As I said, we tend to be awfully inflexible. We say there is an Operational Level, therefor we must have one. They also mention that we, the US, do not do the political aspect of warfare at all well. True IMO and we have not since FDR. Truman never got it, nor have any subsequent Presidents other than Eisenhower who wisely stayed out of most stupidity. I think the thought that heirarchial orthodoxy is inimical to good war fighting practice and our failure to adapt the political to that practice is their message -- and I'm afraid they're correct.
Again. Ken, let's define who the "we" is. The authors are taking US Army doctrine out of context and applying it in a larger sense to the entire security structure of the United States government. You just made the same leap and are like them chasing the wrong fox.

If there is a problem with strategic thought in the USG--and I agree whole heartedly there is--hardly any of the problem relates to the so called "leavenworth heresy". Their premise is both a red herring and a reductionist; it is the wrong argument and an over-simplification at that. Somehow if we just put operational-level back in the box, strategy will emerge. Bull.

The issue is much larger and it hinges on interagency--as I stated below--and one that I deal with every day of the week. We have not and I fear will not ever get a system that gets beyond the muddle through when it comes to strategy and the political. We are very much in the middle of a classic case of muddling through on strategy when it comes to Afghanistan and frankly we only reached the strategic level by default.

Creating levels of war does not help but does not necessarily create that failure. And doing so in the the Cold War as a way of clarifying an new doctrine within the Army is not the original sin that created strategic failure in the US system of waging war. That they offered MacArthur as a case in point should have clued them that their argument was off by more than three decades. On the other hand I could and I am sure you could cite numerous examples of the need for levels because they limit those who would become the epitome of the squad leader in the sky.

Again I give it a C.

Tom