[jude24]

This article is pretty accurate. The tragedy of Vietnam is that it alienated the universities and the military, making each suspicious of the other. Professors who know nothing of war pontificate on the evilness of the military, while generals are bereft of the cultural context that academics can provide.

Thankfully, there have been overtures to try to bridge that gap. The military has been soliciting the input of cultural anthropologists, for instance, in order to better understand the cultures of Iraq and Afghanistan. Universities, on the other hand, are starting to solicit the opinions of men like Gen. Patraeus for their perspective.

[JasonC]

We are a long long way from having serious military historians engaging in serious analytical through about strategy in our universities. Right now it happens only in the army and naval war colleges and in a few think tanks. A couple of dozen political scientists who focus on international relations also have things to say about it.

This is a subject of profound importance that ought to be as science as developed as economics by now, and in higher education today it is less developed than theories of mating rituals in some obscure tribe no one has ever heard of, out in the Amazon jungle somewhere.

Which is cultural and intellectual suicide...

[Grizzled Bear]

Professors who know nothing of war pontificate on the evilness of the military, while generals are bereft of the cultural context that academics can provide.

---

You cannot receive a commission as an officer unless you have a Batchelor’s degree. Some go through a Service Academy (i.e., The Air Force Academy or Citadel). Some go through a college ROTC program. Some get a degree and apply for OTS.

The lack of understanding is not on the Military side.

“An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
An’ Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool — you bet that Tommy sees!”

[bluetone006]

"while generals are bereft of the cultural context that academics can provide."

Ummmm how do you figure that?