7 comments

• 

  concernedcitizen

  11 months ago

  Mr. Korb's article is weak on the facts and designed only to degrade the role of uniform officers in matters in which our country depends on their honest, expert, and non-political advise. I guess he is upset because nobody important ever ask for his advise anymore. Which readers of any article that Mr. Korb writes should know up front that he is dis-honest, amateur in the operational arts, and a left-wing partisan. Mr. Korb, maybe its time to stop associating yourself with the Reagan Administration, you are no Casper Weinberger.
  reply
• 

  ajm8127

  11 months ago

  @concernedcitizen
  
  You don't think that by giving people power, it may create a bias in their judgment on how to handle a situation? If you have control of a very powerful army, I would think that would definitely make you more aggressive. Take MacArthur and the Chinese. Do you really think firing nuclear weapons at China would have been a good idea? In fact, I might as far to say that one of the weaknesses of men, as opposed to women, is their innate desire to conquer. to take on more territory, and that is very juvenile (i am a man). While people in uniform may have their opinions of how to handle a situation, I think it is a very good idea to have a civilian leader to get another prospective. The only person referenced in this article that really does not follow this trend would be Powell, but he is absolutely the exception to the rule.
  reply
• 

  scottryan1

  11 months ago

  cia killed kennedy 100%
  
  dont even think, you now no 100% that he was killed
  reply
• 

  idealthoughts

  11 months ago

  Mr. Korb

  reply
• 

  oscar

  11 months ago

  So, concernedcitizen, which facts cited by Lawrence Korb are weak? You don't get to just claim someone is wrong on the facts without pointing out the errors. War is truly politics by other means and political decisions should be left to accountable, elected officials. The people we elect should decide policy, the military should carry out those decisions.
  reply
• 

  morinao

  11 months ago

  While I agree that political leaders ought to have the brains and balls not to just abdicate all military decisions to their generals, this particular article is just cherrypicking.
  
  Korb can't talk about how great it is when politicos dismiss four-star advice, especially in the context of the Iraq War, without at least mentioning Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Shinseki.
  reply
• 

  vivicon

  10 months ago

  The categorical nature of Korb's title gets things off on the wrong foot. There are times when our generals were right and we can fervently wish civilian leaders had listened to them: General Dwight Eisenhower knew that Japan was almost defeated, and when told in advance of Truman's decision to drop the atom bomb on Hiroshima, disagreed, saying it was unnecessary. Most top WWII military leaders, including William Leahy, agreed with him. It turned out that Truman not only ignored the military but U.S. intelligence as well.
  
  Gen. Shinseki recommended more troops for the ill-considered war in Iraq, while it was Rumsfeld who wanted a lean army.
  
  "Morinao" makes a great point: "political leaders ought to have the brains . . ." and this is where the voting public comes in and the point where we need more of an independent media. As the July 29 Rand Report on "How Terrorist Groups Die" points out, this administration got us off on the wrong path with its "global war on terror" approach. The resulting tragedy and chaos should make us want to learn more and choose our leaders much more carefully.
  reply