Military's officer corps: too political?

Christian Science Monitor ^ | May 28, 2004 edition | Brad Knickerbocker

[Leisler]

Let me be blunt. America is defended by Republicans. Liberals/leftist don't serve, they suck. Yeah, somewhere, some paper is going to find a lefty kid, but it is so rare as to be news.

[Riley]

Agree. People who actually give a crap about America, instead of indulging in risk-free theoretically-based bull-sessions in college, actually DO something about it.

I question the patriotism of ALL Liberals. No, I DENY it. None of you leftist assholes care a whit about this country. Put your money where your mouth is, as I have. Then we'll discuss.

[omega4412]

So the officer corps is almost as slanted against the Democrats as the press corps is slanted for the Democrats?

[Restorer]

"But no other president that I can remember has so tied his political fortunes to military success - not even Lincoln in the Civil War."

A serious contender for the idiotic statement of the week award.

[jwalsh07]

Of those surveyed, 64 percent identified with Republicans, 17 percent with Independents, and only 8 percent with Democrats.

What this proves is that the left is sitting in the war wagon and the right is humping it up the hill.

It is not a comment on the military, it is a comment on the left.

[mrsmith]

"Any "reporter" who would quote a credential-less know-nothing" like me is a joke!" 'says John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org'

[Bringbackthedraft]

""He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this." AMEN TO THAT!

[Leisler]

"..John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org'"

Why do I feel that Pike couldn't secure a gold cocktail purse from a bump and run by a hairy legged, stiletto pumped dwarf with a bad dye job, let alone the security of the world.

And another point. Why isn't he head of UniverseSecurity.org, instead of just the world. Why so humble?

[Leisler]

If it is fighting, making, doing, it is us. Leftist just pick up checks and bitch.

[Leisler]

Good catch. But don't be so cocky, there's still two days left, and there are millions of know-it-all, blovating leftist.

[Billthedrill]

Unprecedented? Good grief, does this reporter read history at all? How about a general named McClellan, who ran against his own president in time of war? Shall we speak of Washington, Jackson, W. Harrison, Taylor, Pierce, Grant, Hayes, Garfield, B. Harrison, and Eisenhower? They were all generals. HERE is a list of the military records of the Chief Executives - of them, only 12 did not serve in the military.

"They're a Praetorian guard who will take over" is one of the oldest arguments in American politics, older even than the Constitution. Instead, every one of them - every one of us who serves or served, took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. One hopes for a similar integrity from our political class.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping

[conshack]

I'll second that statement-for I too am one of them. Twenty years active duty and currently working for the Army. The vast majority of both career military and career civilian workforce are on the right(also correct) side of politics. Thank God !!

[conshack]

If liberals were capable of making tough decisions-as military officers MUST do-you'd find more of them in the military. But, as most of us know, they can't.......So

[RobbyS]

The Republican Party has been the party of choice for the military ever since the Civil War, reflecting the indifference to the military found among Democratic politicans. But FDR, Truman, JFK all ore or less rejected this point of view. Not until we get to McGovern, who was a socialist despite his own service in WWII, do we find a party hostile to the military. Clinton and Kerry are only typical of leaders who are at best ambivalent about military action. Zinni and other generals who served under Clinton simply reflect this ambivalence. They only want wars in which we have overwhelming preponderance and no casualties. So they agree to a military that is too msall to conduct anything except small wars and humanitarian assignments.

[NoDemocrat]

As a Captain in the Active Duty JAG Corps, I can attest to the overwhelming support for conservative idealogy in the Army. It's such a welcomed relief to encounter so many like-minded individuals.

[Terabitten]

Let me be blunt. America is defended by Republicans. Liberals/leftist don't serve, they suck.

That has to be the most accurate line I've heard all week. TRUTH, my FRiend, you speak truth.

The percentages they give, 64% Repub, 17%independent, 8% Dem, are for the Army overall. I served for eight years in the infantry and I can honestly say I never met a fellow officer (including minorities) who admitted to being a Democrat, much less being liberal. Come to think of it, I don't recall meeting a NCO above the rank of E5 who admitted to being a democrat or a liberal. In the combat arms, I'd guess the numbers are closer to 95% conservative.

[LibKill]

Sadly, my experience with officers is that they will do whatever they need to do to get promoted.

In nine years in the Marines I never saw an officer leave on a point of principle.

I did see a lot of Commanding Officers promote enlisted womyn over more qualified men because they were afraid of DACOWITS. I saw a lot of ass-kissers make Colonel because they would promote womyn no matter what. I saw one eminently qualified Colonel destroyed because he questioned the integrity of a 2nd Lt., who happened to be a well-connected womyn.

Fortunately, I got out before the KKKlintoon years.

I probably would have died from vomiting.

Officers like Douglas MacArthur, like George Patton, who dared to PUBLICLY disagree with the CINC over honor, over reality, are no more.

Oh, by the way. Before you flame me consider this. I made Corporal, and Sergeant, Meritoriously. In peacetime.

Flame away. I won't bother to answer.

[section9]

I love Republicans. I am one. And I love Republicans in uniform.

But there's something in my gut that tells me that political involvement among the Officer Corps is a profoundly corrosive thing. Marshall and Ike were political generals, within the service. Only after they had retired did they make their political preferences known. Marshall, for his part, became the greatest Secretary of State of the 20th Century, despite his preference for liberal Democratic politics. Ike became a moderately conservative Republican President, and his tenure was marked by peace and prosperity. I will stack Ike up against any postwar President (with the possible exception of Reagan, who actually won the Cold War) as the "greatest".

Each man remained rigorously devoted to civilian control of the military and noninvolvement in politics. WWII was a profoundly political war, but each man remained focused on his task. Neither individual was diverted by any attachment to "faction".

Non partisanship is the best approach for the professional officer corps. It remains so because, at bottom, the Corps must remain loyal first to the Constitution, then to the Country.

Faction falls way down there on the priority list.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Cannoneer No. 4]

the first extended US combat with live TV and soldiers on the ground sending home e-mails and digital photos

Soldiers' doubts build as duties begin to change course

Guardsmen complain about convoy assignment

Soldiers in Iraq too vulnerable, says Army specialist