severe system failure/ non adaptable
Yingling is looking with candor at the system that produces our military hierarchy. A system which focuses its officers to work for the fit rep and awards required for advancement with a known short rotation schedule.--- And at the High end with an obvious retirement bail out on or near the top philosophy ( Did IKe, Patton, Halsey, Bradley retire while the war continued?) It is only due to the multiple war rotations that this comes to light (only so many sugar coats can improve the taste of dry desert cake)
Ironiclly the first few responses to this very post confirm the pervasive mentality in the DOD that the subordinate will pay for speaking the truth.
"Proceedings" did a great peice on this topic a few years ago called Between Schilla and Carbdis --Odeseuss's Monsters on right and left---The Machine that directs an individual to WAR and the Enemy found there. Their conclusion --Few messengers to congress or the Pentagon will get wine from the table most get vinegar but that is why US Officers take an Oath to defend the Constitution as Primary allegance and obeying superior officers comes second or third if people are looking at the unlawful orders thing.
If Yingling does get parked it only confirms part of his point.
severe system failure Peace time officer selection may not win wars
I do not think he effectively made the case that a second language and or advanced degrees are infact what wins wars since his central fulcrum for failure is lack of integrity
As Duke and the academies have recently proven undergraduate and advanced degree programs have the integrity of the social fabric they attract.
Does anyone know how the Army has reacted so far?
Hello--I'm new to this site, but my name's Fernando and I'm an active duty Special Forces officer attending grad school at Harvard. Some quick comments I'd written earlier:
I think the Paul Yingling is dead on. But what makes his article so interesting is not necessarily its content–though insightful and accurate, the criticism is not new. Many others have written similar accounts in newspaper articles or books such as “Fiasco” and “Cobra II.” What is so striking about the article is that it was written by a successful active duty officer and then published in a military journal. If Yingling isn’t immediately fired or blacklisted, this will mark a clear change in the military’s internal climate. Public sentiment may be so negative over Iraq that military officers can dare to say “the emperor has no clothes” and still keep their jobs. If this is the case, expect the floodgates to open soon–dozens of similar articles by military officers will follow. The change will be both postive and negative: Positive because the American public will have greater insight into the real dynamics of the war as seen by those fighting it. Negative because the insight will be bleak and feed the frenzied call for immediate withdrawal.
Regardless of the potential outcomes, we should all be watching the career of Paul Yingling very closely. The stakes are much higher than we can imagine.
For more, check out our new national security blog at www.roguelystated.com