[Wolfie]

Ha! Wars aren’t all that complex. The perfect job for the military. The ONLY job for the military. Nation Building? Not so much.

[ThePatriotsFlag]

As a “side note” to this circus. I’ve been reading the McCrystal was really a far-left lib. Voted for Obama, the Rules of Engagement were his, the “medal” for not shooting, etc. So it is starting to look like Obama put one of his “buds” in there and as all libs do, the guy’s head exploded and now Obama goes with someone he can trust ... a “conservative” chosen once by Bush. At first I thought firing McCrystal was a mistake ... but the more I read, the more it looks like a good idea and that it will be darned good for our troops and their morale. IMHO.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Perhaps they should cease looking at credentials and pay closer attention to abilities.

[rellimpank]

—probably oversimplifying, but peacetime produces bureaucrats—wars have to be fought by warriors, with the bureaucrats sorted out and discarded—look at what Lincoln had to go through before he got to U.S. Grant-—

[MinuteGal]

"What is wrong with the system that produces top generals?"

First of all, this sentence appears wrong....perhaps the writer means "what is wrong with the system that is producing such turnover in top military officers?"

Second, it's not the system, Virginia. It's the PC that now rules the defense of our nation, causing premature retirements, resignations and out-of-the-ordinary behavior in the officer corps.

Real warriors at the top will not accept indefensible rules of engagement, defeatism, insufficient funding and deployment numbers, slanders against their troops, civilian micro-management plus a traitorous State Department and a kissy-ass Defense Department.....and medals awarded to individual military for "exercising reasonable restraint" in LETHAL BATTLE.

Other freepers can add to this list as you will.

Leni

[Future Snake Eater]

Gasp! Say it ain’t so! A dozen people through three major commands in a nine-year period? We’re doomed!

Casey and McChrystal sucked, their removals were good. The rest is just standard command turnover, it’s not a huge deal. This article is much ado about nothing.

[ETL]

"only two, Gen. David H. Petraeus and Gen. Ray Odierno, are widely praised as having mastered the complex mixture of skills that running America's wars demands. "

Clinton Spars With Petraeus on Credibility
September 12, 2007

WASHINGTON — Senator Clinton squared off yesterday with her possible challenger for the White House in 2012, General David Petraeus, and came closer than any of her colleagues to calling the commander of the multinational forces in Iraq a liar.

Using blunter language than any other Democrat in the last two days, Mrs. Clinton told General Petraeus that his progress report on Iraq required "a willing suspension of disbelief." ..."

http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-spars-with-petraeus-on-credibility/62426/

[lt.america]

My .02:

Plucking officers early has unintended consequences. Immediately after 9/11 in Afghanistan, what went unnoticed was the amount of Bn Cmdrs getting relieved. The common thread was that most of these guys experienced accelerated promotions in the mid to late 90’s due to shortages of Majors. They missed those key developmental assignments along the way to command.

Trying to look at Petraeus’ career path and apply it to the rest of the military is folly as well. Petraeus would have risen to the top regardless. He was the honor graduate in about every school he attended (of note: Command and General Staff College where the Army used to only hand select the best and brightest to attend; now it is the “No Major Left Behind” mentality that permeates so much of society today).

Lastly, I would not consider all of the Generals in the article “failed”. Franks did not anticipate an insurgency with the ferocity that was experienced (no one else did either). Casey did a fine job of building Iraq's security apparatus, which set the table for Petraeus to institute the surge. Sanchez seemed to be adrift though. Not sure if there was any lasting contribution he made to the effort.

[jetson]

We are at a vulnerable point and the Soviets and Chinese are just waiting for a big move to break our legs.

[Condor51]

What is wrong with the system that produces top generals?

Well, for one it is my understanding the The Army War College *recently* STOPPED making Sun Tzu's, The Art of War, mandatory reading and study. For decades and decades this Book was SOP, but *someone* decided it might somehow offend *someone* (hint-hint).

And the thing is the tenets of Sun Tzu have never been wrong -- ever, not in 2,500 years. Go back in history and the winning side always followed what Sun Tzu had written - without even knowing it.

Sun Tzu's most basic tenet of winning is this:

If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.
(but) If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril.

And IMHO right now 'we' are in scenario #2. We don't 'know ourselves' and we sure as hell don't 'know the enemy'. As in; You can't win the 'hearts an minds' of people stuck in the year 1132. They understand one thing -- Military Strength and dead bodies. Things like 'negotiating' is a sign of weakness.

Or inane actions like trying to make nice-nice with some crazed midget porn addict in NK, or trying to 'talk sense' with a whack job in Iran who awaits the 12th Imam and world wide destruction.

So given today's climate (no pun) I suggest EVERYONE read The Art of War, and study it. Every Library was a copy. Or buy one for about $12.00 on Amazon. And a B&N "Classic Edition" is only $22.00 (that's what I have). And it's even available on line for FREE₍₁₎

(1) If you have the ink & printing paper download and print it out. Its only 13 short chapters

[Candor7]

The balance between fighting generals and the politically correct paper pushing a$$ lickers is out of whack. Obama is purg8ng the fighting generals in a slow internat war of attrition. You are against gays in military, well you find yourself getting crappy assignments. You dislike the Olsamification of our military..well you get posted to a remote place like Northern Alaska.

Obama will replace the fighting generals with little fascist puppets who will have no hesitation in acting AGAINST Israel and patriotic America

Its the Barry Soetoro purge

[OldNavyVet]

What is wrong with the system that produces top generals?

There is nothing wrong with our military academies.

What is really wrong is the political system that allows unvetted creatures to pass through unguarded electoral gates.

Secondarily wrong is the fact that far too many Americans are careless when it comes to voting.

[csmusaret]

A point that is lost on or ignored by many: Obama has been Commander in Chief for eighteen months, and in Afghanistan he is already on his third commander.

[sportutegrl]

Not mentioned in this article is that Obama replaced the existing commander with McChrystal in the first place. A purely political move, IMO, that is not usually done with a new president. If there is ‘rapid turnover’ at the top, it seems to be Obama’s fault.

[xzins]

What is wrong with the system that produces top generals?

Nothing. Been this way in every real war. It's war itself that shows who can be a wartime commander. How many did Lincoln go through before he found one that worked?

That's why there's a promotion system.