"Tarnished Brass" (new article by Dick Kohn)

[wm]

If he had then he might have recognized that what he is bemoaning is largely an example of such a catch.

On one hand, he describes the lack of strategic abilty, which he also miscategorizes (my opinion, to argue it here is a distraction) as an intellectual failing. On another, he complains about partisanship. I submit that he is arguing along these 2 lines: To be a military strategist requires one to be political; to be political is antithetical to being a military member. For what it is worth, I believe that being partisan is a necessary condition to choosing/fighting for a strategy. Perhaps Kohn and I just have different meanings for partisan and politics.

I am also at somewhat of a loss for his support of LTC Yingling's point about differing punishments for a lost weapon and a lost war. Privates usually have direct control over actions taken to secure their weapons. Flag officers are not so lucky about the degree of control they have in prosecuting wars. Generals do not lose wars by themeselves. They often have to fight the nation's opppnents with one had tied behind their backs. I guess that is as it should be because, according to Kohn's view of things, they are not supposed to be political partisans.

Perhaps our writer might want to review the literature out there on personal and public ethics--the notion that what one does in one's job comes with a set of ethical strictures that may be quite different than the rules one follows as a private citizen. Another point that relates here is the author's unhappiness about the use of contractors. A large number of contractors are former military members who choose to continue to serve in a way that is in keeping with the prior commitment to be apolitical while in uniform. Once the unifrom comes off, former officers may return to support the nation in a way that has a different set of ethical norms.

The UNC-CH basketball staff seems better at its task than this member of its academic faculty.
BTW, was anyone else put off by the use of lower case letters to start Army, Air Force, and Navy, but uppercase for the Marines. Seems like another instance of inconsistent thinking by the author .

[AmericanPride]

the notion that what one does in one's job comes with a set of ethical strictures that may be quite different than the rules one follows as a private citizen.

Yet it is argued in defense of military participation in the political process (i.e. voting) that soldiers are citizens first, and therefore "the rules one follows as a private citizen" ought to supercede the "ethical structures" in "one's job".

A large number of contractors are former military members who choose to continue to serve in a way that is in keeping with the prior commitment to be apolitical while in uniform.

Yet those companies with which contractors are employed are not apolitical.

I think it is important for the purposes of this conversation to differentiate "political" and "partisan".

[Ken White]

Yet it is argued in defense of military participation in the political process (i.e. voting) that soldiers are citizens first, and therefore "the rules one follows as a private citizen" ought to supercede the "ethical structures" in "one's job".

others disagree. IMO, A professional volunteer force for any nation should not have a vote. That 'soldiers as citizen first' mantra is touted by politicians and it is certainly applicable in times of conscription. Thus far that includes the Civil War, the two World Wars and half of the Cold War -- note only half -- the rest of the time the professional armed forces were legally allowed to vote but traditionally most did not do so.

Many support your position, few today will support mine but I think the matter deserves serious thought on the basis that politicization is bound to occur with excessive emphasis on the 'citizen' aspect. That does not bode well.Many will be able to meld the issues but some will not and that will create -- has created -- problems. Fortunately, mostly minor. Thus far...

Yet those companies with which contractors are employed are not apolitical.

Of course they aren't -- they are massive campaign contributors because it's in their interest to do so. The armed forces are not big contributors, the contractors are -- that's why the contractors are about in such massive numbers, Congress appreciates their help...

Most in Congress do not really court the military vote because it is pretty evenly distributed (all ranks) between R, D, Independent and totally uninterested and the absentee ballots often do not get counted (another thread, that). Those factors account for Congress basically wanting fewer people in the Armed forces as a general rule.

I think it is important for the purposes of this conversation to differentiate "political" and "partisan".

Totally agree with that, only pointing out that one tends to lead to the other. That is not terribly significant in a multi-party democracy, it is quite a different thing in a two party state where politics tend to be polar and not diffuse.

P.S
Old Eagle came in while I was doing my hunt and peck routine. He says he always voted -- so did I -- but two of those votes were for Kennedy and Carter, another was for Goldwater. That proves my voting in what I thought was my interest was a crap shoot. Not a very good one at that...

He also says:

"Trust me, we are not a political military."

True and hopefully we'll avoid that disaster.

[jmm99]

from wm
BTW, was anyone else put off by the use of lower case letters to start Army, Air Force, and Navy, but uppercase for the Marines.

From the bio blurb, Kohn was air force, not a Marine - so that's not an explanation. As they say, Colonialement

[Mark O'Neill]

From the bio blurb, Kohn was air force, not a Marine - so that's not an explanation. As they say, Colonialement

that is an excuse then, as he wasn't in the military....

(tongue firmly in cheek)

[goesh]

"The second is political: the absence from the officer corps of partisan political divisions, its subordination to the legally constituted civilian authorities in charge of the state, and its ability to establish an effective working partnership or collaboration with the civilian political leadership regardless of party or faction."

The DC relationship is more often adversarial with the military constantly under the light of interrogation accused of wasting money or abusing people.

The author goes on to whine about retired, senior Officers aligning themselves with political candidates. Conversely, individual Constitutional entitlements should then be defined by occupation but everybody thought it was wonderful when Joe the Plumber got in the lime light.

My favorite:
"......This may require further de-emphasis of mathematics, science, and engineering at the academies, on the grounds that war is first and foremost a human phenomenon, not a technical or engineering problem."

-right, who needs abstract thinking ability these days........