Definetly an interesting general, he gave us
"Bob, I want you to go out there and take Buna, or don't come back alive" to Eichelberger during WWII, but at the same time had the self confidence and courage to push hard for Inchon in Korea. Tom' point about Yin and Yang may not have a better example.
Best regards, Rob
Certainly OK to disagree here
we've been known to do that here. For me it goes deeper then how things play out (although that is a good way to measure things), but it also goes to personality, character and will. I had two relatives who served in the Pacific theater - both had incredibly contrasting opinions about MacArthur and both were based on different reasons based on what they valued in a general. To me, that is very interesting- it brings it alive, and makes for good thinking about leadership.
Best regards, Rob
All good theories, no question - then one starts to
implement them and finds that one has a large unwieldy bureaucracy (that's reality) to fight with and that everyone involved is not a John Boyd (that's also reality), that other government agencies who must be involved have a vastly different worldview and approach than does DoD (reality again) and that a helpful Congress will intrude to show the American voter they're on top of things and that the Executive Branch cannot push them around (yet another reality).
Then things really get messy because one finds that one has to deal with other people and organizations who have different ideas, not necessarily wrong ideas, just different...
On top of that, there's the pesky enemy, bad guys or whatever one wants to call them who do not always cooperate as they should. Why, sometimes, the enemy du jour doesn't even have an OODA loop; they can be so crass as to simply have a DA loop. Occasionally, they do include the first 'O' and the second is omitted because they Oriented on AND Decided what they wanted to do months or years before they even started observing. Thus one is occasionally confronted with only an 'A unless one catches them at that first 'O.'.
That on tactical, operational and strategic levels...
Quote:
"Amplify our spirit and strength, drain-away adversaries’ and attract the uncommitted."
I particularly like that one; given the divisions in the nation's body politic today, I'm not at all sure on the spirit angle; our strength is technology based destruction which is not always germane; our adversaries have no infrastructure and little strength yet a great deal of 'spirit' and surprising staying power and the uncommitted apparently really don't want to play with either side.
What do you suppose Ol' John would recommend?
Not being snarky or derisory, it's a very serious question.
Thanks for the response, Stanleywinthrop
Boyd has merit. No one has all the answers -- which was my only point.
As you say we're off thread; another time and place.
Take care,
Ken