How a Democrat Can Get My Vote - Bash the Generals

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0706.tryon.html

How a Democrat Can Get My Vote
Bash the Generals
By Melissa Tryon



snip//


The difference between a good military leader and a bad one is simple: a good leader has strategic knowledge, tactical competence, and a dedication to troops and country over self; a bad one lacks such traits. The duty to advise civilian political leaders about military strategy requires moral courage. Generals must object to plans that are not militarily sound. Unfortunately, a lot of mediocre leaders are promoted based on their caution or staff work, adding to a self-perpetuating problem. Loyalty to the system matters a great deal for promotion; today’s generals pick tomorrow’s generals, and they often pick officers who look and think like they do. Unfortunately, this causes many good military leaders to flee. They don’t want the frustrations created by micromanagement, inattention to training, or unclear missions. (A 1999 study at Fort Benning, “Home of the Infantry” and notionally the heart of the Army, confirmed what most of us already knew: “leavers” are generally considered to be among the best officers—competent, innovative thinkers that the Army needs most.)

As the war in Iraq grinds on, we see the fruits of such trends. Bluntly put, there’s no escaping the role played by top military brass in getting us to this point. Nor can the brass avoid blame for understating the catastrophic implications of White House decisions for military readiness, training, supply, recruiting, medical systems, and overall morale. Even if civilian politicians didn’t know how to use their defense resources judiciously, you’d think that generals and admirals, who get paid over $100,000 a year to be the military’s far-seeing advocates, would have pointed out the serious disconnect between civilian visions and genuine military capabilities. They might have warned that if the military isn’t capable of fulfilling current missions without exhausting itself or instituting a draft, then the military is out of business: Not. Mission. Capable.

To be sure, some generals perform superbly, and some have even sacrificed their careers in order to voice unpopular thoughts. (Witness Eric Shinseki.) Also, every general has been steeped in military ethics emphasizing the importance of civilian control of the military, which makes voicing dissent a delicate matter that must always be weighed against respect for the Constitution. Nevertheless, for too many senior military officials, going along with poorly considered civilian plans has been justified in the name of respect for civilian control. It often looks more like careerism masquerading as principle.

When we see hypocrisy or weakness in leaders, we struggle to honor anything more than the courtesies demanded by rank. Over the last decade, Gen-X and Gen-Y soldiers and leaders have become disillusioned, looking up at a military hierarchy that seems more Office Space than Band of Brothers. With the military falling apart from the inside out, the last thing we need is undeserved praise heaped on the military senior leadership behind the status quo. Democrats should understand this.

Of course, that troops should have a say in choosing their commander-in-chief is in one sense bizarre. But that doesn’t mean they don’t embrace the opportunity. For any Democratic candidate genuinely interested in making inroads with the military, learning about the perspectives of enlisted soldiers and lower-ranking officers—not admirals and generals—will be essential. With any luck, such a candidate will come away convinced of the need for greater accountability from the upper ranks, echoing down through subordinate leaders and across to civilian counterparts. At the very least, he or she will begin to grasp the extent of the military’s problems today. And anyone who does that—and who can offer some hope of reenergizing the spirit of American service that the military represents—wins.






Captain Melissa Tryon, a Rhodes Scholar and graduate of West Point, is a veteran of the initial ground invasion of Iraq, in which she served in the 101st Airborne Division. She is currently an associate with the Truman National Security Project and a member of Disabled American Veterans, VoteVets, and Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America. The views expressed in this article are hers alone and do not represent the Department of Defense.

[patrice]

1. Not exactly the same thing, but . . .

Having been through the NCO Academy, I have to say it IS very true that there are two general classes of military careerists: the purely ambitious who abdicate all personal conscience to their "good ol' boys' club" and the Humans.

[yurbud]

2. Bush wants the kind of officers who fed the meatgrinder in Vietnam not the ones

who just got their bars before they were sent and learned the lessons.

Use the military for defense instead of as a foreign assets seizure program, and you could save a lot of money too.

China has no ability to project military power halfway around the world, but they are in no danger of being invaded either.