2013’s Greatest Leadership Failure by CDR Salamander, USNI Blog.
There is something very wrong going on at the very highest levels of our uniformed leadership, they are not standing up for the honor and reputation of their Sailors, Marines, and our other brothers and sisters in the profession of arms.
This failure goes beyond individual failure; it is a systemic failure negatively impacting everyone from the deckplates, to the Beltway, to the post-active duty unemployment line…
Comments
MAC:
No not cynical, in their world. In the regular world in order to use cynical you have to recognize that some things are bad to do, even if they benefit you, they are bad to do. In the multi-star world there is no bad beyond what won't benefit you. So for them, cynical can't really apply. The concept behind the word doesn't exist for them so the word can't exist. It has no meaning. Those are the people that will lead men like Dakota Meyer into the next war. They deserve better.
You are right. There is no money in those things. There is honor though. But I guess that isn't a motivator in the mulit-star world either.
Manly hugs in a manly way...
Carl
Carl,
Is there any money in moral courage, intellectual honesty, conviction and plain old backbone? Let me be the first to submit that there isn't any money to be earned in moral courage, intellectual honesty, conviction and plain old backbone... It's just too controversial... and controversial don't get you hired, contracted or an office in the academic, intellectual - military complex...
... too cynical?
Hugs...
r/
MAC
I wish to key in on a paragraph: "Right after Vietnam, an entire army of poseurs, fakers, and professional victim pimps began a process of smearing and mal-defining an entire generation of men that served their country with distinction and honor; the Vietnam Generation." Our present SECDEF chimed right in with this crowd in a 2002 interview with the Veterans History Project. Read it! At one point or another in the interview he perpetuated the view that the Vietnam veteran was some drafted, out-of-control, alcoholic, pot-head, refusing combat, and not deserving of recognition. He was connected with the VA after Vietnam. He should know that VA information portrayed the real Vietnam veteran as something quite different - better educated, more prosperous, and better adjusted than his civilian contemporaries. What is discussed in the article may have its roots at the very top.
G Martin:
Nor am I surprised that every multi-star isn't a Patton. What I am is horrified and filled with fear for the Americans that most every one is a Massengale. And I would be thrilled beyond measure if just a few were a Hugh Thompson. Our country might have chance then. Tell them that when you see them won't you?
Well... I thought the conclusion of that "prison" experiment was that all humans- even "great" Americans- wouldn't have done anything when the Nazis came knocking on doors... I'm not surprised that every general today isn't a Patton- he seemed to think there were a bunch of politicians with stars back then too...
G Martin:
They have a choice. What they are saying is they don't have choice they like. They don't have a choice with guaranteed results and they don't choose to do what they know is the right thing. They choose alright. They choose their careers, their privilege and their money. And if they tell you they have a conscience by doing UW or insurgent ops, that's not evidence of conscience, that's evidence of a sop to own conscience by somebody who knows he left his character at the side of the road several promotions ago.
What they are really saying is they don't the courage to try. What they do have is the willingness to live with that, be contemned, tell their men they are doing their all for them when they know they are not, the willingness to lie and in the long run, endanger their country. Stars for their soul, some choice they made.
No- I'm saying they have no choice. As one recently told me- the political atmosphere within the US right now is such that truth does not matter and perception, pop culture, and popular opinion mean everything. And that's not just in the military- my friends in the corporate world, in other agencies, and in the public sector say the same. If you want to be an overt leader with balls- start your own company or move to another country. Otherwise, practice UW and insurgent ops if you have a conscience- or don't bother if you don't...
I was just having a conversation with a coworker on leadership. He teaches a class in which he brings up a slide that shows GEN Franks original list of objectives for the invasion of Iraq and asks the question “did we not achieve every one of these objectives?” The answer is yes, so the next question is “why were we still there?”
In my mind that was the wrong question. The question should have been, how did we end up with such a short list of objectives? If the point of war is to produce a better peace, would that list of objectives accomplish that? GEN Shinseki understood that the post conflict environment was going to take more than the aborted TIPFD that GEN Franks was directed to use.
So back to your comment … you are suggesting that it is better to kowtow to the political leaders then to tell them the truth: the Franks solution rather than the Shinseki one. Perhaps you are right, but I am not sure I want to be part of that organization.
I see things differently- as I noted on a few other threads: the generals don't all get together and decide to play politics. They exist in a system that would destroy them if they didn't. From my vantage point- the same forces that cause people to hate Congress but love their individual Congressman are at work in the military: as a whole we blame the generals for not "standing up"- but the very few who have are crucified by us all (media, politicians, fellow officers, etc.).
I, for one, believe that the growth of the bureaucracy within the entire federal government has gotten us to where we are now- and I don't think relying on generals to become disruptive to the political (and federal systemic) process- when we (meaning the body politic) wouldn't let them last a second after they opened their mouth- is realistic.
This article starkly and clearly highlights the greatest military danger the United States faces, the absence of moral characters in the general officer corps of the military services. It isn't cyberthreats, a revived AQ, cuts in funding, change in emphasis or which service gets what. We can probably survive all that. What we won't be able to survive are senior military leaders devoid moral courage, intellectual honesty, conviction and plain old backbone. God help us if we can't change this.