4 co-equal chiefs? um no.
> 4 co-equal chiefs? um no. <
That’s a fair point in that the the various branches of the military are not co-equal in the defense of the nation. For example, the Army is much more important than is the Marines (no disrespect meant to the Marines).
However, a separation of powers is a good thing. So I’d rather see co-equal Chiefs than one Chairman who has most of the prestige and authority. Just my two cents, which isn’t worth much.
Exactly whoever wins the commander in chief trophy gets it for 1 year.
Why not co equal Chiefs, who answer to one appointed by the President as one who can be fired at will?