Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
From Steve,


You know I'm always amazed at leaders who can strike the right balance between telling somebody what they want them to be able to do (and why) and telling them how to suck the egg. This is particularly interesting since as the civilian leader, Sec Gates (or any SecDef) realizes he's up against a strong, conservative organizational culture that knows that regardless of who wins in 2008, it won't be President G.W. Bush. Having said that, his leadership has to be bipartisan and be somewhat in line with how the potential presidents will come to see the world while being true to the way the world really is. He must convince the Army (and the broader DoD) and the civilians that these are the challenges that lie before us, and we have an opportunity to consider how to best meet those challenges, because he also has the responsibility to guide and overrule if the answer he gets back is inconsistent with challenges ahead. A job no one in their right mind would covet, but one which must be done.

I don't know who the potential presidents might consider as SecDef for their adminsitrations, but it seems to me they'd want leaders who understand the challenges as well as Sec Gates seems to.
Best Regards, Rob
Rob,

As I understand it, Gates had some turbulent times in his previous DC days. The difference between him and Rumsfeld is that Gates learned the right lessons. There are as you well know thousands of Gates-Rumsfeld Yin and Yang clones out there. The system--such as it is--is designed to work with the first and endure the second. Means that nothing happens really quickly unless stimulated by a sea change event. One would think that 9-11 was enought to do that and in many ways it did. But the system was already in the endure mode under Rumsfeld by the time 9-11 took place. The rest is the history we are all living.

Best

Tom