Quote Originally Posted by ganulv View Post
I once worked with a retired career officer—certainly not upper echelon—who told me repeatedly that it was vital that the military never be involved in the formulation of policy, that in America the way it worked was that politicians formulated policy and that members of the military carried it out. His is just one interpretation, but I have assumed since knowing him that this is generally the way civilian control of the military is conceived by professional soldiers in the U.S. Anyone care to confirm or deny?
there are too many variations to easily generalize.

IMO, a majority almost certainly agree with your person however, there are a few that disagree and some quite strongly. They tend to believe -- with some justification -- that the inept Politicians need a lot of guidance...

The tradition of civilian control is quite strong however and only when a military senior leader of strong personality who's worried about civilian ineptitude does any heavy lobbying occur. Even more rare is a MacArthur like usurption of or challenge to that civilian primacy. Most will accede to what the civilian master wants (or thinks he or she wants...) with little complaint, no matter how dumb a particular set of policies happens to be.

The Forced retirement of Jack Singlaub, Michael Dugan and Stanley McChrystal (there have been others of lesser stature) are examples of why this is so...