert J. Baciocco, Jr. Vice Admiral, U. S. Navy (Retired) - - - - Vice Admiral Baciocco was born in San Francisco, California, on March 4, 1931. He graduated from Lowell High School and was accepted into Stanford University prior to entering the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, in June 1949. He graduated from the Naval Academy in June 1953 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering, and completed graduate level studies in the field of nuclear engineering in 1958 as part of his training for the naval nuclear propulsion program. Admiral Baciocco served initially in the heavy cruiser USS SAINT PAUL (CA73) during the final days of the Korean War, and then in the diesel submarine USS WAHOO (SS565) until April of 1957 when he became one of the early officer selectees for the Navy's nuclear submarine program. After completion of his nuclear training, he served in the commissioning crews of three nuclear attack submarines: USS SCORPION (SSN589), as Main Propulsion Assistant (1959-1961); USS BARB (SSN596), as Engineer Officer (1961-1962), then as Executive Officer (1963- 1965); and USS GATO (SSN615), as Commanding Officer (1965-1969). Subsequent at-sea assignments, all headquartered in Charleston, South Carolina, included COMMANDER SUBMARINE DIVISION FORTY-TWO (1969-1971), where he was responsible for the operational training readiness of six SSNs; COMMANDER SUBMARINE SQUADRON FOUR (1974-1976), where he was responsible for the operational and material readiness of fifteen SSNs; and COMMANDER SUBMARINE GROUP SIX (1981-1983), where, during the height of the Cold War, he was accountable for the overall readiness of a major portion of the Atlantic Fleet submarine force, including forty SSNs, 20 SSBNs, and various other submarine force commands totaling approximately 20,000 military personnel, among which numbered some forty strategic submarine crews.
[Show full text]
On the Commander-In-Chief Power
Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2008 On the Commander-In-Chief Power David Luban Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 1026302 This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/598 http://ssrn.com/abstract=1026302 81 S. Cal. L. Rev. 477-571 (2008) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Constitutional Law Commons ON THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF POWER ∗ DAVID LUBAN BRADBURY: Obviously, the Hamdan decision, Senator, does implicitly recognize that we’re in a war, that the President’s war powers were triggered by the attacks on the country, and that [the] law of war paradigm applies. That’s what the whole case was about. LEAHY: Was the President right or was he wrong? BRADBURY: It’s under the law of war that we . LEAHY: Was the President right or was he wrong? BRADBURY: . hold the President is always right, Senator. —exchange between a U.S. Senator and a Justice Department 1 lawyer ∗ University Professor and Professor of Law and Philosophy, Georgetown University. I owe thanks to John Partridge and Sebastian Kaplan-Sears for excellent research assistance; to Greg Reichberg, Bill Mengel, and Tim Sellers for clarifying several points of American, Roman, and military history; to Marty Lederman for innumerable helpful and critical conversations; and to Vicki Jackson, Paul Kahn, Larry Solum, and Amy Sepinwall for helpful comments on an earlier draft.
[Show full text]