Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
Yes to both. However, he has or should have (but does not -- that's another thread...) People who serve as a cross check to the military advice. If he or she accepts bad military advice, whose fault is that? The bad advisor's or his / hers for accepting it?
Maybe the fault of the people who voted for him knowing well that his background was law theory and short legislature service (history science, as minimum some deputy governor service and a more versatile -thus necessarily longer- legislative track record would have been preferable)?

Maybe the fault of more competent people who did not run against him in the primary?

Maybe the political system's fault which led to the aforementioned factors?


The military is a bunch of institutions / bureaucracies. You can identify duds, you expect that the institution / bureaucracy removes them.
The failure can more easily be diagnosed than in the political system.


edit: Of how many generals and colonels got Marschall rid of in WW2 because of their incompetence? IIRC it was about 500. In the midst of a huge force expansion (multiplication) with a huge scarcity of formally qualified officers.