Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
Bill,I don't think that is the problem. Your are very professional(expert), the Army is very professional(expert) but politicians are often temporally elected amateurs or opportunist and that can be deadly to a expert.
Well you may have identified a problem, but beyond voting and individual participation in the political process members of the professions of arms are prohibited from political action as a group. So you are highlighting an issue that is both beyond the scope of this discussion and something the profession of arms cannot legally impact.

However, we can provide expertise in the conduct of war form the tactical through strategic, and as I attempted to argue before, our profession also informs, and often helps shape policy.

So again I ask, if we are to provide this expertise how do we credencial ourselves? How do we quantify or grade our expertise? Do general officers, who have a majority of thier experience and training in tactical command intuitvely gain this advisory expertise once they pin on their stars? Because a few weeks at charm school or even broadening educational experiences like the War colleges, or staff assignments are unlikely to build the expertise required of a profession of arms that is required to provide strategic and policy level guidance.