Regarding military misfortune
While waiting for my copy of Military Misfortune (Cohen, Gooch), I thought I'd ask folks in the know how American institutions currently deal with instances of failure from the strategic down to the tactical point of view; particularly where specific rather than systemic incidents of poor performance are at issue and no criminal culpability attaches. I'd like the broad view, but I'd appreciate anecdotes as well. For example, to what extent do we hold generals and senior field grade officers accountable for success or failure in a given operation? Are careers always on the line when missteps emerge. Does a record of past performance weigh heavily or weakly when presented with a really spectacular fiasco? In other words, how much rope does the leadership historically gives a commander to do his job and is it too much or too little?
Bookmarks