Jayhawker—Originally Posted by Jayhawker
I completely agree with your comment about Zinni versus Franks. Just thinking about it is enough to cause “shorter teeth syndrome.”
As for your second point, I think there are a couple of issues. First of all, I believe the system discourages it and the “system” is part of society. For the last 40 years we have been living in a society that revels in constantly lowering the bar—for everything. I think the potentially great generals are present—Petraeus may be one, though I believe it is way too early to tell... and... we may never find out anyway—but the “corporate” mentality of the military tends to keep people in the pack. I suspect, however, that it has always been that way. And it fits with what we want. We boost the underachiever at the expense of those who excel; we always do, even in schools. Instead of spending money to move smarter ones further ahead, we spend the money trying to make the slower ones equal, wondering why they can’t be just as intelligent. All sorts of things fall to the wayside: discipline, manners, dedication. I believe the quality is there; I just do not believe there is sufficient reason for “society” to call on it. Plus, the risks of “labeling” are too great. The Curtis LeMay discussion is a good, early example. You have a WWII genius denigrated and smoked into obscurity because of a remark (that was probably correct, but poorly timed). How about if Ike or MacArthur made such a comment in 1944?
WWII was a catastrophe of a magnitude we will probably never see again. Today’s “war on terror” has become an exercise in face-saving. If it weren’t, we would be winning it. You wouldn’t have generals hauled before congressional idiots who know as much about what should be done—militarily—in Iraq and Afghanistan as my Yorkie. Yet it doesn’t appear to me we have enough backbone to scream to someone about how this thing can be won. It took 3 1/2 years from entry to exit for the U. S. commitment in WWII... and now? Yet you cannot say “draft,” you cannot scream “quadruple the troops!,” you cannot raid Pakistan to clean this modern-day Hammurabi and his bad-haired hash-heads out of their yurts…. No, none of this is the “correct” thing to do. We are entirely too collegial, not only amongst ourselves, but with everyone else. The only problem with that is if we do not take care of ourselves, no one else will chip in to help. Look at the tepid commitment—everywhere. What does Bush call it? The “coalition of the willing” or some such up-chuck. I almost hate to say it, but sometimes I think the only thing that will help will be more 9/11’s, then maybe you will have some leadership step forward that will not care so much about their next star or pip or the “minority” vote or the belly-aching of the great unwashed troglodytes holed-up somewhere in some unpronounceable desert. Waziristan? Sounds like something out of “The Mouse That Roared.” We don’t need great generals today; we’re fighting this so-called war from the shopping malls. How about another hair salon? Anyone for another housing development? Ho-hum! Except, of course, to those who serve; except, of course, to those who bury… but what the hell… that doesn’t affect Americans now, does it? “Quick, Mr.-Man-On-The-Street, point out Iraq on this map! How about Tajikistan!” “Huh?”
Remember, no one knew who the great generals were before WWII. Who was it, Sir Basil Liddell Hart? who proclaimed the German generals of WWII the greatest assemblage of military genius the world has ever known [paraphrased] and then went on to say that America produced a surprising number of very fine generals of its own—at just the right time. Uh-huh!
Best wishes,
Fred.
Bookmarks